Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Lessons Learned, Lessons Not Learned

By Matthew Wheeland, AlterNet. Posted August 5, 2005.


Sixty years after Hiroshima, the damage from those nuclear bombs remains, and the threat is ever increasing.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Matthew Wheeland


Related Stories

Hiroshima Cover-up Exposed

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Sixty years ago tomorrow, the United States dropped a nuclear bomb on the city of Hiroshima, Japan. Three days later, the military dropped a second bomb on Nagasaki.

These are the only two nuclear bombs ever used in war, and with good reason. The devastation from the bombs was unfathomable, and as the extent of the destruction became public knowledge, the bombs themselves became a symbol of the atrocity of war.

Immediately after the bombs, once Japan had surrendered unconditionally, the U.S. military instituted a blanket ban on reporting about the effects of the bombs. It took seven years for the first photos to surface in Japan, and many more for the larger world to learn what happened on those two days.

Sadly, the threat of nuclear weapons seems to have faded from the public consciousness, even as the fear of terrorist attacks looms large. With all the talk of "dirty bombs" and "suitcase bombs," the fact is that more than 30,000 nuclear weapons remain in the arsenals of the eight countries that admit to having any. As Walter Cronkite says in a new radio documentary, "Lessons from Hiroshima: 60 Years Later," "some 4,000 of these are on hair-trigger alert."

"Lessons from Hiroshima" explores the consequences of the bombs, Fat Man and Little Boy, for Japan and the world. Survivors of the blasts, Japanese and American alike, paint a human picture of how the world was forever changed on those two days. Host Walter Cronkite interviews Mohammed El Baradei from the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency about the modern nuclear threat, and shares his own reflections of post-war Japan.

I listened to an advance copy of the program on the way home from work. When I told producer Reese Ehrlich that I sat outside my house for 15 minutes to finish it before going inside, he laughed and said that’s known as a "driveway moment" in the industry.

"Lessons from Hiroshima: 60 Years Later" is full of driveway moments. It is deeply disturbing but offers listeners hope about the future; anti-war activists have come a long way indeed in the last 60 years.

AlterNet: Would you tell me how this documentary came about?

Reese Erlich: Barbara Simmons, the executive producer of the show and head of [Pennsylvania radio show] Peace Talks had been interested in this topic for a long time, and she and Jennifer Beer went to Japan and to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and interviewed the hibakusha (atomic bomb survivors), and that was the beginning of the story and this was already a year and a half ago.

Then they contacted me to put it together and I realized that for the 60th anniversary, this was going to be a really great story. So we added some additional interviews, we tracked down a Japanese WWII veteran who was critical of the Japanese military, and that's not so easy. The Second World War is still very controversial over there in terms of how you look at it. Unlike the Germans, the Japanese government and right wing has continued to justify in some ways what they did and downplay the nature of the atrocities. So it's not easy to find a Japanese war veteran who will be honest about what happened.

It's similar to trying to find, in the military today, somebody who would admit what the U.S. did in Vietnam. It's very analogous, it's "Well, yeah, we fought the good fight, we were fighting Communism, we didn't do such bad things." Forget about talking about torture and mass roundups and slaughter of Vietnamese, you just don't hear about it from official sources. so it's much that kind of thing.

Which brings us to the quote you have from Robert McNamara basically admitting that, yeah, "If we had lost, we were war criminals."

Yeah, that was excerpted from The Fog of War, an excellent documentary, and it's very revealing, he really said, "had we lost the war we would have all been considered war criminals." [Full quote] And he does some fancy dancing around these issues of firebombing.

I think what we do in this documentary, at least for the first time that I've heard, is linking the "total war strategy" that the U.S. used in Germany and Japan that included the firebombing of the cities, with the dropping of the bomb. It was clear that one led to the other. If you can incinerate 100,000 people in a single night in a firebombing, then why worry about killing that many with a nuclear bomb.

And the numbers killed with the two bombs?

Two hundred thirty-thousand at Hiroshima and Nagasaki together. And more people were actually killed in the firebombing, in total, because they went on for a lot longer.


Digg!

Matthew Wheeland is an associate editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The article is ok but contains opinoin not facts
Posted by: iamsenstiveyellow on Aug 5, 2005 4:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact is the military sat on the info as long as possible for military reasons, not because the American public would have been against the idea. That was true both before and after the detonations. I also believe public TV and others have already done several documentaries on this subject. Let's see if this brings out anything other "than we were wrong then and we are wrong now." Anyway, the genie is out of the bottle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "...the genie is out of the bottle." Posted by: iamsenstiveyellow
drop atomic boms on civilians
Posted by: tarzan on Aug 5, 2005 4:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a very descriptive article, which ties together the US aggression in IRAQ to previous experiences with other wars. How does a nation get away from warmongering? Is still to be discovered by mankind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why ??
Posted by: MausMasher on Aug 5, 2005 6:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before Mr Truman gave the order to drop the bombs on Japan, why did they not attempt to communicate to the Japanese(they were already beaten back to their home islands at the time), call a 10 day truce to set one off on a near by island for the Japanese(or to witness the Trinity test) to view the 1st hand destructiveness, thus allowing their leaders the opportunity to surrender?? I believe if such had happened, the war would have ended within 3 days of detonation. It is time peace really was given a chance so we as humans can really advance.

Tomorrow I will mourn the many that were lost on those 2 days in August 1945, as I do for all those lost to the unnecessary violence everyday. I also hope this program is spread around the world for all to hear and ponder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The U.S. does not fire warning shots. Posted by: tkd82arty@netscape.net
» This is new. Posted by: WhatNow?
» This is new. part II Posted by: WhatNow?
» This is new. part III Posted by: WhatNow?
» RE: The U.S. does not fire warning shots. Posted by: tkd82arty@netscape.net
» RE: Why ?? Posted by: spongetom
» RE: Why ?? Posted by: bonapartist
» RE: Why ?? Posted by: MausMasher
almfio1
Posted by: al fiori on Aug 5, 2005 7:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...I had occasion to personnally ask General Paul Tibbetts, Enola Gay pilot, recently how he felt about his action now after all this time has pased. His answer was, "If they asked me to do it again, I would do it in a heartbeat. I know I regret the lives that were lost, but I also know that as a result I have saved many millions of of other lives. It was a price we had to pay."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: almfio1 Posted by: MausMasher
"I'd do it again" Tibbetts
Posted by: al fiori on Aug 5, 2005 7:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...I had occasion to personnally ask General Paul Tibbetts, Enola Gay pilot, recently how he felt about his action now after all this time has pased. His answer was, "If they asked me to do it again, I would do it in a heartbeat. I know I regret the lives that were lost, but I also know that as a result I have saved many millions of other lives. It was a price we had to pay."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's get past Biology
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 5, 2005 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Biologically speaking,we humans are the scurge of the planet!
We are the only species that strives to live out of balance with the rest of the world. We are the only species that can invent a way to destroy everything,and, we're the only ones stupid enough to use it. The time has come to keep out from positions of authority/power those folks that think killing,threats of killing,embargos,and other forms of Tyranny
are acceptable means of Business. We may have superior physical abilities,and superior reasoning abilities as well as communication,but, if we can't get past this propensity for
destruction on the mass scale we've been doing,than I'm afraid the rocks ARE smarter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Let's get past Biology Posted by: Media_max
» RE: Let's get past Biology Posted by: iamsenstiveyellow
» RE: Let's get past Biology Posted by: spongetom
» RE: Let's get past Biology Posted by: spongetom
Depleted uranium munitions in Iraq
Posted by: ScottP on Aug 5, 2005 8:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't forget that the US is still using "tactical" nuclear weapons, DU artillery (M1) and bullets (A-10) in Iraq and Afghanistan on a regular basis, in cities. Not to mention napalm (MK-77 incendiary bombs). It makes a rather precarious pulpit from which to preach about nuclear non-proliferation and terrorist dirty bombs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tibbetts’ Legacy - I
Posted by: bonapartist on Aug 5, 2005 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Among other pearls of his military wisdom there are also - "We’ve never fought a damn war anywhere in the world where they didn’t kill innocent people. If the newspapers would just cut out the shit: 'You’ve killed so many civilians.' That’s their tough luck for being there." &
"You can take a fly swatter and kill a bunch of flies, but what the hell, you don't need to count them."

Oh aye, he is a real all American hero and probably a shiny example of mentality that existed and, judging by Iraq and Afghanistan, still exists among US military professionals. It also can be described as “Let’s kill them all and let the god sort them out” attitude.

If German or Japanese officer made those statements, after killing tens of thousands civilians, he would be denounced as a monster and hanged as a war criminal. Nazi General Jodl was hanged for war crimes but the only difference between him and Tibbetts was that Jodl belonged to the defeated side. Both however were more then eager to kill civilians indiscriminately in the name of the higher goal. Jodl was a part of Nazi power structure, arguably the worst dictatorship of XX century, and Tibbetts was a product of good old democratic and free USA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tibbetts' Legacy - II
Posted by: bonapartist on Aug 5, 2005 10:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Murdering civilians is a war crime and claiming it is somewhat different because US fought against totalitarianism actually makes the picture even more disgusting.

It is well known today that Truman’s main motivation in using the A-bomb was to send a message to Stalin “We have it and we are not afraid to use it” (Germany already capitulated at that point and that left Japan in a hopeless position and with decimated military who suffered a string of crippling defeats from 1942 onwards). Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki hastened the inevitable defeat of Japan however the nasty fact remains that Truman didn’t even try to give an ultimatum prior or after the first bomb was dropped. Even if we accept that Hiroshima was necessary for military reasons, and that security of the project demanded secrecy wasn’t blown off with an ultimatum, the fact still remains that the Nagasaki bombing was totally unnecessary from military point of view. Quite simply it was overkill whose only goal was to show US muscle without any regard for the civilian cost or humanitarian norms. It shows the double standard that is alive and well in current US politics, when Americans commit atrocities it is regrettable but justifiable, when US enemies do the same it is a horrible crime against humanity.

Worst of all I have a feeling Tibbetts’ legacy of “…I know I regret the lives that were lost, but I also know that as a result I have saved many millions of other lives. It was a price we had to pay." Is still alive and well in US, and especially among the right-wingers. It is not hard to imagine President Bush ordering nuclear attacks on Teheran or Sunni Triangle in a near future and justifying it with Tibbetts’ words, all in the name of freedom and democracy of course. Not to mention the acid cynicism of how “we” had to pay the price that equalises the murderer and his victims.

General Tibbetts is currently viewed in history as a controversial figure, at least in Europe, and I just hope in a decade or two he will be listed among war criminals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tibbetts' Legacy - II Posted by: codingguy
» RE: Tibbetts' Legacy - II Posted by: icebox
» RE: Tibbetts' Legacy - II Posted by: bonapartist
» RE: Tibbetts' Legacy - II Posted by: MausMasher
invasion of japan ruled by militarists would have cost more lives
Posted by: codingguy on Aug 5, 2005 11:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In all this discussion, nobody offers any other solution as to how to get japan to surrender -- other than the "demonstrate how powerful the a-bomb is to them, then they'll give up". and if that didn't work? After 60 years, people here seem to forget that the japanese leadership was not a rational group of men. They were fanatic militarists, and, as the kamakazi strategy shows, were not prepared to lay down their arms even though the hopelessness of their situation had been clear for at least 2 years. So how was japan to be defeated without killing millions of civilians, not to mention servicemen on both sides?
I'm not necessarily condoning the use of the A-bomb there, but until the question i've posed is answered, all the piousness about what did happen is so much hooey.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Ya' Don't Give a Weapon to a Lunatic"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Aug 5, 2005 11:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lessons learned? We should never use these terrible weapons again. Lessons NOT learned? By President Bush, who is perfectly willing to use them, and is willing to conduct first-strike warfare against HIS enemies (invading Iraq in part to avenge his daddy's near assassination?). He is also not smart enough to understand the horrible implications of nuclear war (hell, he can't even pronounce "nuclear"). I'm convinced that if Bush had been president instead of Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, we would all be glowing in the dark – that is, those few of us who might have survived.

The world today is a much more dangerous place – and not all of that danger comes from elsewhere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our God Damned Nuclear War Criminals
Posted by: pjrsullivan on Aug 5, 2005 11:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At the end of WWII it was there for all the world to see. Continue with a "Selective Strategy" of human predation and genocide, the human race would be finished.

Our war criminal leadership had no choice in the matter, they are biologically and culturally genocidal cannibals. The decision was made by the General Advisory Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission in April of 1947 to go ahead with the complete destruction of the human race, using the newly invented nuclear weapons.

The decision to build the capacity for genocidal extermination of the human race was based, according to Dr Vannevar Bush, on the notion that "Self sacrifice is a necessary component of survival."

A human in a stressed environment, will canabilize another human. Our leadership arose from the harsh desert environment, and has a sharply tuned cannibal behavior that has put them in the positions to control our operating systems.

Our cannibal leaders have carried out massive internal contract murders against the domestic population, and this gives them a reason to fear being taken captive by American forces. They now are in a position that they knew would eventually occur, and this provides a reason for their insistence that nuclear weapons be launched, to destroy the mass of their fellow humans, that they fear more than God himself.

Reagan said in 1985, "this may be the generation that will face Armegeddon." He, with the assistance of the war criminals in the Vatican, installed Pershing II missiles in Germany. Those were the triggering devices. General Grant, who served during Reagans term, said "that we are still alive only due to "Divine Intervention."

Repeatedly there have been attempts to launch nuclear missiles upon us, foiled by the higher level powers that we call "ET". ET is also apparently the "Gods" and is our creator, manipulating the genes of a 48 chromosome Homo-Erectus, into a 46 Chromosome Homo-Sapiens, which we have some of the genes of ET in our body. The genome project in 2001 found 223 non-human genes in us.

ET probably see's our cannibal leaders merely as "Primitives," where we would use the term criminals. There is a hierarchy of priority in this world, and taking on our nuclear war criminal criminal class is at the top of the list.

For their plans to exterminate us in a thermo-nuclear war, "The Gods have Damned them."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No way.
Posted by: regimeoftruth on Aug 5, 2005 1:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That is bullshit. The first bomb was dropped and we (the US) gave them three days to look at the carnage and decide to surrender. They didn't. We dropped another one... then we gave them a few days to surrender, or so we said... but we really didn't have another bomb.
And thankfully they fell for it, because they were already losing the war, and propaganda was already circulating in Japan about how they should fight to the last man, woman and child. The destruction and loss of life that would have taken place if the emporer had not voluntarily surrendered... on each side, calculated separately... is unfathomably greater than the destruction of fat man and little boy.
Of course everyone has a right to their opinion, and this is a forum where everyone should be able to express their views openly... but has this never occured to any of you?
-Liberal in the US Armed Forces

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No way. Posted by: MausMasher
lakelandbob
Posted by: lakelandbob on Aug 5, 2005 2:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One matter which has often been overlooked is that Inuit people in the Arctic mined the uranium which was used in the manufacture of the atomic bombs- they received slave wages in contrast to the huge profits made by mining companies - then they suffered radiation sickness similar to that experienced by the Japanese victims of the A-bombs. To my knowledge not one of the corporate owners who profited so hugely from this had any symptoms of radiation sickness!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You guys all miss the point.
Posted by: h2oaso on Aug 5, 2005 8:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That being, nationalism often leads to misplaced conceptions that murder can be justified. It CAN'T. Ever. It's not about an "us vs. them" pitting nation against nation or people groups vs. people groups, but is rather correctly summed up in this passage:

For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Eph 6:12

That is why the rule of love will continue to stand as the rule above all rules.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Self-defense? Posted by: Sojourner
Admiral vs. Colonel
Posted by: bonapartist on Aug 6, 2005 4:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were almost defeated and ready to surrender...in being the first to use it, we...adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages."

---Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy,
Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during World War II

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Admiral vs. Colonel Posted by: MausMasher
» RE: Admiral vs. Colonel Posted by: SDogood
Danger vs Regret Argument
Posted by: independent1 on Aug 10, 2005 2:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article and many of the comments on this forum are a tribute to the human habit of using one unrelated emoitional response to spark needed change in military strategies. It just doesn't go down well when one looks at the unemotional facts.

It should be simple: Having thousands of nuclear warheads in ANY country is "bad." Having a few secured warheads under a rational policy of self-defense is "better." As for "best" - that would be "having no nuclear warheads of any kind, anywhere." Too bad - because of irrationality generally and present plus future megalomaniacs striving for world domination - we'll not have "best" in the foreseeable future. So get over it.

I'm 60, so I've seen these mea culpa fits over the nuclear strikes against Japan every 10-year "anniversary" quite a few times now. My father fought in the Pacific against the forces of Imperial Japan. He survived to tell me much of what went on then and there. Enough for me to tell any doubters or guilt peddlers: The U.S. government did exactly the right thing(s), exactly when needed.

One thing about second guessing: You MUST make judgements in the complete context of the situation. Those people who fail to do so are either some brand of True Believer (too many of those around these days) or are failing to investigate the context and naturally drawing "wishful thinking" conclusions.

The one big mistake the U.S. made after the war was to allow Mc Arthur to prosecute his policy of "chivarly toward a vanquished foe." I mean that several of the most cruel war criminals in the Japanese military were let off completely.

On the whole, we did well, because the Japanese majority rightly saw the value of... American values over their own medieval paradigm. Japan won big-time in the long run by working for positive relations with America.

It's not possible to argue against those nuclear strikes in 1945 because all the results flowing from them have been overwhelmingly, hugely positive. THIS is the lesson we should be applying to such insane situations as that with North Korea. Two or three good-sized nuclear bombs applied to North Korea would produce the same positive results for us and the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]