President Obama to visit Hiroshima

[Laika]

I have actually been hoping for something like this when I heard John Kerry had visited Hiroshima earlier this year. It appears Obama won't be apologising for the United States using the bomb but it is nonetheless an important gesture. Hopefully this is something that can be built on.

Full Text Below: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/10/obama-hiroshima-japan-visit-second-world-war

Obama to become first sitting US president to visit Hiroshima
The US president ‘will not revisit the decision to use the atomic bomb’ at the end of the second world war, national security adviser Ben Rhodes says



Survivors of the attack have encouraged Obama to see for himself the scale of destruction at the peace museum. Photograph: Shawn Thew/EPA
Justin McCurry in Tokyo and Alan Yuhas in New York

Tuesday 10 May 2016 14.16 BST Last modified on Tuesday 10 May 2016 14.20 BST



Comments
206
Save for later
Barack Obama has announced he will visit Hiroshima, Japan, becoming the first sitting president to visit the site where the US dropped an atomic bomb in 1945, killing an estimated 140,000 people the final days of the second world war.

In a statement the White House confirmed the visit, saying Obama’s visit will “highlight his continued commitment to pursuing peace and security in a world without nuclear weapons”. Obama will be joined with prime minister Shinzo Abe, who is hosting the G7 summit in Ise-Shima later this month.

Earlier this month White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the president does not believe the US should apologize for its use of atom bombs on Japan in 1945, a point reiterated by national security adviser Ben Rhodes on Tuesday.

Obama “will not revisit the decision to use the atomic bomb at the end of World War II”, Rhodes wrote in a post on Medium. “This visit will offer an opportunity to honor the memory of all innocents who were lost during the war.”

Rhodes added that the visit aids the reconciliation between the US and Japan, and the nations’ mutual commitment to reducing the “the role of nuclear weapons in our security and in the policies of other global powers”.

In April, secretary of state John Kerry visited the site, where he made an emotional speech. “It tugs at all of your sensibilities as a human being. It reminds everybody of the extraordinary complexity of choices in war and of what war does to people, to communities, to countries, to the world,” he said.

Obama will visit the city, where 140,000 people died after the bombing on the morning of 6 August 1945, with the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, at the end of the two-day summit in Ise-Shima.

Kerry laid a wreath at the cenotaph and described his tour of the nearby peace memorial museum as “gut-wrenching”. His visit was well received in Japan, where many atom bomb survivors have dropped demands for an apology, hoping instead that a presidential visit will spur future US administrations to push harder for nuclear disarmament.

Obama said during a visit to Japan in late 2009 that he would be “honoured” to go to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which was bombed on 9 August 1945, killing 80,000 people. “I certainly would be honoured – it would be meaningful for me to visit those two cities in the future,” he said.

Jimmy Carter visited the atomic bomb memorial in Hiroshima in 1984, after he had left office. The highest-ranking US official to visit the site before Kerry was Nancy Pelosi, then the House speaker, in 2008. The US ambassador to Japan, Caroline Kennedy, attended the 70th anniversary commemorations last year.

Japanese officials had made it clear that they would welcome Obama’s presence at the cenotaph, which includes the names of every person to have died in connection with the bombing.

Earlier this year, the mayor of Hiroshima, Kazumi Matsui, said he believed a visit by Obama would strengthen the campaign for nuclear disarmament. “An Obama visit would certainly carry a lot of weight,” he said.

Survivors of the attack have also encouraged Obama to see for himself the scale of the destruction at the peace museum, as well as the transformation the city has undergone over the past 70 years.

In a recent poll, 70% of survivors said they expected Obama to make a stop in Hiroshima during his forthcoming visit to Japan.

Do think it is a good idea for a sitting US president to visit Hiroshima? Would you expect an apology? Or does it undermine the US in some way?

 

[Wu Wei]

Visit yes, apologize no... Japan has yet to apologize or for that matter, in some cases acknowledge, the atrocities and war crimes it committed against POWs and civilians during WW II. See Unit 731

 

[Quetzal]

Do think it is a good idea for a sitting US president to visit Hiroshima?

Sure!

Would you expect an apology?

No. No one is a saint here and given the circumstances, I still uphold we made the right call.

 

[Riverwolf]

Do think it is a good idea for a sitting US president to visit Hiroshima?

Sure.

Would you expect an apology?

Short answer: no.

Or does it undermine the US in some way?

Short answer: no.

Long answer on both: I used to think the answer was "yes" on both those questions, since I'm 100% against their use in ANY circumstance, considering what exactly we're dealing with (and the general bombardment of Japan in addition to the two nukes).

Then l I learned what Tenno Showa (Emperor Hirohito) had said regarding the bombings:

"It's very regrettable that nuclear bombs were dropped and I feel sorry for the citizens of Hiroshima but it couldn't be helped [shoganai] because that happened in wartime."

Because of that (as well as this:

Japan has yet to apologize or for that matter, in some cases acknowledge, the atrocities and war crimes it committed against POWs and civilians during WW II.

Don't forget about Comfort Women, either...)

I do not expect an apology from Obama.

...besides, this was over 70 years ago. The relationship between Japan and the US is amazing right now. We love Japan, and Japan loves us. (At least on the social level, i.e., the only level that really matters. ) The Japanese people as a whole aren't holding a grudge, and so I don't think an apology is warranted unless it's explicitly asked for by the people.

 

[Revoltingest]

If he apologizes, I expect to start a highly profitable business selling toilet paper bearing his visage.

 

[Quetzal]

If he apologizes, I expect to start a highly profitable business selling toilet paper bearing his visage.

Thankfully, I do not see that happening. (The apology or your profitable business. ZING!)

 

[Revoltingest]

Thankfully, I do not see that happening. (The apology or your profitable business. ZING!)

It's already been done anyway.

I suppose the thing to do is to just buy stock in one of the manufacturing companies.

 

[Quetzal]

It's already been done anyway.
I suppose the thing to do is to just buy stock in one of the manufacturing companies.

I know just the broker who could help you!

(It's totally not me.)

 

[Revoltingest]

I know just the broker who could help you!

(It's totally not me.)

He looks really dishonest.....& rather grabby.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Would you expect an apology?

I would not expect...but it would be nice thing. The only thing that will be hurt is America's pride. I believe that apologizing, even for crimes you believe you have not done, always results in a positive outcome. The person who you are apologizing too will feel better, and the only think really that will be harmed is your pride (which I deem not as important).

 

[Revoltingest]

I would not expect...but it would be nice thing. The only thing that will be hurt is America's pride. I believe that apologizing, even for crimes you believe you have not done, always results in a positive outcome. The person who you are apologizing too will feel better, and the only think really that will be harmed is your pride (which I deem not as important).

We who object to the apology do so because nuking Japan was far from a crime....it was just.
Many lives, both ours (most importantly) & theirs (secondarily) were saved by ending the war sooner, thereby avoiding invasion.
Today, we have experience with nuclear warfare, & are more loath to do it again.
But this modern sensibility doesn't make it wrong.

 

[निताइ dasa]

We who object to the apology do so because nuking Japan was far from a crime....it was just.

It does not matter whether it is just or not (in my statement I assumed it was just). That is why I said, it is not morally obligatory to apologize, but permissible. If the president did apologize, it would make the Japanese happier with really no negative consequences (apart from America's Pride), so there nothing wrong with apologizing. In-fact, if it helps ease tensions between the American and the Japanese, then there is a strong reason to apologize irrespective of whetherthe original action was a crime or not.

I mean I personally believe that the action was a crime (but I am a deontologist after all heheehe).

I had a English teacher, and she apologized for like everything, even if it was wasn't her fault (like she was late to class due to a meeting not within her control, yet she still apologized). And I mean we all loved her. My point is the act of apologizing generally always has positive consequences because it involves empathy for the other party.

 

[Revoltingest]

It does not matter whether it is just or not (in my statement I assumed it was just). That is why I said, it is not morally obligatory to apologize, but permissible. If the president did apologize, it would make the Japanese happier with really no negative consequences, so there nothing wrong with apologizing. In-fact, if it helps ease tensions between the American and the Japanese, then there is a strong reason to apologize irrespective if the original action was a crime or not.

I mean I personally believe that the action was a crime (but I am a deontologist after all heheehe).

Instead of an apology, I'd prefer acknowledging the horror of the bombing,
& the intention to avoid nukes ever being used anywhere ever again.
That's what matters most anyway.

 

[Quetzal]

It does not matter whether it is just or not

I tend to disagree. If something is justified in the eyes of the entity that carried out the action, then there is no real need to apologize at all. This wasn't a heated argument between a daughter and mom over a short skirt. It was war.

If the president did apologize, it would make the Japanese happier with really no negative consequences (apart from America's Pride), so there nothing wrong with apologizing.

I am not a big slippery slope guy. I hate the fallacy, but I give in this time. If we did accept some sort of apologetic responsibility, we would then have to consider how other nations might interpret this if we then do not turn around and do the same thing for them. As it is, why risk making the water muddy when we don't need to?

In-fact, if it helps ease tensions between the American and the Japanese...

Are things tense now? I don't quite see it that way but I could be wrong.

I had a English teacher, and she apologized for like everything, even if it was wasn't her fault (like she was late to class due to a meeting not within her control, yet she still apologized). And I mean we all loved her. My point is the act of apologizing generally always has positive consequences because it involves empathy for the other party.

I think it is a bit different between two individuals than it is between two nations. Things seem relatively stable with Japan, I do not really see anything in the press to suggest that things are getting rocky over these historic events. Again, no need to bring up a painful past if we are all dedicated to a better future, yeah?

 

[निताइ dasa]

I tend to disagree. If something is justified in the eyes of the entity that carried out the action, then there is no real need to apologize at all.

hhaha cool cool.I agree, there is no need in itself, but out of empathy for the other individual, if my apologizing makes them feel better in any way, than there may exist an obligation (or in the very least, it is permissible or worthy of praise).

e. If we did accept some sort of apologetic responsibility, we would then have to consider how other nations might interpret this if we then do not turn around and do the same thing for them.

You have a point...maybe on a political scale it may be seen as a sign of weakness (which I don't think it is but..).

Things seem relatively stable with Japan, I do not really see anything in the press to suggest that things are getting rocky over these historic events. Again, no need to bring up a painful past if we are all dedicated to a better future, yeah?

Maybe. It was just an interesting thought I had. Restraining from apology simply out of principle is something I am generally against, especially if that apology may lead to favorable outcomes. I guess each situation is different. If Obama decides to apologize, I don't think there is anything wrong about it.

 

[Wu Wei]

USA apologizing to Japan (although I do not understand why the USA would), which may or may not make the Japanese feel 'better', would make China feel much worse, angry actually, see previous reference to "unit 731". and the later mention of "comfort women"

But after that, do we then apologize to Germany for destroying Berlin in an effort to stop Hitler, do we then apologize once again to Japan for executing Hideki Tojo for war crimes?

And if the apology makes one feel better and one feel worse, what then? Apologize to those (US Citizens) because your apology upset them.... thereby risking looking disingenuous and once again upsetting the Japanese.

Frankly I see no need for the apology, like I said, there are a lot of nasty things Japan did during the war they have yet to acknowledge and/or apologize for

 

[निताइ dasa]

And if the apology makes one feel better and one feel worse, what then?

Well a utilitarian would say, "pick the choice that makes the most people happy, and pisses off the least". As for US citizens, I don't see any valid reason why they should be angry if the president's intent was a noble one. Question that arises here, is when is anger justified, and when is it not?

Frankly I see no need for the apology, like I said, there are a lot of nasty things Japan did during the war they have yet to acknowledge and/or apologize for

I agree with you. However I want to say that if someone commits a crime against me and does not apologize, that does not mean I should not apologize to them for any crimes I have committed against them. Two wrongs do not make a right, nor does a moral wrong against me mean I can retaliate with a moral wrong against the culprit. As Gandhi said, "an eye for an eye leaves the world blind".

 

[Wu Wei]

I agree with you. However I want to say that if someone commits a crime against me and does not apologize, that does not mean I should not apologize to them for any crimes I have committed against them. Two wrongs do not make a right, nor does a moral wrong against me mean I can retaliate with a moral wrong against the culprit. As Gandhi said, "an eye for an eye leaves the world blind".

Was what the US did a crime though? Because by your statement, you seem to be inferring it was.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Was what the US did a crime though? Because by your statement, you seem to be inferring it was.

I was responding to your statement which seemed to suggest that if someone does not perform a moral obligation towards me, I must not perform my moral obligation against them, which I don't think follows.

As for the bombing of Hiroshima I find myself conflicted on this issue. One can argue the act itself was wrong, because it treated human lives as means to an end (and one could sustain this argument quite well which is why I generally lean towards this argument as I told before). On the other hand, one may argue that the intent may have been good (i.e to prevent loss of further life by ending the war, but then...are all lives equal?) and therefore the action was right on that basis.

As for a crime.. that changes with the law.

 

[BSM1]

I have actually been hoping for something like this when I heard John Kerry had visited Hiroshima earlier this year. It appears Obama won't be apologising for the United States using the bomb but it is nonetheless an important gesture. Hopefully this is something that can be built on.

Full Text Below: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/10/obama-hiroshima-japan-visit-second-world-war



Do think it is a good idea for a sitting US president to visit Hiroshima? Would you expect an apology? Or does it undermine the US in some way?

What's his point for visiting?