President Obama to visit Hiroshima

[Laika]

What's his point for visiting?

It's looks like it will be after the G7 Summit being held in Japan, so he's going to visit after that.

 

[metis]

Maybe you haven't studied the end of the war. The Japanese people were dedicated to dying for the Emperor. The Emperor would not surrender so we had to persuade him to reconsider. It actually took the second bomb to make him see the light. If it had taken a third bomb we would have used it also.
.

Yes, I studied the war in great detail, thank you. Matter of fact, I started my teaching career teaching history, plus most of my classes in my history major were from WWII or later. On top of that, my father was based in the Philippines under MacArthur, and I didn't meet my own father until I was three years old, so my family had some irons in that fire.

Again, you have jumped to a convenient conclusion as there is not way possible that either of us would know exactly what the emperor may do nor whether the people would continue to support him under dire straights.

 

[metis]

highly highly unlikely the Japanese would have revolted, it just was not part of the culture.

If people are desperate enough, they typically will revolt. Granted, Japanese culture treasures conformity, so I'll grant you that revolting would be difficult for them, but not impossible. You should remember that Japan historically was more regional in nature, and fights between regions during the Shogun era were commonplace.

What I believe was far more likely, however, is the emperor caving in and going for peace, which is what did happen at the end anyhow.

But either way, the point is moot-- this was their decision to make either way.

 

[Revoltingest]

If people are desperate enough, they typically will revolt. Granted, Japanese culture treasures conformity, so I'll grant you that revolting would be difficult for them, but not impossible.

A good military strategist cannot plan based upon hope for the "not impossible".
Dropping the bombs was based upon premises of what was most likely, ie, the
Japs would keep on fighting to the bitter end.

(Notice how I avoided the more offensive word for the enemy, "Nips".)

 

[Wu Wei]

If people are desperate enough, they typically will revolt. Granted, Japanese culture treasures conformity, so I'll grant you that revolting would be difficult for them, but not impossible. You should remember that Japan historically was more regional in nature, and fights between regions during the Shogun era were commonplace.

What I believe was far more likely, however, is the emperor caving in and going for peace, which is what did happen at the end anyhow.

But either way, the point is moot-- this was their decision to make either way.

There is speculation and there is historic fact, what you are doing is speculating.... nothing wrong with it, but you are not taking into account was is known as fact based on history. I am dealing with things based on historic fact, not speculation.

 

[Acim]

I do not totally understand the lack of a desire to apologize. And yet, a few times within the last year, I have been on the side of the argument for why the US ought not to apologize for nuclear weapons dropped on Japan in WWII, resulting in mass genocide.

At this point, the apology would be forced or very (very) likely stipulated by other Americans as that person doesn't speak for all of us, therefore not really an apology by (United people of) America.

Also, a political apology does seem to be different than whatever an actual apology is understood to be. As in if we now apologize, do we suddenly owe a debt that could forever be collected upon because of generation after generation claiming to forever be ill by an action long time ago?

I just think it is another one of those mythological type things we perpetuate in what is either inconsistent, or misguided. If we observed two kids fighting and observed one clearly start the fight, being relentless in the fight, and then the other kid picks up a stick and literally pokes the eye out of the other kid, I'm thinking adults are intervening, making both kids apologize or see reason for the children to express regret. And if consistent with this political event, the kid who poked the eye out would have nothing to be sorry for, no reason to be expressing regret. I'm thinking the non-apologist (American regarding Japan stuff) would agree that the kid poking out the eye, has nothing to apologize for.

But also just seems odd that we think politicians ought to condemn things immediately, when the disconnect is every bit as viable on the apology side of things. Apparently it is easier for us to condemn actions than to apologize/feel regret for them.

Perhaps a U.S. president could apologize for not being able to apologize for a past genocide?

 

[metis]

There is speculation and there is historic fact, what you are doing is speculating.... nothing wrong with it, but you are not taking into account was is known as fact based on history. I am dealing with things based on historic fact, not speculation.

Did not the emperor agree to a cease fire after the bombs were dropped, yes or no?

If the emperor supposedly would not stop, then why did he stop? The "historical fact" is that he did agree to a cease fire and the treaty provisions, which you deny he would have done if the bombs had not been dropped, thus proving your claim logically to be in error because we simply cannot know to which extent the emperor would have gone under different circumstances.

And, either way, the real issue is moot, namely that there's a difference between us doing the killing of many thousands versus what the repercussions of their actions would be. We cannot control everyone else's actions, but we should be responsible for our own, and the mass killing of innocent victims is antithetical to basic morality, imo. If you don't agree, then we don't agree.

With this in mind, there simply is nothing more to discuss.

 

[Wu Wei]

Did not the emperor agree to a cease fire after the bombs were dropped, yes or no?

If the emperor supposedly would not stop, then why did he stop? The "historical fact" is that he did agree to a cease fire and the treaty provisions, which you deny he would have done if the bombs had not been dropped, thus proving your claim logically to be in error because we simply cannot know to which extent the emperor would have gone under different circumstances..

After yes, but you seem to be talking about other options prior. He stopped because the bombs were dropped, there is no way of knowing, based on history, what would have happened had we not dropped the bombs as it applies to the emperor. All we do know is that the only other option on the table (based on historic fact) would have been a full scale allied invasion. And I am not denying anything, I am simply working with historic fact, and I guess I should add in chronological order. And you are still speculating based on what he did "after"

And, either way, the real issue is moot, namely that there's a difference between us doing the killing of many thousands versus what the repercussions of their actions would be. We cannot control everyone else's actions, but we should be responsible for our own, and the mass killing of innocent victims is antithetical to basic morality, imo. If you don't agree, then we don't agree.

With this in mind, there simply is nothing more to discuss.

You appear to be taking this personally, going for the moral ground which I have not even implied in any way, as well as wanting to argue, which I do not want to do. I simply am working with historic fact, that is all. But I have a question, at what point did this change to a discussion about taking responsibility for ones own actions. You appear to have changed the entire focus here, and if this is where you wish to go, why no mention of Unit 731 or Unit 8604. They were Japanese and they were doing horrendous things to POWs and civilians. Should Japan then not take full responsibility for its actions as well?

I do believe we agree on one thing however, since you are speculating and extrapolating, I do believe pursuit of this would be pointless.

have a nice day

 

[Revoltingest]

In the news......
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hiroshima-atomic-bomb-victims-want-apology-obama-115648493.html?ref=gs

They want an apology?
They might start with numerous apologies of their own to so many other countries.
Then we can talk.

 

[esmith]

In the news......
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hiroshima-atomic-bomb-victims-want-apology-obama-115648493.html?ref=gs

They want an apology?
They might start with numerous apologies of their own to so many other countries.
Then we can talk.

Do you think they would ever apologies for Nanking?

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you think they would ever apologies for Nanking?

Perhaps some day.
That, & so many other crimes await their admission & apology.

 

[Revoltingest]

From the snippet I heard of Obama's speech in Japan, it sounded appropriate, ie,
lamenting the horror of being nuked, but no apology.

But dang, he is an awkward speaker.
He pauses at odd times....as though he's having trouble reading his script.

 

[Palehorse]

Pictures say a thousand words.