Lies being Taught; PRO’S
- Was necessary to save allied lives/Preferable to an invasion. Although the necessity of a US invasion was debated within the US military (US Army was for, US Navy was against) the general consensus judging by the Battle of Iwo Jima and Battle of Okinawa is that an invasion of the Japanese home islands would be costly.
- A deterrent to the USSR. The Soviets invaded Manchuria on August 9, 1945 only 3 days after the Hiroshima bombing and 9 hours before the Nagasaki bombing. The US were aware that the USSR would enter the Pacific War on 9 August because at the Yalta Conference Stalin had promised Roosevelt that he would declare war on Japan no later than 3 months after the end of the war in Europe (Germany surrendered on 7 May, which makes 9 August the latest date in which the Soviets would declare war on Japan). It was therefore no coincidence that Truman unleashed two nukes, one 3 days before and one 9 hours after 9 August. It was an attempt to end the war before the Soviets could occupy significant territory as well as showing the USSR that the US was in possession of nukes.
Now the truth; CON’S
Evil is as evil does. Mass burning of civilians mainly children, women or old men is not a war crime. It is crime against humanity. Dropping atomic bomb on women, children old men was biggest terrorist activity the world has ever seen.
– Evidence shows that the atomic bombs played little to no role in Japan’s surrender. The 2nd bomb dropped on Nagasaki was on August 9 but Japan didn’t surrender until August 15. If the atomic bombs played a decisive role in Japan’s surrender, Japan would’ve surrendered immediately rather than wait 7 days at the risk of more atomic bombings. Particularly when USA did not have any other bombs to drop. Remember it was just a 3 day gap between the bombing of Hiroshima and the bombing of Nagasaki. The atomic bombings were obviously not enough to convince them. As many in the U.S. military predicted, the atomic bombs were unnecessary and futile to get Japan to surrender.
– Between August 9 and August 15 the Soviets declared war on Japan, invaded Japanese occupied China and destroyed the Japanese army in Manchuria. This event was what persuaded the Japanese to surrender on August 15. This is because Japan believed they could still end the war on favourable terms if the Soviet Union stayed out of it, but the Soviet intervention crushed all hopes Japan had left. This is proven by the fact that while the Japanese cabinet ignored the atomic bombings, they panicked and called an emergency meeting after hearing that the Soviets had invaded Manchuria.
– Most U.S. military commanders such as Eisenhower, MacArthur, Leahy and Nimitz confessed in their memoirs and wartime diaries that the Soviet intervention and the U.S. naval blockade was enough to get a Japanese surrender. These men knew more about the military situation than President Truman.
– It’s been suggested that Truman’s real motive in using the atomic bombs was not necessarily to end the war but to use the atomic bombs on cities and people – something he couldn’t do in a testing site. Truman believed that the war against Japan was an opportunity to test the atomic bomb on cities and people to examine its effects. This is proven by the fact Truman selected Hiroshima and Nagasaki to drop the bombs – these two cities were largely untouched, heavily populated and therefore allowed Truman to measure and research for weapons of mass destruction on whole cities.
– Truman set up the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission (ABCC) after the war to examine the victims of the atomic bombs to investigate the effects the atomic bombs had on their bodies. The ABCC was purely for scientific research and it didn’t provide any sort of medical care for the victims (to their grief the survivors believed that was the ABCC’s purpose). This is further proof that Truman was interested in knowing how much damage the atomic bombs caused on innocent civilians.
– The Americans viewed the Japanese as a sub-human race. All Japanese Americans were also put in camps. In 1944, a public poll showed that 13% of the U.S. public voted for the “complete extermination of the Japanese race”. Such emotional anti-Japanese sentiment made the U.S. public believe using atomic weapons on Japanese cities was justified.
– After the war, many Americans saw a connection between the way American troops mutilated the dead bodies of Japanese troops, the fact that Japanese Americans were sent to internment camps, and the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. It was obvious that there was intense hatred specifically toward the Japanese.
– The U.S. military were the most sensitive when it came to casualties, this is why they feared invading Japan. Contrast this to the Japanese military thinking of kamikaze and banzai charge. The U.S. were under a perception that the entire Japanese population was ready to resist just like their military. Contrary to popular belief, Japan actually protected their civilians and never forced women and children to fight. The bushido code only applied to soldiers. At Iwo Jima, all the Japanese civilians were evacuated before the battle and the only Japanese left on Iwo Jima were the soldiers. At Okinawa, there were no Japanese civilians to begin with. The civilians at Okinawa were Okinawans – who are a different ethnic group. As a result, the Japanese treated them the same way as Chinese and Filipinos. The perception that the Japanese would resist to the death was enhanced by U.S. propaganda to justify the use of the atomic bomb.
– Truman definitely saw the propaganda value that the atomic bombs would have. The dropping of the atomic bombs can even be said as not the end of WWII but the start of the Cold War. Truman didn’t want to see any communism in Asia let alone Japan and therefore wanted to keep the Soviets away. The Soviets were so stunned by the atomic bombings that they didn’t demand joint occupation of Japan like they did with Germany. This was what Truman had hoped for. The Cold War had begun and it was USA 1 USSR 0.
– Some have defined the atomic bombings as a form of state terrorism no different to 9/11. In both cases, the U.S. and al-Qaeda targeted innocents to achieve a political goal and psychologically terrorize the population. As the former U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson said in 1947: “The atomic bomb was more than a weapon of terrible destruction; it was a psychological weapon.” Same as terrorism.
– There are some who call it the classic example of a war crime. Those who don’t think it is a war crime ask yourself this: Say the Allies won the war without dropping any atomic bombs. But say if during the war Japan or Germany had dropped an atomic bomb on an Allied city. Would you classify that act as a war crime?
Nowhere but in America do people get taught that atomic bombs were used to save lives. I see it as an attempt by some Americans to justify an atrocious war crime/ terrorism committed. Not even President Truman thought about “saving lives” when he made the decision. The use of atomic weaponry on civilian cities had no military significance whatsoever in ending a war that was already over. Mislead by the impact of the atomic bombings, not many Americans are even aware that the Soviet Union entered the Pacific War – arguably the reason why Japan surrendered exactly on August 15, 1945 and not sooner.
The flaw of the argument for atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is that it relies on the fact that a US invasion was the only other alternative to end WW2.
Was a US invasion necessary?
With no navy, no air force, their armies losing in China, their people at home starving to death, American bombers ruling their skies, an effective American sea blockade in place, the Soviet Union having just declared war on them, and with martial law imposed, Japan was essentially defeated by August 1945. America had air superiority over Japanese skies and sea superiority in Japanese waters. Japan didn’t even have the ability to shoot down the lone unguarded bombers that carried the atomic bombs. Whether the US invaded it or not, Japan’s surrender would’ve been inevitable.
Was there an alternative?
Without using atomic bombs or invading Japan, Truman could’ve:
- Waited until the Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 9;-
– Because of the close proximity of the Soviet Union’s entry into the Pacific War and the nuclear bombings, it is unclear over which one of these had the biggest impact to Japan’s surrender. It is quite possible that it was purely the Soviet Union’s entrance into the Pacific War that got the Japanese surrender when you compare the date Japan surrendered (August 15) to the date the second atomic bomb was dropped (August 9). This lengthy timeframe may suggest that atomic bombs did not play a key role in the surrender. By contrast, the Soviets invaded Manchuria on August 9, and by August 15, occupied it and threatened the Japanese home islands.
- Waited for the US sea blockade to end the war;-
– A sea blockade was more effective than a US invasion to end WWII. The Japanese military were eagerly anticipating a US invasion so they could inflict American casualties. If the US publicly denied an invasion of Japan it would mean no American casualties and would signal to Japan that defeat was inevitable. The US Navy was against an invasion and strongly backed a sea blockade for this very reason. Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz and Gen. Carl Spaatz of the USAAF believed that in the event of this scenario, Japanese leaders would ultimately give in. (Remember, Japan had no navy and no air force to relieve the blockade).
- Given a public message to Japan saying that the imperial family would be saved from war crimes trials;-
– The Japanese military resisted primarily to defend the imperial family from post-war prosecution. Japanese military leaders believed the Allies’ “unconditional surrender” meant that the imperial family would be powerless. Truman did not assuage the feelings of Japanese on this issue Gen. Douglas MacArthur knew the importance of the imperial family to the Japanese military and therefore urged Truman to let Japan know that no harm will befall their imperial family if Japan accepted the unconditional surrender.
If Truman was truly humane and serious about “saving lives” he would’ve tried these alternatives before resorting to nuclear bombs. This is why I believe Truman purposely used nuclear weapons something which probably FDR would have avoided which may have led to his death.
I hardly think deliberately destroying Hiroshima and Nagasaki’s hospitals, universities, high schools, primary schools, kindergardens, temples and residential suburbs was the difference between winning or losing WW2. At least with conventional bombing, bombers aim for specific military-related targets (like a barracks, munitions factory, depot etc).
If the atomic bombs were dropped on the fishes in the ocean to show its might or in the frontlines it wouldn’t of been such a big issue. The regrettable aspects of the atomic bombings were that it was militarily unnecessary and used on civilians. Many Americans lack the sympathy because their country was the perpetrator and not the victim. If Germany or Japan had used an atomic bomb on Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix etc. There is no doubt that Americans would condemn that act and call it a state terrorism or war crime – even if the Germans argued that “it saved lives”.
Is it a war crime?
Nuking civilian cities is classified as a war crime, even back in 1945. The US signed the Hague Convention in 1907 regarding the rules of war and the bombing of civilians. It was against international law to deliberately target non-combatant civilians, and kill them by any method. The atomic bombings resulted in the mass murder of millions of non-combatants en masse, and the US therefore violated the Hague Convention and broke an international treaty. It is never justified to break an international treaty that your country had signed and pledged to abide to.
Is it terrorism?
The French word terrorisme is derived from the Latin verb terreō meaning “I frighten” and refers to the killing of innocent people or civilians to achieve a political goal by psychologically terrorizing the population by violent “spectacle” or “Shock and Awe”.
Former U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson said in 1947: “The atomic bomb was more than a weapon of terrible destruction; it was a psychological weapon.” Same as terrorism
With inputs from ‘Beau’
Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Documentary
The Most Censored Nuclear Catastrophe in History
THE SOVIET Union’s Marshal Georgy Zhukov was much celebrated in the USSR and the allegedly anti-Communist West. Victor Suvorov, the noted Soviet dissident, described the World War II leader as “the only general in world history honored for losing 5 million men under his command.”
As an interesting aside, it has been since revealed that the battles this soldafon (Russian for loud-mouthed martinet) did win were entirely thanks to US aid.
There is a dirty secret the world doesn’t know about this man, though, because Western journalists choose to keep quiet about it. Merely as an experiment Marshal Zhukov discharged a nuclear bomb over his own troops and a defenceless Russian community.
This heart-breaking self-inflicted catastrophe occurred during a Soviet military exercise held in 1954. It only came to light in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Western media journalists kept quiet about the 20th century’s worst single act of base treachery.
For the purpose of studying the effects of a nuclear blast on civilians and ground forces, an explosive nuclear experiment was conducted at 09:53 hours on September 14, 1954. Under the direction of Marshal Zhukov, a Soviet bomber, flying at an altitude of 42,000 feet (13 kilometres), dropped a 40-kiloton nuclear bomb.
The device was timed to detonate at a height of 350 meters over a group of both civilians and troops. The detonation’s explosive power combined that of America’s atomic attacks on Japan’s Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The medical facilities in the Soviet Union had no means of protecting or treating humans or livestock against the consequences of exposure to a nuclear blast. At the instant of the blast, Suvorov recounts, some 60,000 young men were rendered sterile; countless numbers suffered radiation sickness, bloody flux, leukaemia, and other debilitating and fatal diseases. The troops involved in the experiment were sworn to secrecy. Most were subsequently released from the army as unfit for military service.
Zhukov chose as the site for the experiment the Totskoye test range. This locality is situated in the Southern Urals Military District. An especially fertile agricultural area, Totskoye is located between the Volga River and the Urals on the Samara River.
The farmers who lived in the surrounding area were evacuated before the experiment. However, they were obliged to immediately return and continue their lives as before the explosion. Consequently, the community suffered the same terrifying consequences as did the doomed Soviet troops. Afterwards, Zhukov, darling of the Western powers, was commended for his bold leadership. At home, some proposed he be awarded a fifth Hero of the Soviet Union medal.
A commemorative plaque has since been placed at the site of the tragedy. The inscription reads: ‘In September 1954, at the landfill site were conducted tactical trainings of troops led by Marshal Zhukov.’
On 17 September 1954, the Soviet newspaper Pravda published a TASS report: ‘In accordance with the plans of scientific research and experimental work was tested one type of atomic weapon. The purpose of the tests was to study the action of an atomic explosion. The test produced valuable results that will help Soviet scientists and engineers to successfully solve problems of atomic attack protection. A post-test study was carried out in the winter of 1954 and spring and summer of 1955.’
TASS merely claimed that the test was different from the previous tests. There was no media mention of those who were responsible for the initiative or charged with carrying it out.
Both appalling tragedies can be attributed to Marshal Zhukov. The warlord had returned to Moscow following Stalin’s death. The Marshal, whose military blunders surpassed those of his wartime leader Winston Churchill, then held the post of First Deputy Minister of Defence of the USSR.
The plan of the “guinea pig” military exercise was as follows: After the bomb exploded, some troops were to break through the ‘enemy defences’ and other troops were to defend themselves. The defending soldiers were supposed to be in trenches and ditches to assist in surviving a nuclear explosion. Advancing troops were ordered to pass through the explosion’s epicentre through the imaginary enemy defence.
The Russian military newspaper, Red Star. on September 29, 1989 carried survivors’ accounts: “The earth rocked. There was a huge cloud, the size of half the sky. The cloud was pushed up by pluming scarlet flames; the clouds varied in colour. The heavens had become crimson, bright or less so and all the time raged clouds of smoke. Clouds rose higher, dragging everything out of them, sucking dust from the ground and making pillars of all that was on the ground.”
The whole area changed beyond recognition. The land was afterwards flattened and strewn with stones as if ploughed. Everything seemed to be melting and in places smoking and emitting fumes; vegetation did not survive.
Measuring devices such as X-ray devices were broken. Military tanks melted and many had sunk into the ground. Other military vehicles had been pushed dozens of meters. They lay overturned with their caterpillar tracks up. There were many hillocks, but what objects were buried by the explosion it was impossible to guess. Cloud cover shimmered as if it was unfolding from a huge bowl of boiling, raging flame; it rose to the heavens. Weapons and guns had melted and would afterwards be sold as scrap.
The forest was turned into wood chips and small fragments. At distance of 1,200 meters from the epicentre of the explosion was a well-protected stronghold command point with a solid roof and powerful shelters for both weapons and personnel: “This shelter survived but the shock wave destroyed partition walls, penetrated into the shelter’s compartments, and scored interior surfaces as if by abrasive sand. There had been two horses tethered at the entrance to the building; both simply disappeared,” according to Gennady Ambrazevich (Independence, April 23, 1997).
Other reports (Red Star, July 9, 1992) recount how “at the time of the explosion the earth underfoot heaved. There was a clap of thunder, crackling, and in the sky a dazzling bright fiery mushroom.”
The (Russian) Literary Gazette, September 15, 1999, stated: “It was so painful to look at the mad, blind, and charred animals, scary to think of uprooted trees, disappeared oak groves, the ashes of several villages, the pitiful remnants of military equipment.”
“In the trenches and open areas can be seen the doomed cows, goats, sheep, and other domestic animals. The eyes of many animals had exploded out of their heads; their hair showed evidence of having smouldered. Many animals were lying with terrible wounds, according to Independence, April 23, 1997.
According to Red Star, July 19, 1996: ‘The soldiers who took part in the secret event and, with them, the local people got a large dose of radiation exposure. Officers in the area witnessed that at the oak forest massif there remained only black ashes and charred stumps. All military equipment had either melted or been mangled.”
“Trenches and shelters were gone. The top layer of the earth in many placed had moved. All land became equal. The sight was horrible.” (Red Star, July 9, 1992)
The oak forest had been planted by decree of Tsar Peter I. In the area had been thousands of mighty oaks of about 250 years of age. All had been destroyed.
Mikhail Arensburg was a junior sergeant of the Engineers’ Battalion and participated in these doomed experiments. The soldier was the only survivor of a squad that included 21 young soldiers and a sergeant. He says: “Although the explosion was above ground, and we were so far away, the earth under us moved like a sea wave. All our devices went off the scale and were rendered useless. We were ordered to go immediately to the epicentre of the explosion with our tanks and our soldiers shouting, ‘Hurrah, Hurrah!’ The high officials departed immediately after the action. At the landfill site were lying around not only many dead cattle with severed limbs and charred sides, but also many dead people. It was said that sometimes during the pretend attacks, tanks ran into tents occupied by soldiers. Of course, these losses were concealed. I think that, first of all, the chiefs wanted to put the risk on both humans and animals. I realised that we were all in the role of experimental rabbits.” (Magazine Hour, January 27, 2001)
Afterwards, Marshal Zhukov, who was unaffected by the radiation, was promoted. This darling of Western media journalists had, before the experiment, slunk away to a concrete bunker situated far from the epicentre. He later decided against visiting the affected area.
It is notable that this appalling act of treachery was widely publicised in the Russian Federation after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Western media and palace publishers have remained tight-lipped. One again we realise that Bolshevik-occupied Russia and the capitalist West are just as the German chancellor Adolf Hitler described them: ‘two sides of the same coin.’
* * *
SHOCKING VIDEO: TOTSKOYE (THE RED BOMB) NUCLEAR EXERCISE
RECOMMENDED BOOK: TROTSKY’S WHITE NEGROES BY MIKE WALSH
HISTORY WITHOUT SPIN
New Stories and YouTube videos every day.