Grandson of President Truman lays wreath for Hiroshima dead

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Grandson of President Truman lays wreath for Hiroshima dead

Clifton Truman Daniel attends memorial to 140,000 killed in atomic bombing of Japanese city ordered by his grandfather

Associated Press in Tokyo
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 4 August 2012 14.04 EDT

A grandson of former US president Harry Truman – the man who ordered the atomic bombings of Japan during the second world war – is in Hiroshima to attend a memorial service for the victims.

Clifton Truman Daniel visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park on Saturday and laid a wreath for the 140,000 people killed by the 1945 bombing authorized by his grandfather. Another atomic blast in Nagasaki three days later killed 70,000 more.

"I think this cenotaph says it all to honor the dead to not forget and to make sure that we never let this happen again," Daniel said after offering a silent prayer.

Daniel, 55, is in Japan to attend ceremonies next week in Hiroshima and Nagasaki marking the 67th anniversary of the bombings.



Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/04/truman-grandson-hiroshima-memorial-wreath

[Faygo Kid]

1. I'll never forget the 25th anniversary, in 1970.

I was a camp counselor at 18 at Camp Ararat, an Armenian summer camp, in northern lower Michigan. Another counselor and I had time off, so we went into Traverse City, where we lit candles to recall the 25th anniversary. Some yahoos (obviously now 60 plus) harassed us, but they didn't want anything to do with us at that age.

I don't blame Harry Truman for dropping that bomb. An invasion of Japan would have been terrible, and he had no idea of the power it held. For those who lost their lives, it's unspeakable. It's a lesson to all of humankind about what happens when you turn your nation and loyalty over to those who would ruin you, as the Japanese did.

And which we may yet do.

[Archae]

2. What we have to realize is that things were FAR different back then.

We were facing a whole country, that even though we were starving them to death, they had the desire to fight to the death.
Even children.

Nowadays we can look at nations that for the most part will surrender, when facing overwhelming odds.

But Japan had no desire to surrender.
They were going to fight to the death. No matter how overwhelming the odds against them.

The US had the Bomb.

It was the horrible shock that made them realize how bad they had it.

And it took the Emperor himself to lay down the law.

Even then, a group of vicious "Fight until we all die" officers tried to stop the Emperor from saying it was hopeless.
They failed, and killed themselves.

And BTW, both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military bases, in the cities.

It was that horrendous shock that ended the war, and it has prevented a nuclear weapon being used ever since.

My uncle would have had to invade Japan, had it not been for the bombs.
And it's pretty much a sure thing he would have been killed.

[Posteritatis]

4. The thirties and forties were a really alien time.

It's amazing how much has changed since then, especially in terms of attitudes and worldviews, not just technologies.

The kinds of thought processes that make Okinawa - or Stalingrad, or Berlin itself - happen the way they did are just ... well, as I said, alien to me.

A lot of things are different now, and a lot of those changes are certainly improvements for everyone involved.

[boppers]

5. "Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military bases, in the cities"

Wrong.

Both were places with military production.

Neither were exclusively military bases.

[Archae]

7. I didn't say exclusively.

But they did have war factories and bases in those cities.

[happyslug]

10. Sorry, wasn't believed at the time, but became dogma for Japan and USA ever since

Last edited Mon Aug 6, 2012, 01:01 AM - Edit history (3)

The US dropped its first bomb on August 7, 1945, the Russian invaded Manchuria on August 8, 1945, the US dropped its second bomb on August 9, 1945. The Japanese only surrendered on August 15, 1945 when it became clear the Russian would take all of Manchuria by September 1st, 1945, and all of Korea by October 1st, 1945.

The US had plans to invade the Southernmost main Island on November 1st, 1945, the Russians had plans to invade the Northernmost Main island on the same date. The only surviving opposition in Japan was lead by a Communist residing in Moscow. IF any revolution would have broken out in Japan, it would have been Communist lead. Given the food crisis, the refusal of commercial sailor to sail on ships, Japan was heading for Revolution. Similar situation has lead to Revolutions in the past. For example the "Arab Spring" was driven by the huge increase in the price of food more then anything else (Tied in with price increase due to last years drought in Russia forced Russia NOT to export grain, lead to massive increase in grain prices worldwide). The Russian Revolution of 1917 was food driven, as was the fall of the Austria-Hungary Empire and the German Empire in the Fall of 1918 (In both bases Republics ended up surrendering to the Allies, for a war fought for four years in the name of Emperors, but food was so tight that socility broke down in all three countries, thus revolution),. The 1848 revolution was food driven (IT followed four years of bad crops). The 1789 French Revolution was Food Driven (The 1787 Great Famine set France on its way to Revolution). The Recent revolt in Syria is driven by four years of drought in Syria.

The Japanese leadership knew this history of food and revolution (and similar revolts in Japan driven by Food), thus Japan was in pre-revolutionary state by August 1945. The US also believed that to be the case. FDR Knew Russian intervention could provoke such a revolt, thus demanded Russian intervention at Yalta within 90 days of the end of the war within 90 days of the end of the war with Germany.

With the Atomic bomb the US hoped that Japanese leadership fearing the Russian (Being Communists) more then the USA would surrender to avoid a communist takeover. The Speed of the Russian offensive was so fast, that the Japanese Government had to act fast, so that American Troops could get to Seoul Korea before the Russians did (The US landed in Inchon on 9-8-1945 and then moved directly to Seoul). Thus the surrender on August 15th, 1945, a week after the Atomic bombings, but by then they was nothing capable of stopping the Red Army except the Japanese Sea. Given that Korea is only a "stone throw" from Japan, Russian occupied Korea was more to fear then USA occupied Japan.

Furthermore the Japanese had assumed an USA lead invasion from Okinawa. With Russia holding Korea, it would have become a US-Russian invasion from Korea. B-17, B-24s, British Lancaster Bombers if based in Korea within easy range of Japan. Without Korea, Okinawa to small to based those planes. The B-29 was the only plane capable of bombing from existing bases.

The only way for japan to "win" would have been for the US and USSR to go to war. Such a war would have given Japan the three things it needed, fuel, pilots and Planes. The Russian invasion killed off this hope. Thus Japan was looking at not only a US invasion but a Soviet invasion by the middle of August. This lead to the Japanese Surrender more then the Atomic bombing.

On the other hand, Japan and the USA have used the Atomic bombings for their own purposes ever since. The USA that it has the bomb and will use it, Japan as a martyred state that was a victim of Atomic bombings. Historical reality is different, but does not serve US or Japanese interests,

Side note: US occupation of Korea:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Military_Government_in_Korea

Wikipedia article is mostly correct, but misses key points. The US Occupying forces did declare its intentions on September 9, 1945, and a huge outcry occurred, but the biggest outcry was from the Japanese Imperial Governor who told the US Commander his plan was unworkable for the simple reason the Koreans so hated the Japanese, that the Japanese troops could NOT stay, they had to leave or be killed by the Koreans. Some of the Japanese could and did stay over as advisers, but from day one the Japanese told the Americans the American had to Rule or Koreans had to rule, the Japanese could not and could NOT stay. This fact, made clear by the Japanese Governor, shocked the American Governor, it upset the whole plans the US had for Korea, but the Japanese Governor was correct, the US could NOT use Japanese Troops to occupy Korea, the US had to send in US Troops or let the Russians take all of Korea,

In the 1930s Japan came more and more under the control of its far right, which used murder as one of its main weapons against anyone who opposed them:

http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/JAP1930.html

1921 Assassination of a Japanese Prime Minster:
http://www.ndl.go.jp/modern/e/cha3/description10.html

1931 attempted assassination of the Japanese Prime Minster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamaguchi_Osachi

March 5th, 1932 Assassination of a left wing political leader:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Takuma

The May 15, 1932 Assassination of the Japanese Prime Minster by the Japanese Right Wing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_15th_Incident

1936 Assassination of a former Prime Minster, but by 1936 Fiance Minster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takahashi_Korekiyo
This was part of the February 26, 1936 incident, where many politicians were killed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_26_Incident

The "League of Blood Incident" a 1930 incident:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Blood_Incident

More on the 1930s and Japan:
http://books.google.com/books?id=yadHD-aCo_cC&pg=PA268& ...


More on the Russian Invasion, Operation August Storm"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_August_Storm

US Decision to drop the Atomic Bomb:
http://www.doug-long.com/debate.htm

More cites with reports from the time period as to use or non-use of the bomb:
http://www.doug-long.com/

http://www.dannen.com/decision/index.html

[davidpdx]

3. I think going there and pledging to work with the Japanese for peace

was a nice thing do to. The Japanese were obviously receptive to his visit.

[reACTIONary]

6. John Rawls, one of the leading figures in 20th Century political philosophy...

...served as an infantryman in the Pacific during WWII and was part of the occupation of Japan. His experience with the aftermath of the bombing of Hiroshima inspired him to pursue a doctorate in moral philosophy.

In "The Law of Peoples" he considers the ethical legitimacy of the bombing. It's interesting and worth a read.

[DallasNE]

8. My Father-in-law

Graduated from high school in 1944. Within a couple of weeks he enlisted in the military where he was trained as a bombardier for a B29 crew. He rarely spoke of his war experience although his B29 crew got together every 10 years in Colorado until their numbers dwindled and some could no longer travel. When he passed away 3 years ago all but his wife were surprised by the number of missions he flew in just less than a year of war action. And the number of times his plane was hit, but not downed, by enemy fire. (We thought they were only hit the time they lost their tail gunner as that was the only hit he ever mentioned). The later missions were over Japan proper so it wouldn't surprise me if he helped soften up Hiroshima and Nagasaki. With that as a background he had a heart of gold and was well liked by everyone he came in contact with. When he passed away it was standing room only in the church -- the very same church he got married in nearly 60 years earlier.

[reACTIONary]

12. My Father...

... was part of the occupation, although he never "confronted the enemy in anger", as he put it. He said that in many cities the only things left standing were chimneys and bank vaults. War is hell.

[bucolic_frolic]

9. A Gracious Gesture

From what I recall, the Truman and Eisenhower descendants have been stately, reserved,
very diplomatic, and carried their legacy well.

[TheDebbieDee]

11. My history may be a little fuzzy in this matter, but what did Eisenhower have

to do with the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings?

[indie9197]

13. I think the quote "history books are written by the winners" applies to the atomic bombings

Interesting reading in this article.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson7.html

It's hard to know who to believe sometimes....

[happyslug]

14. He referrs to "The Decision to Use the Bomb by Gar Alperovitz,"

Parts of the book are repeated at the following cites:

US Decision to drop the Atomic Bomb:
http://www.doug-long.com/debate.htm

More cites with reports from the time period as to use or non-use of the bomb:
http://www.doug-long.com/

More on the Russian Invasion, Operation August Storm"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_August_Storm

List of Documents involved in the Decision to drop the Atomic Bomb:
http://www.dannen.com/decision/index.html

The problem with most of these sites is they ignore the DOMESTIC POLITICAL SITUATION IN THE US. The Democrats had controlled the Presidency and both houses since 1932, but since 1938 the hold of the Democrats had weakened. The GOP was already making waves that they could run the War better and the Democratic Party was worried about losing control of both houses AND the Presidency. This was reinforced by the idea that which ever party won a war, the opposition ends up winning the next congressional election after peace breaks out. Furthermore soldiers who had served in Europe was already complaining of being shipped to Japan. The GOP was still holding onto its attacks on Labor (Which the GOP said was to strong), attacking Social Security (And getting little traction on that issue), Crime (the GOP was doing its best to tie the Democratic Party with Organized crime, the problem was most members of Organized crime where affiliated with the GOP not the Democrats), and most effectively attacking FDR for giving into the Communists at Yalta.

Truman was a political animal, he had massive support in 1945, but realized he will lost most of that support when he decided to NOT demobilized at the end of the Fighting, but to keep Soldiers in Uniform for at least a couple of years so that another Post War Depression would set in (Which had happened after the Civil War and WWI do to massive demobilization at the end of each war). The GOP was already crying to let the boys out of the service, even if they was no jobs for them (More to bring down domestic wages which had increased during the war, the GOP wanted what had happened in 1919-1921 a massive release of Soldiers whose release from service forced them to enter the job market, bring down wages).

Thus the GOP was catering to those men in the Service who wanted out, who also thought that they can be hired at the high wages they heard civilians were getting (But NOT connecting that such high wages were the result of them being in the Service, once released, wages would drop). Truman wanted to release the men slowly from the Service, to spread out the effect of all those people entering the job market (Truman and the Democrats had also supported the original GI bill of 1944, providing for education payments to those veterans who wanted to go to collage, again to prevent the massive unemployment that occurred in 1919-1921 AND the Great Depression).

Truman knew his plan to keep men in uniform would be unpopular, but necessary. Truman skill on that level is shown in that no recession occurred after 1945, unlike 1919. At the same time period, he saw his popularity decline as people hated that their sons could NOT go home as soon as the war was over. Thus the start of Truman's unpopularity among American Voters. Something he knew would happen, but accepted. At the same time Truman already saw the start of a New Red Scare (As happened in 1919) to scare people to vote out the Democrats and vote the GOP in. Thus Truman had to look tough on Russia, and try to make it look like the US, lead by the Democrats had won the war not only against Germany, but also against Japan. For these DOMESTIC reasons Truman first choice was anything that made Japan Surrender do to American Actions NOT Soviet Actions (i.e. Atomic Bombs instead of Red Army invasion of Manchuria).

A further factor was the Atomic Bomb had been super secret, but the second most expensive war project of WWII (the development of the B-29 to carry the Atomic Bomb was the most expensive project). IF not used, how would the American people respond to its non use? Would they turn to the GOP? Especially if the GOP said they would have dropped it and ended the war earlier (even if days earlier). How do you explain to the American People that you did not use it on Japan, but instead left the Red Army take over China and Korea? That political attack was high on Truman's mind and I think the decisive item he why he dropped the bomb. I also believe it was the consensus of the Politicians around Truman, including some of the military officer who for military reason opposed the dropping of the bomb.

We also have to remember, the decision to drop two bombs on two untouched Japanese Cities had been made in 1943, even while the US was fighting Germany (The reason was simple, the US had a rough idea of the capacity of Japan and Germany and Japan in 1943-1945 would have had a harder time figuring out what went wrong on such a bomb, if we dropped a bomb and it did NOT explode, i.e. Germany had better chance of making the bomb work for them, if we dropped it and it did not explode).

Thus the idea of two cities was already in the pipeline set by the military bureaucrats in charge of the Atomic Bomb Project. When it came to time to actually used the bomb, the top military leadership had come out to oppose it, for blockade and Russian intervention were seen as better options, but the movement to use the Atomic bomb was already beyond they control. Given the political situation IN THE US (Not with the Russians or Japan) that movement was given additional push. How can the Democrats justify development of such a weapon at the cost it took to develop it, and NOT use it?

Thus the domestic political situation that drove the US to the Atomic Bombing, not the military situation, not foreign policy and not the Russians (and clearly not the Japanese). You be surprised where domestic politics comes into play, and the Atomic bombing is a clear example of this and it is the only item the author fails to address. It is a shortcoming but if understood one we can live with when reading his paper on the decision to use the Atomic Bomb on Japan.

[indie9197]

15. perhaps the title of my post was not the best...

A very difficult situation and made more difficult by the way Russia was expanding quickly to fill the vacuum left by the imminent surrender of Japan. It still seems possible that we would not have had to "invade" Japan if the bomb was not dropped. That was the main point of the reference that I made. But honestly, I haven't put in the hours to properly research it.

[uppityperson]

16. Hiroshima Day. Never again. k&r