Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda (leftist academic barf alert)
NewScientist.com news service ^ | July 21, 2005 | Rob Edwards

Posted on 07/21/2005 8:05:16 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s

The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was meant to kick-start the Cold War rather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory.

Causing a fission reaction in several kilograms of uranium and plutonium and killing over 200,000 people 60 years ago was done more to impress the Soviet Union than to cow Japan, they say. And the US President who took the decision, Harry Truman, was culpable, they add.

"He knew he was beginning the process of annihilation of the species," says Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University in Washington DC, US. "It was not just a war crime; it was a crime against humanity."

According to the official US version of history, an A-bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on 6 August 1945, and another on Nagasaki three days later, to force Japan to surrender. The destruction was necessary to bring a rapid end to the war without the need for a costly US invasion.

But this is disputed by Kuznick and Mark Selden, a historian from Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, US. They are presenting their evidence at a meeting in London on Thursday organised by Greenpeace and others to coincide with the 60th anniversary of the bombings. Looking for peace

New studies of the US, Japanese and Soviet diplomatic archives suggest that Truman's main motive was to limit Soviet expansion in Asia, Kuznick claims. Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union began an invasion a few days after the Hiroshima bombing, not because of the atomic bombs themselves, he says.

According to an account by Walter Brown, assistant to then-US secretary of state James Byrnes, Truman agreed at a meeting three days before the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima that Japan was "looking for peace". Truman was told by his army generals, Douglas Macarthur and Dwight Eisenhower, and his naval chief of staff, William Leahy, that there was no military need to use the bomb.

"Impressing Russia was more important than ending the war in Japan," says Selden. Truman was also worried that he would be accused of wasting money on the Manhattan Project to build the first nuclear bombs, if the bomb was not used, he adds.

Kuznick and Selden's arguments, however, were dismissed as "discredited" by Lawrence Freedman, a war expert from King's College London, UK. He says that Truman's decision to bomb Hiroshima was "understandable in the circumstances".

Truman's main aim had been to end the war with Japan, Freedman says, but adds that, with the wisdom of hindsight, the bombing may not have been militarily justified. Some people assumed that the US always had "a malicious and nasty motive", he says, "but it ain't necessarily so."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: americahaters; artbell; bomb; campuscommies; campusradicals; conspiracytheories; econuts; guilt; hiroshima; kooks; koolaidguzzlers; pacifism; revisionism; tinfoilalert
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
A) My father and uncle (USMC) served in the South Pacific in that war. It is entirely possible they both came back because we dropped the A bomb. Anyone that knows the casualties they took in that theater knows that we paid a lot of blood to reclaim those islands.

B) These "scientists" are the same yo-yos that go apopletic when it is even suggested that FDR could have prevented Pearl Harbor.

1 posted on 07/21/2005 8:05:18 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
But this is disputed by Kuznick and Mark Selden, a historian from Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, US.

I stopped right here..

2 posted on 07/21/2005 8:06:57 PM PDT by cardinal4 (Definition of Insanity- Political Correctness when applied in the War on Terror..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

But I thought we nuked them to create Godzilla????

Baffling...


3 posted on 07/21/2005 8:07:37 PM PDT by CarlEOlsoniii (What happened 36 years ago this week? Ask Sen. Kennedy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
They are presenting their evidence at a meeting in London on Thursday organised by Greenpeace

Tells me everything I need to know about the "meeting" and its participants.

Where's the French navy when you need them?

4 posted on 07/21/2005 8:08:32 PM PDT by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda

Then that "hidden agenda" got seriously incinerated....

5 posted on 07/21/2005 8:09:43 PM PDT by Onelifetogive (* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some FReepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
"He knew he was beginning the process of annihilation of the species," says Peter Kuznick

What a doofus.

6 posted on 07/21/2005 8:09:55 PM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
"It was not just a war crime; it was a crime against humanity."

But I thought only Republican presidents could commit atrocities! It must be true, the MSM told me so! :)

7 posted on 07/21/2005 8:10:39 PM PDT by patricktschetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

That's funny! I did the SAME thing! ;-)


8 posted on 07/21/2005 8:10:58 PM PDT by hiredhand (My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: ChildOfThe60s
Exactly... These so called "historians" appear to be completely blind to the sort of fighting that went on at Iwo, Saipan, and Okinawa. And you could bet that as soon as the US attacked the home Japanese islands, there would be very fierce resistance.

But then, for some people it's more important to besmirch anything that the US has done. The US has always been the focus of evil in the world, according to these morons.

Mark

10 posted on 07/21/2005 8:11:52 PM PDT by MarkL (It was a shocking cock-up. The mice were furious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

Liberals think that FDR had no intention of ever using the bomb he ordered developed. It was merely some sort of jobs program for the world's most brilliant scientists.


11 posted on 07/21/2005 8:13:19 PM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

I am so sick of traitors. Growing more disgusted every day with them.


12 posted on 07/21/2005 8:13:20 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s; maikeru; Dr. Marten; Eric in the Ozarks; Al Gator; snowsislander; sushiman; ...
Exactly. The thousands of casualties suffered by the USMC and Navy taking Iwo Jima and Okinawa, coupled with the suicidal fighting of the Japanese (military and civilians, often involuntary) would make most sane people see this story for what it is - revisionist history BS.

Japan * ping * (kono risuto ni hairitai ka detai wo shirasete kudasai : let me know if you want on or off this list):

13 posted on 07/21/2005 8:13:38 PM PDT by DTogo (U.S. out of the U.N. & U.N out of the U.S.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

It began the process of annihilating the species? How come we're still here?

I thought the Soviets entered the Pacific war right at the end (I think we wanted them to at least declare war on Japan long before, but they held out for concessions from us) because they knew it was going to end quickly and they wanted to get in on the reparations from Japan.


14 posted on 07/21/2005 8:13:54 PM PDT by michaelt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
More liberal, revisionist historian hogwash.

Did one of Truman's advisers suggest that using the atomic bombs might make the Soviets more "manageable" in Europe? Yes. Did this influence Truman? Not likely as it was only one person suggesting it and not as a deciding factor in whether or not to use the bomb. It was simply said that Stalin respects strength the A-bomb might impress him and keep him under control.

The single thing that most influenced Truman was after seeing the projected casualty estimates, a comment made to him by another adviser. "Mr. President, what will you tell the American people at your impeachment trial in 1946 when they learn you had a way to end the war early..." (May not be an exact quote but as close as I can remember it.)

15 posted on 07/21/2005 8:14:09 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Tom Tancredo- The Republican Party's Very Own Cynthia McKinney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

I wonder if it hurts to think when you are this stupid?


16 posted on 07/21/2005 8:14:45 PM PDT by msnimje
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing

I'm sick of liars. The MSM is twisting anti-bomb stuff into anti-Bush stuff. Just like someone I know who blamed Bush for not entering WWII faster


17 posted on 07/21/2005 8:15:12 PM PDT by CarlEOlsoniii (What happened 36 years ago this week? Ask Sen. Kennedy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

I have often heard the theory that ONE of the reasons for using the atomic bomb was to discourage Stalin from moving into Europe.

The primary reason was to end the war with Japan. But Truman would have been negligent of his duties if he did not also consider the dangers of Russian aggression after the defeat of Germany and Japan.

Only a Stalin-lover, however, would think that it was wrong to send a cautionary message to the Soviet Union to watch its step. Perhaps they would rather we had just handed over the rest of Europe to the Red Army. Certainly it never occurred to me, way back then, that such a secondary purpose was "culpable."


18 posted on 07/21/2005 8:15:14 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

"presenting their evidence at a meeting in London on Thursday organised by Greenpeace"

When I saw the word Greenpeace my bull**** -o- meter went off the scale


19 posted on 07/21/2005 8:17:15 PM PDT by commonasdirt (Reading DU so you won't hafta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
"He knew he was beginning the process of annihilation of the species," says Peter Kuznick...

Uh, Pete? What species was that, exactly? Ours, or yours?

20 posted on 07/21/2005 8:18:19 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson