Mr. Kincaid has responded to Dr. Ernest Engles’ article “As Big A Liar As John Pope”.
In case people have missed it, as the discussion forum is not a heavily frequented location, I reproduce it here.
As Big A Liar As John Pope
No doubt the use of nuclear weapons against Japan was a terrible decision that cost many thousands of lives. However, in Mr. Engels’ writing and in the available historical record I’ve seen no compelling evidence that Japan was on the verge of surrender prior to the dropping of the atomic bombs. Yes, their country was virtually flattened, but the Japanese military was still fighting.
In fact, at that time it was popularly believed that Japan, the country of hideous atrocities against China; kamikaze attacks and ritual haru kiri; and the perpetrators of the Bataan Death March, were a nation of fanatics who would fight down to the last person. In comparison, the Germans seemed rather reasonable. Either a further loss of life or a drastic new weapon system would be necessary to stop the Japanese.
The US and allies, on the other hand, were wearing down in morale and in finances after a huge expenditure of lives and materiel. Given the circumstances I can’t blame the US for using the weapons of mass destruction. In spite of the consequently huge death toll, I can think of a few things the US has done more recently that were far less justified than ending the war in this manner. Respectfully, I must disagree with Mr. Engels.
2 Comments
When Harry Truman dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki I was a twinkle in my daddy’s eye. I rely, therefore, for my views on the bombing on readings in historical sources (specifically the cited work of Gar Alperovitz) and personal judgment (including, but not confined to moral judgment). I am appreciative of Mr. Kincaid’s reasonable tone in his expressed view but I would ask him to look again at my piece. I do not simply say that I think Harry Truman was wrong to do what he did; I say he was prohibited from doing what he did and I believe I have cited sources for that prohibition.
Ernest Engels
Not to say that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn’t qualify as war crimes by the strict definition of the term… this issue has been long debated and if taken out of context, these two bombings, especially that of Nagasaki, seem to fit the description well enough.
But is it not possible for a nation to veer so far outside the limits of propriety that they exceed the rule of international law? The Japanese had distinguished themselves as using, possibly even enjoying, “superfluous” force. The Rape of Nanjing, involving the US by attacking Pearl Harbor, the Bataan Death March, the horrible treatment of POWs in general, chemical and biological experiments, vivisection experiments on Korean prisoners… this was an enemy that scorned the rules and norms of warfare, let alone international law.
But the Allies were fighting an enemy that fit the description of “fanatic”. Given all that had been seen during the past six years of Japanese-initiated mayhem, the Allies had good reason to fear the Japanese civilian population, whom were believed to be indoctrinated into unquestioning obedience to their Divine Emperor. A civilian could be merely a soldier-in-waiting.
Hopes for a clean end to the war had never been good. The negotiations with the ruling junta had broken down, Japan was still fighting with every bit of its strength, and flatly refused to surrender. The atomic bombings were the last of a long series of incendiary raids on all the major cities of Japan, yet Japan still refused to surrender. It took intervention by the emperor to get the Japanese government to surrender more than a week after the first atom bomb detonated.
Now that we’re sixty-five years out from the start of the Japanese aggression, Japan is no longer thought of as an enemy of all decent nations. Bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki seems barbaric when a hopeful olive branch of peace, backed by the contrasting background of gathering Allied might, could have been held out to Japan to end the long war that Japan voluntarily started. However, we might look back to the late 1940’s when the many nations of the world had their chance to condemn the US and Great Britain for bombing Japanese and German civilians, perhaps to try Allied leaders for war crimes, but acting in the context of the war as a whole, decided not to do so.