Why No Apology For Hiroshima

Obama is talking (live) to the US Marines, next to Hiroshima as this is published (“I will visit this afternoon, Hiroshima!”). Obama, correctly, will not apologize for the nuclear bombings of Japan in 1945. However, it’s a good time to reiterate my old position on this subject.

Yes, the fate of children in Hiroshima brings tears to one’s eyes. However… However optimizing morality is not about crying about what happened, it’s about doing the best one can do, considering the circumstances. And the best, at the time, was, clearly, and in retrospect, to use atomic weapons exactly as they were used. It was a superb rolling of the dice. Better: thanks to a bit of luck, it worked splendidly.

The “Hitler line” had been erected across very mountainous ground in Italy, south of Rome. It was a natural barrier, the last one for hundreds of kilometers. It stopped the Allies for six months. The Commonwealth troops, Poles, British and American armies had suffered immense losses. And not advanced a mile. In 1944, the French army broke through it near Monte Cassino.

French General Juin, was nicknamed “Hannibal by the American command for his ferocity, calm and strategic cunning. After a first test and diversion, the French army pierced in two days through the twenty miles thick with Nazis, fascists and mountains, like a hot knife through butter. This was really a Franco-North African army. And its ferocity was unequalled. Ferocity starts, but also wins wars. And the ferocity of the just always surpasses that of the unjust.

Want Peace? Don't Make War For the Worst Reasons. Hiroshima Roasted, 8 September 1945.

Want Peace? Don’t Make War For the Worst Reasons. Hiroshima Roasted, 8 September 1945.

Stabbed in the center and through the heart, the entire Nazi line soon collapsed. However, the American powers-that-be got soon worried that the “French”, those racially impure Franco-Africans, were committing acts of war going over the line of what they considered proper. The American generals went to see the French generals… who laughed to their face: ”C’est la guerre!” The French explained they had no love lost for the treacherous Italians. In June 1940, fascist Italy joined Hitler in attacking the French Republic. Thus the honor of Italian women was not high on the list, considering that the Italians had shown they had no honor. After covering 50 kilometers in a few days, through the mountains, giving no quarters, killing the most contemptible forces in the world, love acquired the same old meaning that real war calls for. Real tough love!

And, as far as the French were concerned, a good Nazi, was a dead Nazi. The French army would keep that relaxed attitude through the rest of the war (the US Army had a pretty similar attitude, and the Nazis were dismayed to be out-Nazified, so to speak…) In the last few weeks of the Second World War in Europe, in April-May 1945, the First French army charged through the two German states of Bade Wurttemberg and Bavaria, suffering more than 5,000 dead in combat… while destroying all Nazi units in south Germany, killing untold thousands. That’s war! Although Nazism was clearly already finished then, an unforgettable  lesson still had to be taught, a punishment for the ages (the Nazis had sent all the armies they had to try to stop the French, whom they hated the most among those they confronted in 1945; they feared the Russians more, but the French had declared war, and brought the destruction of the 1,000 year Reich).

Punishing the Nazis was the moral thing to do. The French finished the war by killing as many Nazis as they could, precisely because a hard, cruel and thorough finish was needed. The sort of hard, unforgettable finish that German racist fascism was not given in World War One. And thus it did it again, as it felt that lack of punishment meant approbation!

The German Republic we all enjoy now was born in the blood and ashes of prior fascism and barbarity.

By summer 1944, the American generals learned, indeed, and learned from the French, that ferocity was called for. During the (mostly failed) Operation Market Garden, the Nazi command bitterly complained that the Americans were taking no prisoners, even when the SS surrendered. Why not? Was not the idea of the SS that there should be no surrender?

Although technically France had declared war to Nazi Germany (with the United Kingdom and its puny army in tow), it was the Nazis who had decided to destroy civilization. They had started the war (contrarily to what they pretended later).

Who had started the war in Asia? The Japanese military command. A coup was actually attempted against it, by lower officers (in 1937). The coup failed and was repressed in (a lot of) blood. However, the fact remains that Japanese society, like the German one, or even Italy, engaged in collective mass murder.

The Japanese army massacred at least 15 times more (innocent) people than the total of Japanese (mostly military, mostly by their own hand) who died. Japan losses were of the order of two millions, mostly troops dead from bad treatment by… the Japanese high command (yes, this is a slightly biased description, but only very slightly: most Japanese who died in the war were Japanese soldiers mistreated by the conditions their command put them in!)

True, a two month old Japanese baby was innocent. And maybe her parents, too. However, collectively, all of Japanese society was culprit. Proof? The US could atom bomb, and it was the highest moral way.

Yes, I know perfectly well that the “collective responsibility” doctrine was rejected in 1945. That was clearly idiotic (and a political manoeuver, thinking of Stalin and Mao).

On the island of Okinawa, the civilian population resisted with a fanaticism that the Islamist State envies, no doubt. A consequence is that most of the civilian population of Okinawa died (I have covered all these arguments, with detailed numbers, in the past).

Hiroshima killed 70,000 right away, and for a total of 140,000 later. Nagasaki killed much less. And  the war was over within three days.

And that high rate of atrocious atom bombing was all a lie, a make-belief.

Bombing August 6, and again August 9, should have induced the Japanese High Command to believe that a bomb would be coming every three days. Several Japanese cities, including Kyoto, were still untouched. All Japanese industry was within those cities. Clearly, Japan could not sustain an atomic bombing every three days.

In truth, there were no more bombs at the ready. A few could have been dropped over the next few months. Not enough to have a big military impact. Japan could have held into 1946. The landing prepared for Fall 1945 was expected, in light of what had happened at Okinawa, to kill at least one million.

Announcing a demonstration atomic bombing would have been a very bad idea, for a variety of reasons.

So, considering the situation, the atomic bombing were morally optimal. Those who don’t want to be atom bombed, better not start a world war.

A lesson for the future, averse to war. Those who got zapped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not get zapped in vain: they gave their lives, and a lesson. Yes, it was horrible. But so is surgery without anesthesia. It doesn’t mean it’s not necessary.

Let’s help, and get help from, the Bhagavad Gita

Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds and evils

You want to be moral? Start by not being an idiot. (Or the sort of fascist robots Japanese and Germans had turned into in the 1930s and 1940s.)

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , ,

7 Responses to “Why No Apology For Hiroshima”

  1. Gloucon X Says:

    Exactly correct again! Thanks Patrice for even more excellence.

    Chalmers Johnson said the Japanese slaughtered as many as 30 million Asians during the war.


    Ward Wilson in his book Five Myths About Nuclear Weapons, reveals that Japanese revisionist scholarship based on the war diaries of Japan’s despicable Fascist leadership reveals a nonchalance over the mass death of their own civilian population. Japan’s despicable Fascist leadership deserves complete and total blame for the civilian deaths by the a-bombs and the fire bombings, which killed even more, for refusing to surrender while knowing that the country was defenseless to air attack. They finally decided to surrender mainly because of the entry of the USSR into the war and the fact that the entire west coast of the country was undefended against a Soviet invasion. (Another little know fact: Japan had a nuclear weapons program, but they abandoned it because they thought it would take too many years to produce results.)


  2. Gloucon X Says:

    I just read your post of May 23, 2016 and now see that you already mentioned most of this info.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Right. I focused here on the moral conclusions. I have published detailed analysis on the subject for more than ten years. All the way back to:

      The point being the moral aspect: the most awful part, is that the nuclear bombings were clearly the most moral decision to take.
      I just wanted to put it in a tight package, a nice remember as BO was going to speak in Hiroshima (after reading yesterday PC editorials claiming the US should apologize).


  3. What If The USA Had Used No Nuclear Weapons In 1945? | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] is in the details. If one wants to be moral, one has to plunge in the details. Hiroshima is an examination of one’s moral compass. The question is not whether one can claim to be a Hiroshima lover or not, but whether one has […]


  4. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to Quora]

    The Japanese were hopelessly outmatched. They had less than 1,000 excellent pilots, most of whom went down, burned to a crisp, at Midway. If Midway had not happened, that would not have changed a thing: the USA had more qualified female pilots than the Japanese had qualified pilots: so the US used those women daredevils to ferry cargo across the Pacific (that was extremely dangerous before satellites and dependable engines). The USA had a deep well of pilots…

    Moreover, as early as 1933, president FDR had decided to construct 24 FLEET carriers (the largest, most armored carriers, which took years to make; all together, Japan built 15 fleet carriers, the USA, 34…). As the war came two other carrier types were added, and soon the US added more than another 100 carriers.

    The US submarine fleet was enormous, and the subs, excellent (it’s the torpedoes that didn’t work, initially). Soon the sub fleet sank most of the Japanese ships (military or not). A blockaded Japan could not get oil…

    The nuclear bombings saved Japanese lives:

    Why No Apology For Hiroshima

    So why did the Japanese leaders launch a war they were sure to lose? Well, one thing led to another, and by 1937, said leaders were drenched in blood anyway, they were, in a way, serial killers, so they kept on doing what they did best…

    Moreover, the success of the Nazi attack against the Spanish Republic, and Mussolini against Ethiopia (1936), made the Japanese military leaders believe in Hitler’s credo that democracies had no spine, and fascist regimes could get away with mass murder.

    Also, the world’s strongest land army, that of France, had been quickly defeated, and Japan had invaded French Indochina: why to worry?

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Jim Payne Says:

    As Civil War General Phillip Sherman said, “War is Hell” and added he did as much as he could to make it so.

    I have recently been reading several excellent accounts of the Pacific War and was reminded of a time when our military commanders were not hamstrung by have JAG officers in every unit to enforce rules of engagement.
    A good example was Cmdr. Mush Morton os the U.S. submarine Wahoo. Aware of Japanese atrocities such as beheading shot down U.S. polots fished out of the sea, je showed no quarter.

    Sinking a Japanese troop ship during the height of the island hopping campaign, he surfaced and used his subs deck gun and machine guns to sink lifeboats and rafts so as to drown as many of the troops in the water as possible. He didn’t go after those in the water because it was a waste of ammo ( in the dark they made poor targets) but his rationale for destroying anything that floated was that he considred the ships boats and rafts to be military targets.
    Every “Jap” ( in WWII slang) who survived and made it ashore would kill or try to kill U.S. Marines. The Japanese were seen as fanatics.
    To Morton a life boat was just a little troop ship.

    Wahoo was one of the most successful subs in WWII and was later lost with all hands.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Hello Jim Payne, and welcome! Thank you for the cogent comment. Future comments of yours will go through without “moderation”, namely right away. Sherman, in his “march to the sea” devastated as much of the south as he could, deliberately so, to undermine the Confederates military. That was not a new strategy. It was used successfully by the 3 powers (Babylon, etc…) coalized against ASSYRIA, 26 centuries ago… The powers then, unable to defeat the Assyrian army, decided to annihilate its population…

      The Judge Advocate General’s Corps (JAG Corps) is the branch or specialty of a military concerned with military justice and military law. It’s powerful now, but in the case of total thermonuclear war, it will mostly concern itself in how to serve human flesh, and do not doubt…

      I didn’t know the particular example you gave… Although I am a sort of specialist of the War In the Pacific… But the powers that be connived as much as possible to kill admiral Yamamoto… Knowing full well he was a very competent commander (although obviously idiotic at Midway, where le had the carriers isolated from the battleships, hence losing ALL his carriers and pilots…)

      Japs were fanatics and there are no excuses for their behavior early in the war against France, and then the USA. They were also cowards, as the third strike against Pearl Harbor was called off, when it became clear the US carriers were not in port (but close by). Amusingly, by 1945, the Jap navy was ordering sailors to save themselves if sunk, because Japan would nee them in the future (namely during reconstruction…)


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: