QUOTE(SaRuMaN @ Jul 23 2005, 05:35 AM) [snapback]749573[/snapback]
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.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.

View:
Full Article | Source:
New ScientistAnyone who believes this is ignorant of the facts.
The facts are that Japan waged a brutal war in China for years before Pearl Harbor. Then it waged a brutal war against the allies, and allied prisoners, for years after Pearl Harbor.
The Japanese military was refusing to surrender, even after the first atomic bomb was dropped. This made dropping the second bomb necessary.
As for targeting civilians, again blame the Japanese. The Japanese, by and large, did not have centralized manufacturing areas near the end of the war, as Germany did. Manufacturing goods for the war were mixed in with neighborhoods, schools and even hospitals. Their manufacturing had reverted to being a cottage industry, as it had been up to the 19th century.
Finding a large industrial plant as a target was impossible, but Nagasaki and Hiroshima were cities that contributed greatly to the war effort.
On a personal note:
My mother and father fought the Germans in World War II. My father as an American G.I. My mother as a member of the Belgian Resistance, who was twice imprisoned by the Gestapo and whose first husband was executed by the Germans.
After the Germans surrendered, Dad was sent to the Philippines to await the expected invasion of Japan.
Dad spoke with many Philippinos, who told horrible tales of their mistreatment at the hands of the Japanese. And Dad personally witnessed the entire city of Manila in ruins --- dynamited by the Japanese when they left, purely out of spite. Dad was in an engineering outfit, he saw evidence of dynamiting all over the city.
People, you are looking at this from a 21st century, comfortable, "We won the war" view.
Well, in 1945 the allies believed that waging a conventional war against Japan, in invading it, would take at least two years and cost millions of lives --- allied and Japanese. And still, there was no guarantee that the allies would win.
Hindsight is always 20-20.
The atomic bomb stopped the war. Was it used as a warning for the Russians? That was undoubtedly in Truman's thoughts but not his reason for using it.
Japan had ravaged the Pacific since 1937, when it invaded China. It brutalized the Chinese populace for years --- while the rest of the world's diplomats filed endless protests and gave little more than lip service to Japanese brutalities.
Perhaps if the soldiers of the free world had joined together, attacked Japanese forces in China, sided with Spain and defeated Franco's facists and Hitler's Nazis in Spain, then came to the rescue of Poland when it was invaded --- the bomb would not have been needed.
But it was needed.
It's the Devil's Math when you have to decide to sacrifice 100,000 or 200,000 lives to save millions of lives down the road --- but history shows it is sometimes necessary.
So, a couple of American profs claim that the bomb was dropped to start the cold war. And they got to present their findings in London, before members of Greenpeace and others. Hardly sounds like an objective audience. Wonder how much their new book costs? And how much they'll make from it.
Controversy pays, and often quite well.
Oh, I admit my prejudices. My parents told me nearly every day of the atrocities they had witnessed, wrought by the Japanese and Germans. And without the atomic bomb, I probably wouldn't be here. My father would have likely died in the invasion of Japan, along with an estimated 1 million others of all nations.
Dropping the atomic bomb, twice, bothered my father right up to his death at 83 years of age. But he never once said it was unnecessary.
The world was awash in war and destruction, its resources were fed into the war machine without end.
It ended the war. It saved millions.
Would that we could get rid of atomic weapons today, though. Oh, I'd say keep about 20 as a deterrent to those madmen who ponder using one against America or its allies.
We can never truly rid ourselves of atomic weapons. Nor, I believe, should we.