history

[technoir]

To my knowledge formal apologies have been issued for the internment of Japanese Americans and the dropping of atomic weapons. I do not believe the japaneese have ever apologized for Pearl Harbor.



"Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the House of Representatives: yesterday, December 7th, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese Government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya. Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong. Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam. Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands. Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island. And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.

But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounded determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."
FDR on december 8th to a joint session of congress.

Comments

[technoir.livejournal.com]

Perhaps I misunderstood your intent. It seemed like you were argueing that japan owed no apology because later we dropped a bomb on them. If that was not your intent then I apologize.

as to bombing children never being acceptable, thats a not so funny thing in war. In war you try to knock out your opponents capability to make war more than fight its armies. You do this by destroying its supply chain. Hitting factories is something any general is going to do. The Japanese navy had lost the war. There was no chance they were going to win at this point. We had driven them back and demanded they give up. The japanese government knew they were loosing. They could have accepted the loss and spared their people. They could have moved to manufacturing facilities not in large populated areas. Instead they kept to the ones in large cities. If you know your enemy has free reign to bomb you then you might want to conceed but still they didn't. We did not want to invade and kill millions of people on both sides. So we chose the lesser evil. We bombed a city filled with war factories. If we could have made a bomb that did not hit kids we would have. But the sad truth is innocents die in war. This was not a time where some one went"you know we need to kill as many children as possible." This is a situation where they said we have two of these we need to use them as best we can. They made a tactical decision that unfortunately killed innocents. It beat the alternatives,but it makes it no less terrible. I think we should apologize for it. no matter needed or correct a decision is people should always be willing to apologize at least for the terrible things they do and take responsability for them.

Japan has never really done this. Most nations dont. Most people dont.

[pipistrella.livejournal.com]

I regret that my intent was not clear in the first place. I don't care if anyone else apologizes. We did something wrong, and we ought to.

But - there was no chance they were going to win at this point.

Then - why nuke their city?

They were negotiating terms of surrender already. Why was a civilian-killing invasion the only other option? Why would we have found it necessary to gun down children in the course of invading and occupying the country?

Japan had lost. We dropped that bomb to show the world - especially Stalin - that we had it. What would have happened if we hadn't? Japan would have surrendered very shortly anyway. Blaming them for getting bombed, claiming that they brought it on themselves, is not acceptable.

Nor am I willing to accept the brutal death of thousands of people as a regrettable necessity. There were plenty of intelligent people in positions of power then - you're telling me the only ideas they could come up with were "atomic bomb" and "slaughter and pillage?"

[pipistrella.livejournal.com]

Now I'm getting really interested. You've inspired me to look closer into the subject.

Predictions for casualties in the proposed Operation Downfall varied widely. I'll be reading up on the plan and getting back to you, since I'd like to know what I'm talking about before going on further. :)

[technoir.livejournal.com]

hey half the reason I love these discussions is i learn something in persuing them.

[touchstone.livejournal.com]

I'm not prepared to say it was the right decision. I think it was probably made for the wrong reasons, and I've read that a lot of the military leadership of the time were opposed to the bombing (either ahead of time, or shortly afterward, depending on when they were aware of it).

It /is/ the case that civilians die in warzones, but the standards the nations of the world have agreed on require us to pursue military objectives in ways that preserve the most civilian life. Even if one accepts that there were factories in those cities and the factories were the military target of the bombing, it would be considered a war crime in the modern day to use a wide-area weapon against them rather than a more specifically targetted one.

Now, that said, with the caveat that it is an entirely different subject than the moral question of whether the bombing was appropriate: It's my belief that had atomic weapons not been used at the close of World War II, they would have been used (in a bi-lateral, more wide-spread way) during the subsequent conflict between the United States and the USSR. In the absence of the images of destruction from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I don't believe that the US and USSR would have managed to pull back from the brink during the various moments of critical decision during what turned OUT to be a Cold War.

Does that justify the deaths? Not in the sense of supporting the decision, because it wasn't a factor at the time. But perhaps it does give them some meaning. They might well have been martyrs to the cause of preventing an actual nuclear war.

[technoir.livejournal.com]

I will go as far as to say that given the thinking at the time and the information they had the A-bomb was the lesser of evils choice. If they had better intel about goigns on in the higher echelons of japanese government or they had maybe had thought they could afford to waste a bomb to or two to make more of a show demonstrating they could do it without dropping it on a civilized area. If Truman really understood the effect this bomb would have on a civilian populous. but these are all ifs. Given what they had to work with information wise and only having two workable bombs it was the unfortunate but appropriate choise. Given the information and resources they had I probably would have made the same choice. I would have regretted it but it would appear to be the less awful thing to do.

[technoir.livejournal.com]

actually shortly before the bombs were dropped the prime minister of japan greeted the surrender terms with a statement to the press that they would just ignore it. The Japanese army tried to use the arguement that they should not even sue for peace untill they made the us pay dearly for a battle. Some reports indicate that many in the leadership were willing to throw away countless lives in defence of the island. So no they were not on the edge of surrender. The US made a decisive move to make sure they7 could win the war with minimal loss of life. Would children have died in the invasion? Yes. Children and innocents get caught inbetween pretty often in war. destroy one city in a decisive action or fight a whole country in a land war that promised to be really bloody. It sucks but the math is easy there. Sometime all the smart folks in the world cant stop the unfortunate from happening.

To his credit The emperor of japan and some of his advisors saw that this was a posability. Sadly he was not in control as he was a voice calling for surrender.