E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Kimimasa Mayama / EPA
Doves fly over Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park on Monday during a memorial ceremony to commemorate those killed by the world's first atomic bombing in 1945.
Updated at 12:42 p.m. ET: TOKYO - As dignitaries from 71 countries joined a crowd of 50,000 on Monday to mark the 67th anniversary of the Hiroshima atomic bomb attack, Japanese officials vowed to revamp energy policies in the wake of the devastating Fukushima nuclear accident.
"The government must learn from the lessons of Fukushima's nuclear accident and establish without delay an energy policy that guards the safety and the livelihood of the Japanese public," Hiroshima Mayor Kazumi Matsui told the crowd that had gathered in the scorching heat near the blast's epicenter to observe a minute of silence.
On Aug. 6, 1945, about 140,000 people were killed by an American atomic bomb that hastened the end of World War II. Another blast in Nagasaki three days later killed 70,000 more.
On August 6, 1945, the United States dropped the first atomic bomb used in warfare on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Sixty-six years later, NBC's Brian Williams recalls the events leading up to the historic decision President Truman stood by for the rest of his life.
In March 2011, meltdowns at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima nuclear plant following an earthquake and tsunami caused radiation to spew over large areas of Fukushima, forcing more than 160,0000 people to flee. In the months following the world's worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl in 1986, all of Japan's nuclear plants were shuttered.
While two reactors resumed operations in July, the Fukushima disaster has fueled widespread unease about the country's dependence on nuclear power.
Now, 17 months since the multiple explosions at Fukushima, efforts by the government of Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda government to establish this new energy policy have finally started to gather momentum.
Reports: Workers told to underplay Fukushima radiation
Aug 6, 2005: Sixty years ago, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. It was one of the most consequential decisions any president has ever made. Harry S. Truman was faced with whether to use the newly developed bomb to end the war against Japan
Over the weekend, two days of deliberative polling -- which extracts informed and in-depth opinions through discussions and debate -- strove to determine the public's opinions on what the country's dependence on nuclear energy should be by 2030.
While in the past energy policies relied on opinions of industry experts, bureaucrats and politicians, a combination that a recent parliamentary investigation concluded had bred collusion and blindness when it came to ensuring nuclear reactors' safety, this time close to 300 citizens participated in the discussion.
Nearly a year after an earthquake and tsunami devastated Japan, Fukushima City residents fear the radiation is spreading outside of the government mandated exclusion zone. The government has asked residents to bury radiated soil in their own backyards, but how dangerous is the dirt and where should it go? NBC News Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel reports.
Citizen participants judged three options, the first being zero dependence, which would be the most popular given the nuclear disasters the country has lived through. However, it would also mean higher energy bills and a stronger reliance on fossil fuel given that before the Fukushima disaster, 26 percent of Japan's energy was derived from nuclear power.
In wake of Fukushima, Japanese village goes all-solar
The second of option of 15 percent dependence would be attained if all of the current reactors were decommissioned after 40 years as is required by law now.
The third option -- 20 to 25 percent dependence on nuclear energy -- would require renewing current nuclear power plants.
But all of these options would desperately need new advances in the field of renewable energy, which currently provides a mere three percent of Japan's total energy, especially if the country continues to seek, clean affordable and safe energy.
More coverage about Japan on NBCNews.com
Next, the government will sift through the opinions gathered at the citizen debates, make them public, and compile a draft of its new energy policy by the end of August.
Cleanup continues after last year's 9.0 earthquake and tsunami destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in northern Japan.
Surrounded by testaments to atomic energy's devastating power in the Hiroshima Memorial Park, Prime Minister Noda promised that his government would follow through and make the difficult choices the country required.
Complete international coverage on NBCNews.com
"Under our fundamental policy to abandon the nation's dependence on nuclear power, we will strive to establish a mid-to-long-term energy structure, one (with) which the public will feel safe," he said.
More world stories from NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
It will be interesting to see if Japan actually gets serious about renewable energy...unlike the USA. I'm sitting in Phoenix, AZ, where it's supposed to be 113 or 114 this week. Why doesn't my apartment building have solar panels on its roof? This is ridiculous.
There is no solar panel fairy, you actually have to do some research, make a purchase and either install them yourself or pay someone to install them for you.
That's my point! By now, we should have solar panels on just about all buildings - incl. apt. buildings, especially in places like Phoenix. Accountants specializing in the costs of installing solar panels have said that it can be done economically. Why haven't businesses done the research and started installing them? I shouldn't have to do it as an individual.
Living in an apt. complex that had solar panels to reduce my cost of living would be a huge selling point for me to rent in that complex. It's a niche in a competitive market that hasn't been developed. I would gladly pay a fixed price for energy as part of my rent. I've moved into a one-bedroom for my retirement and am very energy-conscious, but I've lived in larger apartments with poor insulation that have cost me over $200/month for electricity during the hottest summer months! I can't even imagine what energy bills are for people living in huge houses. I didn't stay there for just that reason.
Intelligent & Independent: Instead of complaining about it, why don't you do something (like attend your next Condo Board meeting) and suggest this as a possible project. But to give a short answer to your question on why your building doesn't have solar panels, it's because it's not economically feasible (regardless of what some green-energy 'accountants' will say). You'll end up spending more on installation and maintenance than you'll save from having an extra energy source. Hence the reason why the entire country hasn't switched to solar yet.
But back on the topic of Hiroshima, I'm always amazed at what a wonderful transformation this city has made. Someone sent me this link a few years ago comparing the economic progress of Hiroshima and Detroit since we dropped the bomb. I think the results are astonishing to say the least.
Tom,
1) I have mentioned it to the apt. complex management.
2) If more businesses would take a chance and invest in the future of solar technology - gee, maybe those big banks could loan them some of that $2T bailout money the American taxpayers gave them at low interest rates - the costs wouldn't be so exhorbitant for long and they would have a thriving business because they would have little competition.
I guarantee, years from now, we're going to look back at this time in history and complain that someone should have done this...but it will be too late by then.
By the way, I am looking for an interesting job in the renewable energy business. I enjoy being part of start-up operations.
Wow..........I'm always amazed at the ability of small-minded individuals like you to include those 'big evil banks' in any sort of discussion even when it's completely unwarranted. So far you've managed to take the initial topic of Hiroshima and nuclear power, and transform that into a social rant where large financial companies should effectively subsidize high-risk green energy investments for the benefit of individual consumers such as yourself. Everyone who's read your last post is now dumber as a result.
You're wrong, Tom. When business (including big banks) invest in new markets with big potential, everyone wins, not just "individual consumers" like myself. Even YOU win!
Those big banks are not doing what they were and still are, supposed to do - loan money to businesses with good plans - so both they and those busiinesses can not only make a profit, but can improve our society and the lives of people like you and me.
Do you think Chase's recent "investment" in itself that cost its shareholders billions of dollars is a good thing to do? No wonder I and millions of other people in this country have such a low opinion of the big financial institutions right now. They are not only greedy, but they're stupid.
Tell me, Tom. Do you know what the big banks did with our taxpayer bailout money? Their actions were disgraceful.
Installing solar panels on buildings in a desert area like Phoenix, Arizona is NOT a high-risk business venture! America is afraid of all the wrong things. I guess the government will have to invest everyone's tax dollars in rebuilding its infrastructure and, yes, investing in new kinds of energy. But then people like you will probably complain about that and whine about how business could have done a better job!
I live in sunshine California and have researched extensively regarding solar panels. Unfortunately, it is still economically unattractive for any household with <$200 electricity bill.
Paul, my point is that we are going to have to bite the bullet sometime and make this investment. My electric bill is less than $200 now, but it won't be for long. I've been in Phoenix since 1988 and have seen the summers get hotter and longer each year. Someone is going to have to make the investment. If a business, or the government, had done so 20 years ago, it would be affordable today.
The longer we wait and say it costs too much, the harder it will be to do in the future. Surely we can figure out how to do this!
Solar energy is neither a new market, nor one with big potential. The technology has been around for 40 years now and no country on earth uses it as a primary (or even secondary) source of energy.
Interest rates are at record lows. There isn't a single business or individual in the country right now that is both seeking and deserving of a loan that is not getting one.
Not sure what this has to do with anything, but that $5B trading loss represents less than 0.5% of their total assets under management. I'm not sure this is anything to panic about.
The bailout was meant to shore up the short-term liquidity of some of the nation's largest financial institutions. Virtually all the TARP money has been repaid with the exception of the equity investments that were made in GM and Chrysler.
Yes it is.........that's why you don't see solar panels installed on every building in the Southwest. The costs are too high, and the financial benefits are minimal. Regardless of what you think you know about green energy, the fact is that it's cheaper for you to just pay your natural gas-powered ultilities than it would be to install solar panels. That's not my opinion, that's just the reality.
In Germany they have a building code. It requires panels. California has a code requiring some level of panel installation. Florida should have such a requirement, but has none. So new buildings going up have no panels unless the owner wants them.
You live in an apartment building.
If they but in solar panels on your building I can guarantee it will not be hook up to your electricity.
Global warming guru James Hansen said in 2009 we need more nuclear power plants. Obama did not listen.
All you anti-nuke energy fools are just so far wrong,we need all energy areas and make it possible for ALL to purchase energy, obama and the epa are killing America,and on a side note the bombing of Japan we warned them for weeks,they did nothing,we warned after Hiroshima,no reply,even after the 2nd A-bomb they didn't want to surrender and the militarists still would not stop the war,they finally lost control and they surrendered, if we had to conquer mainland japan we would have lost at least a million troops,look at Okinawa,and other battles,and the japanese would have lost 2-3 million soldiers and citizens,we saved Japan and look at Hiroshima today. Also for historic correctness we fire bombed Tokyo and killed more people. I would never apologize for the bombs,just the loss of life,but the Japanese dishonored themselves with the attack on Pearl Harbor,they are responsible for all of it.
@Tom Marvolo you whooped his a$$ and made me laugh - I love you
Banks are supposed to lend to reasonable risk. Venture capitalists are supposed to put up the money to start businesses. So they put up a Million and maybe lose it or maybe make 20% or maybe hit it big and make thousands of percent. The risk of loosing it is the "venture" part of it. Banks are not supposed to loan at consumer bank rates money to people who are trying something new and the idea might fizzle. Banks are supposed to lend to people who have a way to pay it back. Banks can't collect interest or winnings over the amount of the loan contract but venture capitalists can. Banks aren't supposed to loose the principal either but venture capitalists can. Start up money for a business needs investors to come up witrh it not banks.
A lot of words and nothing is said; my neighbor got solar panals put on her home not too long ago as part of a personal project in making her 1907 Victorian home totally green. I wont name any businesses but search, they are out there.
First, @Intelligent & Independent;
Thank you for at least caring about alternative energy options for the future. Although it is true that alternative energy resources; solar, wind, etc. are expensive, some countries have begun to change over their entire energy production to these alternatives. Yet, here we are, the greatest country in the world, and we have too many naysayers to make anything happen. We even have some individuals in Congress claiming that the whole Global Warming event is a hoax. (But, then again, these people also think that scientists have made up the whole thing about dinosaurs.) All the while, we are experiencing the hottest year on record...in succession. We have been experiencing the most violent tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.; fueled by the rising and warming ocean waters. Breathtaking Glacier National Park in Montana is no longer covered in glaciers and never will be again. A program on the History Channel today showed a small island off of New England which had been inhabited since before the Civil War and it is now a mere strip of land. One man is trying to fight off the rising ocean eating away at the coastline, trying to protect the one last important thing left on the island; a cemetery. I believe he stated that over the period he was trying to build up a wall of protection, the island had lost 25 feet. It is so sad. It is truly tragic that more people aren't concerned about what we are doing to this planet and our country. Of course, I know we aren't the worst offenders; it seems that China couldn't care less about what they are doing to the environment and there are many others.
I do know that it is possible to change things. Growing up in Southern California in the 60's & 70's, we had so many Smog Alert Days, it was crazy. Sometimes you couldn't see your neighbors house. After some regulations were put in for automobiles and businesses, there was a drastic change. I didn't think there would be blue skies ever again.
When we think of alternative energy sources we should look to nuclear power, just as long as the power plant is kept as far away from people as possible. We know that there are no "perfect" power solutions. When they say that all the safeguards are in place, well, we know that there is always that one thing that someone didn't think of. Or, you have someone trying to cut costs that inevitably leads to a leak of billions of gallons of oil and the death of several people.
I really like the Japanese people and was heartbroken when the Tsunami hit, but I think they lied about what really happened and the true magnitude about what the failure did to the air and the Pacific Ocean. And, I don't know if they will ever be really honest about how many employees of the nuclear plant died, or are going to die, because of being exposed to the radiation. I do know that there were some really brave men that went into that plant to try to get things under control (somewhat) when they knew it was almost like suicide.
So, of course, someone would have to say something about President Obama and how he has done nothing energy-wise. I think, rightly so, that everyone is taking a closer look at nuclear energy and making sure that the new plants that are put in at as safe a location as possible. New plants are going in. And, although there was a pause in the deep-ocean drilling after the BP Oil Spill, more oil is being produced in the United States than any other time in history and we are importing less oil than we are exporting.
I believe that all energy sources should be used, but done so with consideration for the environment, for the employees, and human beings in general, and also for wildlife that could affected by exposure.
Although I wanted to make a comment to "Intelligent & Independent", I also wanted to say that I am so sorry to those Japanese people who lost loved ones in the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But, we all know the first blow was struck on all the men and women who died horrible deaths at Pearl Harbor, besides the hundreds or thousands that were injured. So many people suffered because of the tragically stubborn decisions of a few Japanese military officials who cared more for their own pride than caring for the safety of their people. May all the victims Rest in Peace.
Due to recent price reductions solar is now the cheapest form of energy, but only if you DIY the job. Contractor overhead doubles costs and they become non viable.
When idiot Carter put them on the white house, prices in today's dollars were upwards of $30/watt. Now they are as low as 50 cents/watt. If you are at all handy and understand electricity, jump on solar.
But as said above, there is no solar fairy leaving panels under your pillow, don't expect a handout from government, they've already given you one. Any conservative like me wanting some of their tax money back, this is a great way to do it.
Don't expect apartment buildings to convert, they will want to use contractors and that route is still not viable, and likely won't be for another decade.
Let the memorial in Hiroshima be a reminder to all nations hostile to America...
Then let us hope nuclear weapons will never need to be deployed anywhere on this planet again.
@mathuin; Very well said...thank you.
My parents believed that it was the only way to end the war, and saved millions of American and European lives.
What do I believe. I think if we had not done it, Russia would have even if it was years later. Not necessarily Japan.
I think it was a race to see who could prove who had the military might first. At that time in history it was imperative that we or another free nation came out on top.
If the hold out had been Germany instead of Japan, it would have been tested there. Luckily for Germany the Russians got to them first.
To bad the nuts in the Middle East don't feel the same way Japan and the rest of world does. They will use the weapon, it is just a matter of time.
Why? Because on like the U.S. military using it for ending a war, they believe and will justified it as some non existence GODS will.
Steven100: Could you clarify? It looks as if you dictated this comment to someone or something that does not understand English well: does "on like" mean "unlike"? What does "they believe and will justified it as some non existence GODS will" mean? It's hard to guess.
It is Godzilla's will.
The bomb was used because that japanese loved death for the emperor more than life. Sound familiar in the ME? If Japan's bomb program would have beaten ours, I'm sure they would have used it too.
it ended the nan king massacre
On just one island 50,000 Americans were lost as well as 150,000 Japanese. Think of the lives lost if we had to invade the main land, easily millions more would have perished.
i think that using the BOMB on japan was the easy call because it was an island and racist, where as if were dropped on germany it would have effected most of europe with the fallout and all us WHITE GUYS!
You do not have a clue; the war in Europe was over by the time that the BOMB was actually ready to be used; the Japanese were prepared to sacrifice the lives of millions, including their own citizens in an effort to negotiate an end to the war short of unconditional surrender; the proof of this can be seen in the bloody battles of attrition that increased in ferocity as we got closer to the home islands (e.g. Iwo Jima and later Okinawa); the BOMB was the only possible solution and that almost did not work as many in the Japanese military were ready to fight on even after the second device was detonated over Nagasaki; God Bless President Truman for having the guts to use the BOMB and ironically, save many lives which would most certainly have been lost.
The bomb was built to counter hitler. The scientists would have been killing people they used to know. Using it on japan was a secondary goal.
Hurr durr America discovered the nuclear bomb.
Guess what ronald: we got the tech from Germany. Who (this may come as a surprise to you) was going to use it in Europe and America. We also got our stealth tech and the flying wing aka. B2 bomber from: you guessed it, Germany. In fact almost all of our 'modern' tech came from Germany. It's called the spoils of war, learn about it.
Now, we didn't gain the knowledge for the bomb after Germany surrendered. We got it from defectors of Germany and other countries that they conquered. See, America only knew you could split the atom and a little about the effect it could have. We didn't know that such a chain reaction from self sustained fission could destroy an entire city and still be delivered in a relatively small package. We also didn't know how to achieve a cascading reaction. We didn't know how to dope or setup bombs using primary, secondary, and ever tertiary boosters. We didn't know how to effectively create an imploding sphere or use the shotgun method to start the process.
Germany did. They were a couple months away from having a functional nuclear weapon. Japan was not far behind.
Then again, I think you're just trolling but I feel better anyway.
Well said John, I couldn't have said it better :)
Another part of war that was directed at civilians because the allies would not accept anything ,but total surrender. It's the usual thing of the people suffering the effects of their rulers .
We have Pearl Harbor...Japan has Nagasaki and Hiroshima...we're even.
True. If there had been no Pearl Harbor there would have been no Hiroshima.
Which was their response to the US oil embargo. We used to be an big oil exporter.
rock n roller you are right, but 2500 deaths and 1200 wounded doesn't compare to over 100,000 deaths, plus generations of nuclear poisioning.
Better Mother- Are you nuts? Yeah, so I guess we should have sacrificed the lives of 100,000 US troops so that we could end the war they started? Too bad a few more didn't get poisoned.
Listen war is hell, my family originates from hiroshima, I am the 2nd generation here on my grandfathers side. You can't get any closer then if you were therE, War is started and ended in terrible was, but to wish more poisioning on others is like saying Bales should have shot a few more afghanistan children because they reside in afghanistan or let's lead a few more children to the gas chamber because they are jewish. The death toll of WWII was 418,500, us soliders / 2,620,000 to 3,120,000, japan & 57,000 madated japanese/ 6,630,000 to 8,680,000 germans nationals, which is so high because of the jewish population. Over all total deaths world wide was 62,171,600 to 79,184,700 and 37,585,300 to 55,883,000 were civilians so before you say sacrifice another life look at the facts and mutiple your number 550, there was innocents lost.
Better Mother: Re #6.3, if "generations of nuclear poisioning [sic]" refers to Hiroshima or Nagasaki, it is not the case. Second generation residents of neither city show higher than normal rates of "nuclear poisoning." Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are now perfectly functioning cities. (Your point in #6.5, though, is well taken.)
Yes ware is hell but if killing ends it, then you kill. There is no doubt the bomb saved conservatively 100,000 US lives and likely millions of Japanese.
By all accounts they were brainwashed to fight to the death. Americans were so demonized by Japans leaders that on Iwo Jima women would jump off of cliffs with their babies in their arms rather than be taken in.
There is simply no comparison between Germany and Japan, Germans were pragmatists, the closer we got to Berlin, the more surrenders and defections. Japan was just the opposite, the closer we got to the mainland the more fierce the battle.
One of the reasons Americans were tortured so much is Japanese thought we were cowards for surrendering rather than fighting to the death. To them we were beneath respect.
The worst mistake people make is to place their beliefs and sensibilities on other societies. What seemed nonsensical to us was logical to them and visa versa.
Estimates of people killed in an invasion of Japan,that I have read, guessed that there would be at least one million killed.This of course included Japanese defenders of the home islands.The bomb killed what 250,000 mostly Japanese,Who started the war with us by a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, Then showed their compassion by such things as the Bataan death march,their treatment of POWS,their treatment of civilan detainees in the Philipines. Seems like a wash to me,war is hell as has been said,and the civilans always suffer.
You should research the conventional bombing campaign on Japan - literally, hundreds of B-29s loaded with thousands of fire bombs carpet bombing the cities. One casualty estimate on the bombing of Tokyo was 1 million people in one night.
Good point, we did the same to Germany. A number of select cities were off limits so they would have a pristine site to measure the damage of both bombs accurately, but the cities that weren't spared were bombed mercilessly.
If we wish to analyze whether the bomb should have been dropped, we have to analyze it using the information available to decision makers at the time. The Japanese culture at that time would have sacrificed every citizen in defense of their homeland. This would have cost a tremendous amount of allied lives as well as Japanese lives. Wars kill huge numbers of civilians, and Japan suffered horribly during the war. We can discuss all day their reasons for Pearl Harbor. The fact remains that this is all history, and we can do nothing about it now. All we can do is, hopefully, learn the lessons from history, vow to avoid a repeat, and work diligently to settle our differences peacefully. No one wins a war. You have one who loses, and one who loses more. Plenty of blame to distibute all around, but what does that gain. Move forward, striving to avoid any more wars. We won't get there anytime soon, but we can try. Eventually, maybe we will learn.....
I watch a lot of anime and I can't tell you the number of times Tokyo has been destroyed at the hands of heartless and cruel Japanese animators - and yet there are no Americans protesting such incredibly (animated) self-destructive behavior. It's a Japanese thing and Americans should stay out of it.
Also, it's good to see the Japanese people actively pushing their government to replace that nasty nuclear energy with clean, non-polluting, apolitical, super-safe petroleum fired power plants! Another step in the (exactly wrong) direction to the future!
New revamped Japan nuclear policy: Install generators inland away from the beach. Construct taller, thicker sea wall on perimeter of plant.
The pumps are near the ocean for a reason. The generators are near the pumps for a different reason. Please tell me, in which of the fields (nuclear, electrical engineering) do you have a degree or meaningful experience in?
While I will agree that it is possible to move the generators further inland, the cost involved could skyrocket very quickly. The longer the line is you have to run, the less power gets to said item. Also, the line heats up, efficiency goes down, the generator has to put out more power, and you may have to build a substation to amplify the current. Now, when a tsunami hits the water can travel very far inland as you should already know. The water level is also very high moving at a very high speed. Now you need to build a structure to set the generator and substation off the ground and reinforce the poles holding up the lines. Of course this structure holding up the generator and substation would need to also be reinforced very heavily. Or you could leave them on the ground but they would need to be encased in something watertight that's very strong. We all know that very rigid structures don't fair well during earthquakes - especially something the likes of a 9.0
Now, a taller, thicker seawall around the entire plant is just idiotic also. Yet again, you're creating a further potential issue with a tall rigid structure that could collapse during a strong earthquake. Or be moved by the ENTIRE ocean pushing against it. Thus possibly damaging the reactor even worst the next time.
Let me preface my comments by stating that if the bomb was not dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I would not be here today. My father was on a troop ship leaving the Mediterrean on its way to the Pacific in preparation for a conventional invasion of Japan in the spring of 1946. At that time, my parents had not yet met. Having said that, lets look at some of the facts we have learned since August of 1945.
Okinama gave us a strong indication as what to expect from the Japanese people when we did invade Japan. Conservative estimates were upwards from 1,000,000 Allied casualties, not counting the untold millions of civilian casualties. The fire bombing of Tokyo resulted in over 100,000 civilian casualties. A conventional invasion of Japan had the real possibility of totally exterminating the Japanese as a people.
The decision of use the bomb was a political as well as a military decision. As a result of agreements made at Yalta, the Russians finally declared war on Japan in early August of 1945. In fact, there are still a number of small Japanese islands that are still under Russian control, having been occupied by the Russians before the Japanese surrender. Both Truman and Churchill realized that Stalin was not to be trusted. In Truman's mind, accelerating the end of the war would potentially reduce Soviet influence in Southeast Asia. (yeah, right).
What we now know is that the Japanese did have quite a bit of German 'skunkworks' in place, ready to repluse the Allied invasion. The Japanese did have the Me 262 jet fighter, and short range missles, all capable of sinking the Allied fleet. Our 'intelligence' had no clue regarding this. It is entirely possible that the Allied invasion would have failed, thus allowing Japan to sue for peace.
What a lot of people do not realize is that on August 13, 1945, Japan successfully detonated an atomic device. The plan was to send a submarine on a suicide mission into San Francisco harbor, and detonate the bomb there. So, if we didn't use the bomb, Japan most certainly would have used theirs.
All war is horrible. However, the loss of life, while horrific, coupled with the unconditional surrender by Japan on August 15th, resulted in the minimal loss of life under the circumstances in affect at the time. Like I said, I for one am happy things happened the way they did. However, I shudder to think what would happen if another device of this magnitude (or worse) were deployed today.
CarGuy - You are correct in that hundreds of thousands more Japanese were killed in conventional bombing and incendiary bombing than were killed by both atomic bombs.
Mike-2184348 - The casualty estimates for an invasion of the Japanese home islands were 1 million U.S. casualties, that's not counting our allies or the Japanese. That is the main reason the bombs were dropped and they saved hundreds of thousands of more lives than they took by eliminating the need for an invasion.
We did not just casually decide to sneak an A-bomb onto Japan. After the successful test at White Sands in mid July 1945 Truman warned the Japanese that we had a weapon like the world has never seen and if Japan did not unconditionally surrender by 9/1/1945 we would use it. They did not, and six days after the deadline passed he kept his word. After Hiroshima Truman again demanded the unconditional surrender of Japan and when that was rejected he ordered the second bomb to be dropped on Nagasaki. After Nagasaki the military Generals still did not want to surrender, but the Emperor, for the safety of the Japanese people did surrender under heavy protest and an attempted coup by the Generals.
To those that deride the U.S. for using the bomb. As Germany was crumbling it sent the info they had developed in their atomic bomb project to Japan and Japan was in the process of putting it into reality. Do not think for one second that if Japan or Germany had developed their bomb first that they would have hesitated on bit about using it on the U.S. Documents uncovered in Germany after the war showed that the Germans were developing an eight engine bomber with the range to be able to bomb the eastern U.S. and return. It was designed for a payload of one bomb, and atomic bomb. Germany was on the verge of attaining their bomb when they were defeated. The only thing that saved the U.S. from being attacked by an atomic bomb is that we completed ours first.
We must remember that we were in this war to win it. It was not a Police Action or a campaign to win hearts and minds, or a nation building excursion. This was an all out war to preserve our very existence because the Axis powers were hell bent on conquering the world at any cost.
Somebody said in an earlier post that Pearl Harbor was Japan's reaction to the embargo we imposed, but they failed to mention that we imposed that embargo on Japan for their aggression in Asia, especially the invasion of China. Had Japan withdrew from China we would have continued to sell them the resources they were seeking, but their bold agression could not be allowed to go unchecked.
To those who say that the Japanese never set foot on U.S. soil that is not true. In March of 1942 the Japanese invaded Dutch Harbor Alaska and set up an airfield and base there. They were driven out either later that year or in early 1943.
The Japanese leadership was clearly warned in July and again in August of 1945 of what would happen if they did not unconditionally surrender. They called our bluff and lost.
I will say it again. If there had been no Pearl Harbor there would have been no Hiroshima. When one starts a war they know that there can only be one of two outcomes, you either win or you lose. The Japanese took their chances and lost. The U.S today tries to fight wars without hurting anyones feelings but when a nation, any nation decides to go to war they must be in it to win it or not go to war at all. That is our problem in Afghanistan right now.
@Soldier's Dad. Hear Hear! I support your comments and observations.
Thank You. Just some facts from an old history buff. History as taught in our schools today is either distorted by teachers opinion or just grazed over without any in depth look at the facts surrounding historical events.
Correction - Truman warned the Japanese that we had a weapon like the world has never seen and if Japan did not unconditionally surrender by 8/1/1945 we would use it.
I still don't feel badly about nuking Japan. They're lucky we didn't genocide them.
If we had not dropped the bombs, most of us would not be here today. The Japanese people were not dangerous, it was their government. The Japanese military was very savage, cruel, and exceedingly brutal. The government planned to join forces with Hitler to take over America and all free nations. In 1937 the Japanese invaded Nanking, China and within a few months killed well over 350,000 people. That was just one city! The Japanese military used biological warfare against the Chinese people, and American POWs. In their war against China, the Japanese killed over 19 million Chinese (men, women, children, and babies). You must read "The Rape of Nanking" and "Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crimes of World War II". Casualties in the Pacific War numbered around 36 million. Of that number, over 109,000 were American military.
On the note of nuclear energy. I worked in the nuclear industry over 30 years, and felt extremely safe. Thank goodness the USA has the Nuclear Regulatory Commisssion to watch over our plants for safety and reliability.
Hiroshima stands as a testament to the evils of war....We humans are REALLY good at devising new ways to blow each other up.
It also stands as an example.......Don't walk into a room, kick the biggest guy in the room in the 'jewels' and not expect him to pimp slap the crap out of you.
Well said Ed--my man! I like the pimp slap.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Fukushima..
Nuke technology as designed by the experts ought to be very safe. But there are two major risks and mistakes in these areas are hard to comeback from. First is where do you put the waste ? The US gubmint can't decide the Yucca mountain question after 20 years. So where is it going to go ?. Second is: the risk of compromising those engineering and scieintific safety standards. So what if after 30 or 40 years you have to take it apart and rebuild it but the bureaucrats use the same rational for not repairing bridges or funding the schools or funding gubmint obligations anywhere ? We can say rather cavalerly here how easy it would be to make things right. But the truth is the gubmint in almost every endeavor you can name messes things up and then passes the bill for fixing things to the people. Well the bill for messing up nuclear is death. This is what has so many people apathetic to deadset against nuclear. You can't trust people. And Nuclear requires a lot of trust.
My late father and uncle's fought in this war and the Japanese soldiers were nasty and fought to the death every time in every battle. So just think if we Americans invade the Japanese mainland the death toll for Americans would be almost a million men and Pres.Truman could not do that so lucky for the USA we had the bomb and after the first one was dropped we asked them to surrender but they never answered back so we dropped the second bomb and then they got the message and remember we did not start this war the Japanese did by attacking us and when we were in battle the Japanese fought to the death and they were brutal to our troops if they captured them. The Japanese were nasty evil people and they would not stop fighting so yes the bomb was dropped and then the second one until they got the message.
Just in case everyone has forgot we are dependant on Nuclear enregy every day. It's not fission but fusion and this reactor is about 93 million miles away. The sun has provides all the energy this earth needs we just have to find the right components to utilize it. One day we will. But for now Nuclear energy is efficient and safe provided we understand time , distance and sheilding and forthought of this earths incredible energy in changing it's landscape.
As far as Nuking Japan enough said, thank you PilotHawkeye and Soilder's Dad for putting the facts in, " although many lives were lost, alot more would have been if they had not been dropped".
Correct. But cost reality sets in. Fossil fuel generated electricity retails for 14 cents kw/hr. Solar panel generated power is way more expensive. The gubmint knows this so they subsidize the manufacturer by taxing citizens and giving the money to the manufacturer. They give money to the purchaser after taxing it from someone else, or just deficit finance the givaway by borrowing from the Chinese. So the buyer thinks, "I want solar" and doesn't give a crap someone else is paying for it. They hope the price will come down but after 40 years it has not. Two reasons for this" the technology isn't really there and by now it's a welfare program for the manufacturer's and soalr owners. There is no incentive for recipients in a welfare system to modify their behavior. So the price does not come down.
So then why not subsidize the cost. Create incentives (better ones), or use all that money our government spends on idiotic things and spend it on rebuilding the infrastructure (eg. solar power). I'm sure you same comments could have been said back when roads, railways, and hydroelectric dams were build to improve the infrastructure and give people jobs, IReadyou.
I do agree though, solar power needs a bit of improvement. Given all the current tech with it however, it's very doable. Heck, there's solar paint now. Strain on the lesser output from solar panels could be offset by using geothermal heat pumps for HVAC. There are also infrared solar panels which can be used under the visible light solar panels to produce even more energy (since IR can penetrate regular solar panels).
IT's not roads and bridges John Doe. virtually everyone uses the roads or is free to use the roads. All they have to do is go out on the roads. But if the gubmint subsidizes solar for your house and taxes your neighbors to do it, it's not like roads at all. Your neighbors still do nat have access to it.
It is amazing that they have a day of remembrance for all these years. The atrocities that occurred by their soldiers back then is still crude by any standards. However, several years ago when a submarine suddenly rose in the waters off of hawaii and crashed into a boatload of japanese tourists. The commander had to go to Japan and apologize for the accident. My problem with that and the WWII is I do not ever recall the Japanese EVER apologizing to the USA for their acts of beheading, mutililations, other henious acts. So, to all of you Japanese descents, I personally belive and demand that you humble yourselves and FORMALLY come to the USA and PUBLICALLY APOLOGIZE to all the men, women, children, grandchildren,great grandchildrens, uncles, aunts, etc that their loved ones were brutally harmed, killed, starved, forced to work to death, etc. So how about stepping up to the plate and correct a major travesty? Am I sorry that it took 2 bombs to get your attention? Not really, am I sorry for the loss of life? A little, but bear in mind that your children were growing up to kill and soon to be kamikazee pilots of the future, etc. Much like the talibans of now-the more we kill the better until like you they finally get tired of loosing your children that someone says "ENOUGH". So when you have your remembrance services-remember YOU started the war and WE finished it. Does anyone think for a moment that Japan would not have hesitated to use it first if they had it??? I thinketh note! So apologize to me and my fellow countrymen and their families that you destroyed!! Looking forward to seeing if this happens. But do not DARE belittle the USA for doing WHAT HAD TO BE DONE back then!
okeydokie: You can start by rereading the article and making sure you actually read that Japan attempted to "belittle" the United States. (Hint: I didn't see anything.)
Next you can start following the links provided in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan.
After that you can take a look at any of the school textbooks used in Japan for the last 50 or more years and see how the war is treated, taught, and understood.
Then you can try actually talking to some Japanese war veterans and seeing what attitudes they have.
Let us know how much vitriol remains thereafter.
I do know of what I speak. You may not have heard it this time around. Go back and research other memorials that they have had. I recall seeing this on the news a couple of years back. Thus I do stand by my statement. It may not have been covered this time or reported but it has occurred!
okeydokie: You may be recalling the 2002 or 2004 speeches by the (then) mayor of Hiroshima. In those speeches (http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/declaration/English/2004/index.html and associated links on the left side of the page), the mayor comments on (then) current actions by the US (viz., the reaction[s] to the 11 September terror attacks), but, unless you equate criticism with belittling, you are recalling something that did not happen, at least not in the last 15 years of speeches I checked directly, and specifically did not happen at all with reference to the actions of the United States in the Second World War. I also ran a search in Japanese (for the speeches not officially translated into English), but did not find any belittling.
If you come up with a reference, please post it. Google searches I ran did not turn up anything resembling your comments about belittling in #21.
Reading some of the posts regarding solar panels. There is a company in San Antonio, Texas that will install solar panels, maintain, etc. In return, you or your condo rents the panels, etc until it is paid off in full. It is a win, win situation if you are indeed serious about going solar. I have seriously considered this for my home. So, here is one alternative available.
Ireadyou, you mentioned the nuke waste. When i worked for TXU electric and we were trying to get Commanche Peak powerplant online. There was and is a method available where the waste could be "recycled" and reused with minimal nuke waste. it is available however the govt, nuclear energy commission would not authorize the implementation of such a plan as was even then bent on shipping it to Yucca and other secret repositories. Shipments have been shipped for years without the public knowing or suspecting, this is why the protesters have been mocked as when they protest a coming shipment-chances are it has already been moved or relocated-making them think they have blocked a shipment that has already been shipped long time ago. They just release fake momos just to get the minds off the real waste. I have suggested years ago to simply ship back to where it was mined! Thus the area is already polluted with radiation.
You are hilarious!!! Ship it back to where it was mined, huh?
First off - while uranium is mined, enriched uranium, plutonium, and a few other elements are not mined. They are created.
Secondly - natural uranium is more dangerous from it being a heavy metal than from radiation. Natural uranium is no more radioactive than granite. There are far worse natural rocks and gases (radon) than uranium. The reason it's used in nuclear energy is due to it's atomic structure. Things I won't delve into since you obviously don't grasp them. Not because of it's 'radiation'. In order for it to be useful for nuclear purposes it must be enriched.
You probably don't even know what things (non-nuclear) uranium is used for, do you? Ever heard of uranium glass? It's actually where people got the incorrect impression that uranium glows green, or radiation for that matter. It was also used in dentures, toner, and multiple other things. The main thing that makes natural uranium even mildly radioactive is the radium in it.
Furthermore, there are actually a couple known natural 'nuclear reactors' that burned out long ago. The contained uranium and plutonium (among other radioactive isotopes) in a pocket underground and managed to undergo sustained fission. It was self contained and cooled naturally, nothing leaked out. Of course they burned out some millions of years ago so this wasn't a recent occurrence. Those pockets aren't very radioactive anymore also. So storing waste seems to be our problem and needs to be researched a bit more. Also as you said, there are reactors that use nuclear 'waste' as fuel and convert it to something less insidious.
I really hope you don't have an important job at TXU, I really do. Aside from one point you made. The rest was completely uninformed.
Japan had only a couple of weeks until THEY had the same bomb. THEY planned to drop it. Many of you posting here would NOT BE HERE if that bomb wasn't dropped... assuming that your ancestors weren't draft dodgers.
Read how they raped the Koreans and the Chinese and made slaves of them. What they did to us and our allies. THEY only talk of the atomic bomb not of what they did and HOW they did it. Anyone not Shinto was considered not human. That is why it was easy for them to join with the Nazis.
Uncle Bill: The Japanese were not even close to developing an atomic bomb, let alone "a couple of weeks" from it. You are probably thinking of Snell's long-since refuted 1946 article (a reproduction of which can be seen here: http://www.reformation.org/atlanta-constitution.html; one of several refutations here: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02684529808432475).
As for "THEY only talk of the atomic bomb not of what they did and HOW they did it," you can dissuade yourself of this simply by perusing what has actually been said at the ceremonies here: http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/declaration/English/2004/index.html.
Laughable ---- HOW were they going to drop a nuclear weapon on America??? They had no planes left capable and in addition the US ruled the skies over the pacific. The closest they ever came to dropping a bomb on the mainland was from unguided helium baloons carrying small warheads that mostly fell on unoccupied forests in Washington and Oregon on a couple of occasions.
It never ceases to amaze me how Americans will dismiss the terrorist history of its own. The VERY reason we even got in to the Pacific war was due to the ill advised boycott of Japan in the first place! The Japanese did not just wake up on the wrong side of the bed one day and decide to bomb Hawaii.
close they were going to drop anthrax on us from balloons launched from subs, get it right.
Research Tesla he had an invention that would have given us all free electric, but was confinscated by the government, just more corporate greed to fleece the working man.
Nope, not even close. Perhaps you should research a little.
Mitchell