« 7 February 1812-2012 and beyond | Main | The Celluloid Lady »

18 January 2012


Frank S

I think there will be no 'afterwards' for a long time to come in the wars being waged by believers in Islam against non-believers. It is a permanent conflict until they achieve dominance. This makes for a huge difference between this conflict and wars between broadly similar nations with similar belief systems and moral standards. There, there can be an end and an 'afterwards' within years and within lifetimes.


I don't believe the dropping of the atom bombs was such a bad thing when you consider what an invasion of the Japanese home islands would be like. Remember, we had to drop two bombs! The Japanese military didn't believe we had any more bombs and so they were not going to surrender! To me that is grotesque.



"The Japanese military didn't believe we had any more bombs and so they were not going to surrender! ..."

Is that so? I remember reading somewhere that the Japanese were preparing to surrender when the second bomb went off.

But at that stage of the war there was precious little goodwill on the Allied side towards the Japanese people, and none at all for the Japanese military.


"Is that so?"
Oliver Kamm wrote about it:

"Thus she asserts that the US President ordered the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki “when the Japanese enemy was known by him to have made two attempts toward a negotiated peace”. She also maintains that the Allies were wrong to promulgate the aim of Japan’s unconditional surrender in the Potsdam Declaration, for “the Allies’ demands were mostly of so vague and sweeping a nature as to be rather a declaration of what unconditional surrender would be like than to constitute conditions”.

As I mentioned in my earlier posts, no such efforts towards a negotiated peace were made by Japanese leaders. The most that can be said is that certain elites envisaged a bargain in which Japan would retain its autocracy and Empire. This was far from an offer of surrender, and it did not in any event come from the government of Japan. We know this from decoded Japanese diplomatic cables that have since been declassified, but even the published material available to Miss Anscombe in 1956 contradicted her claims (e.g., Robert Butow’s 1954 volume, which remains indispensable, Japan’s Decision to Surrender). Moreover, the terms of the Potsdam Declaration were not vague at all. They were explicit on what was required and also what was promised in return (you can read it here; note in particular points 9-12). I shall return to the question of Japan’s unconditional surrender – a just and necessary requirement - when I address Norman’s argument."


The comments to this entry are closed.


  • Rosie Bell

    Some song writing, some verse writing and too much blogging about culture, politics, cycling and gardening.

    My Profile on Normblog