
There were some very insightful comments in response to Dr. E’s post on Hiroshima and my earlier offering.
Dr. E suggested that interested readers acquaint themselves with the Hiroshima Maidens, while I would recommend these books, all of which I have read:
The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb (Gar Alperovitz)
Hiroshima Diary: The Journal of a Japanese Physician (Michihiko Hachiya)
Hiroshima (John Hersey)
Death in Life: Survivors of Hiroshima (Robert Jay Lifton)
The Making of the Atomic Bomb (Richard Rhodes)
The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb (Dennis D. Wainstock)
And a movie, as well:
Hiroshima Mon Amour (1960)
These books are in print and available through online booksellers. Used copies of most are available for under $5.
Alpervitz — NO. (Same for the other guy who says we were a racist empire.)
A book possibly out of print by people associated with the Hirishima “peace monument” or a related organization is pretty good. So is “Rain of Ruin.”
But why obsess about this? Clear conscience, no neurosis is normal.
Heaven for-freaking-bid that a suggested reading list have books with a diversity of views.
Diverse is not equal. Trash is not the same as (equal to) treasure.
Not only is it abnormal to be agitated or preoccupied with the use of the atomic bombs (or about atomic energy), but “diverse” includes plain nonsense or leftist propaganda.
The Enola Gay episode was telling.
http://www.afa.org/mitchell/reports/0404enolagay.pdf
http://www.afa.org/media/enolagay/
The following is hardly equal.
(the book and the review)
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/20/045.html
Sadly, we see the same or worse with nuclear power plants often.
This is a good reading list Shaun, and thank you for adding it, and thank you for the insert with the picture of one of the Hiroshima women with the burn pattern from her kimona now raised keloid scars on her body where the blast burned into her.
DLS, TMV is not the Vatican Index. You can like or not like books on a list someone else offers. You can offer your own list too, which you have. And, I know of no one of our time, including my friends who served or were POWs in WWII in the Pacific who have come to peace with all decisions. Those who still harange and name call, as some of my elderly friends do, those who are just sad, those who say they are sadly resigned, were there, have had many years now to think things through, are far from the bravado of youth, have seen much travail since after the war that has also shaped their hearts and depth, especially their depth. Many thoughtful people from all sides (and there are far more than two sides as you know) continue to, not argue, but think about these matters, not as though it’s a football game rooting for the home team in a game still hanging in ashes in the air of 66 years ago, but about how we live now knowing about then, how we move in deeper, and closer to see from the many points of view. Given the huge waves of post-trauma in men and women who came home from WWII, the profound amounts of alcoholism, and being mia to one’s own family, the many wandering without aid after the war, there are few victors who are certain about all things. Just one other side. ONe of the many many sides.
I hate war. God knows how much I hate war.
I know it’s not the Vatican Index, Dr. E. — as so many articles by the writers make that so definite.
* * *
The aerial warfare was nothing like the ground warfare (where war really is fought, after all), and it’s a good bet about then (and earlier) as well as now that the ground warriors have had a worse time than the “removed” air warriors (not to mention air warriors that are naval based offshore).
Related:
(MUCH more at this site — you may recognize the author of “On Killing” if you’re familiar with the psychological effects such as in war. It reminds me of when I was in St. Louis and someone was back from the first war in Iraq. It was one of those moments when I predicted successfully what somebody would say. The man was asked what was the worst part of the war and he replied, “The killing, and I wish you hadn’t asked me about that.”)
http://www.killology.com/article_psychological.htm
* * *
There is no excuse for nuclear phobia. Nuclear energy put to work is bigger and better than fire (or conventional explosives), much better, as a tool, and worse as a weapon or when it is out of control (which, after all, is needed with anything, not just fire). There is also no excuse for strange double standards and wanting the United States to feel diseased “guilt” about dropping the atomic bombs (or about winning wars, et cetera!). Every anniversary of this pair of bombings gets politicized by the Left (even if that wasn’t Shaun’s intention — he did include a poor activist source) and “neuroticized,” and it shouldn’t, ever.
dls, you are always welcome to write a point of view piece next year and I’ll likely run it. Many of us, are very much still thinking through past and present horrific events, with more and more understanding and less and less understanding… this increases every year. Not politics, humanity. Except for sometimes, I dont often see horns where some others point. Just humans.
Another good film is the HBO movie Hiroshima which covers both the US and Japanese sides from April-August 1945
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
I really like the cannibalism part. I guess allied pilots were tasty, but there is enough murder and mayhem against civilian populations to shade the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In war, you kill, but some made a sport of it. Without giving the victims any “sporting chance” of course. So what did the allies do? They struck back at the monsters. Because in their minds that’s exactly what the Japanese were. Putting myself in the allied soldier’s shoes, in their time, I seriously doubt that I could have been any better of a human being my damn self. I would have fought with a vengeance. Provided I had sustainable courage that is.