
Hiroshima (1946) - kibwen
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1946/08/31/hiroshima
======
supernova87a
When I was young in grade school, and learned about the bomb, and its
terrifying aftermath, pictures, scars, I thought that this was clearly a wrong
against humanity to have been dropped on anyone. Clearly the visceral kind of
"this should never happen" reaction that any average person would have. "How
could we put the Enola Gay on a stamp to glorify this?"

Then, in college and especially after, learning about the equal horrors of the
Japanese war machine, and maybe actually more the non-horrific but relentless
robotic support for the war (or obedience towards the emperor, government,
etc) among the people, I realized that it actually did bring an end to the
war. Which if it had continued, could have consumed far more lives. (whether
it had to be this tool, of course, is certainly worthy of debate)

Now, my 3rd phase of thinking -- beyond any opinion on tactics or reaction or
bombs in the moment of a war -- is how do we get people to help themselves get
out of the path to war? Each and every one of us, who whether by support or
indifference, or tacit approval, or compounded misinformation, or ego, get
ourselves into situations that we look back 50 years from now and say, "what
happened?".

Surely, we have the tools and desire, don't we? I hope.

~~~
EarthIsHome
For those interested in arguments about whether the bombings were necessary,
there's a good Wikipedia article:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombi...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki)

I do believe the bombings were a strategic show-of-force to the Soviet Union
since they were coming out of the war as a global power; USSR were
instrumental in ending the war.

~~~
missedthecue
The fact that the military is still awarding Purple Hearts that were
manufactured for the invasion of Japan tells me that it was more than
justified. Japanese intelligence itself estimated 20 million casualties during
an invasion.

~~~
pmachinery
Regardless of the number, there was no need to invade Japan.

It was already defeated, and offering to surrender, before the USSR joined the
fight.

Totally surrounded/blockaded, no allies left in the world, bombed at will,
what else could it do but accept defeat?

~~~
manfredo
Offering to surrender _conditionally_. Specifically, on the condition that it
keep Korea and Taiwan (and maybe Manchuria, too), and that it's military
government remain largely unchanged. This is was not a surrender that was
acceptable to the Allies.

This thread is being rate limited, reply in edit:

Denying Korea and Taiwan is easier said than done. Remember that Japan
essentially won the continental war against China. It's best equipped and most
experienced troops are there. Japan is also in an optimal position to control
ocean access to Korea. Any boats have to travel through the East China Sea, or
sea of Japan to reach Korea. Both of which are in range of the thousands of
kamikaze planes built for the purpose of destroying vessels that sail close to
Japan.

At this point, you're talking about conducting an invasion of a landmass even
larger than the Japanese home islands, against better troops, and with more
difficult naval access. It would undoubtedly incur substantially more losses
than the 100 to 200 thousand inflicted by the atomic bombings. And to what
end? A hostile military government would still be in power back in Japan.

~~~
valuearb
Not invading or dropping nukes would mean the deaths of millions. The Japanese
would still fight, Japanese and Allied planes would still get shot down and
warships sunk. Japanese Civilians would still be dying at a high rate, from
bombings, starvation, lack of medical supplies, etc.

Before these bombs were dropped, tens of thousands were dying on days with no
large military operations.

------
mholt
If you're interested in this, I highly recommend watching _In This Corner of
the World_. The perspective of a young woman who lives her life during the
war, and her family's tragic experience with the bomb.

If I'm not mistaken, it is the first anime the Emperor of Japan has gone to
see personally in theaters ([https://www.crunchyroll.com/anime-
news/2019/12/18-1/japans-e...](https://www.crunchyroll.com/anime-
news/2019/12/18-1/japans-emperor-and-empress-attended-charity-screening-of-in-
this-corner-of-the-world-anime-film)).

Spoiler-free analysis:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPS2U2ijBkU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPS2U2ijBkU)

US Netflix:
[https://www.netflix.com/title/80192244](https://www.netflix.com/title/80192244)

------
spicyramen
I have had the opportunity to visit Hiroshima and lived in the US where I had
the chance to study under professor William Perry former Secretary of Defense
and responsible for many post war research. The perspective and official
version that Americans have is that dropping the bomb was the right thing to
do and only way to finish the war in the Pacific. The history is written by
the winners simple fact to always keep in mind. This is clearly a
misunderstanding of World War 2. In Europe after England and France lost their
hegemony as empires, it became a race between USSR and US for world
domination. The Red Army after controlling Germany were on their way to Japan,
and Japanese were really afraid of it. There was a previous dispute over
Kamchatka peninsula and other territories that Russians would want to claim
back. US already defeated Japan in the Pacific and most of Japan was already
destroyed. US sent the bomb to send a message to the World and USSR: we have
this weapon and we will use it. It was in their best interest to control a
Russia-free Japan than get into the same mess as in Germany.

------
mytailorisrich
The allies had already started to resort to obliterating whole cities and
their inhabitants before Hiroshima (see Dresden, Tokyo).

IMHO, this was not the result of how "evil" the German and Japanese regimes
were (which seems to me to be a rationalization) but the result of 5 years of
total war. I think that at some point people came to accept doing whatever it
took to win and end the war.

In the context of what was going on I think dropping atomic bombs to
precipitate the end of the war and send a message to the Soviets was perhaps
not considered as big a deal as we might think because, as said, the result
was already accepted looking at the conventional bombing raids that had taken
place.

War is hell and total war means total hell.

~~~
gen220
FWIW, the goal of the allied bombing campaign was _always_ to cripple the
adversary nation by bombing industrial infrastructure; the doctrine pre-dated
the outbreak of WW II.

The invention of radar-assisted targeting thwarted this mission in the early
phases of the war in Europe, and it took a tech arms race to get past it.

In the Pacific, the US’s primary objective was to secure an air base within
strategic bombing range of Japan. It pursued this by capturing islands and
investing in aeronautics (extending the range and carrying capacity of
bombers).

Once within range of Japan, the Air Force tried strategic bombing at first,
but found themselves unable to hit their targets. They had to fly above flak,
and aim _through_ the previously-undiscovered jet stream. They eventually gave
up and turned from strategic bombing to recently-invented (demonstrated in
1942/3, mass produced in 1944) napalm. They knew it was awful, but considered
it a trade of X lives now for 10x lives later.

All this to say, I don’t believe that war weariness significantly influenced
the decision to use napalm and atomic weapons, in Europe or Japan. If the
allied powers had encountered the opportunity to use them within the first
year of the war, their military doctrine would have dictated their use.

------
overkalix
This is such a remarcable piece of writing. I'm sure among americans this is
already somewhat of a classic but if you haven't read yet it do yourself a
favor and take half an hour to read it.

~~~
dan-robertson
If you look up the author, one of the first things a you will read is that
this was judged to be the finest example of 20th century American journalism
by a large group at New York university.

~~~
gen220
It also arguably made The New Yorker magazine. It’s identity is still strongly
influenced by this piece. Each article they have published since has had to
“follow” this one.

Prior to WWII, its tone was more playful and humorous. The somewhat-detached,
illustrative and poetic exposition originated in the war period, and resonates
today.

------
dang
If curious see also

2018
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18536235](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18536235)

2016
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11750331](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11750331)

------
idlewords
If you ever get a chance to visit the Hiroshima Peace Museum, it is a moving
and worthwhile place to go. Give yourself a few hours so you can spend time
watching eyewitness interviews. The main tram line through downtown goes right
past Ground Zero, which never stops being shocking.

~~~
jfoster
There is even some restored tram cars from that time still in use:

[https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-
elsewhere-33148281](https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-
elsewhere-33148281)

------
mlb_hn
Great article. It's worth considering the Japanese reaction to the bomb -
people thought it was cluster munitions or other conventional explosives
leading to them taking sub-optimal follow-on steps. While the physicists
figured it out, it was not obvious at the time to many people who experienced
it firsthand what happened.

------
pengaru
I happen to have just started reading the book Made In Japan, and the first
chapter's title is War.

It's been a good read so far. I found it quite interesting to hear about the
Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings from the perspective of a young Japanese
technician working in the war effort at the time.

A lot of comments in here are throwing around terms like "war crime". I'm not
well informed on this subject, but the impression I get from this book at
least, wasn't one of anger and accusation of wrongdoing WRT the bombings.

It comes across more as a humble acceptance of defeat, and perhaps a subtle
criticism of his own nation's propaganda-washed populous, military-dominated
leadership and authority, than anything accusing the Americans of committing
war crimes.

He describes the bombings as clearly demonstrating how far behind Japan was
technologically. Up until that point he had the impression that Japanese
military technology was only slightly behind the Americans, based on reverse
engineered equipment recovered from downed planes.

The thing I wonder is if the Americans could have just dropped a single bomb
first on a relatively unpopulated area, near enough to a Japanese population
center to witness its destructive force, without all the loss of civilian
life. They might have surrendered after that. You still have the second bomb
if they don't get the message. But I guess there wasn't exactly 100% certainty
both bombs would function, and I don't know how long it would take to make
another at the time - it's not like we had a huge stockpile of the enriched
fissile material laying around.

In any case, so far I'd recommend the book, and I haven't even gotten to the
stuff about Sony yet.

------
traceroute66
Nuking the Japanese was just the culmination of rather horrific methods used
by the US against Japan.

Another one the US was quite keen on is firebombing (aerial incendiary bombing
of urban areas). Grave of the Fireflies is a movie well worth watching that
provides a depiction of the effect of war on society.

------
MrsPeaches
If you have never read it, I high recommend "The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima
& Nagasaki" by the Manhatten Project [1].

There are some facinating technical details (in particluar the way heat
reflected in the hills of Nagasaki) but in general it makes for grim reading.

I was always struck by the contrast between the dispassionate analysis in the
report and the final eye witness account in the appendix.

I always had the feeling that they knew what they had done and knew that it
was wrong.

[1]
[https://www.abomb1.org/hiroshim/hiro_med.pdf](https://www.abomb1.org/hiroshim/hiro_med.pdf)

------
lordgeek
Notice the similarity with today Russia:

\- Run by an eternal Emperor adored by population at large (not counting few
remaining intellectuals he murders every year)

\- Extremely religious-jingoistic national ideology as “strong spiritual
braces of Russians”. Quite similar to militaristic Japan “warrior spirit of
master race”.

\- Already invaded and conquered few smaller neighbors in the wars of conquest

\- On of top sources of toxic influence in every field in the modern world

Countries who blindingly follow some two bit God-Emperor aggressive trash
should not be surprised to eat Gamma rays for breakfast one fine morning.

------
dkyc
The pop-up advertising a 'flash sale' over the first paragraph couldn't have
been placed worse.

------
mixmastamyk
There are two "WWII - HD in Color" documentaries on Netflix right now. I
recommend them if you find this subject interesting.

The old one is more comprehensive, but a bit numbing in that it just hits you
with fact after fact after fact.

The newer one is a bit shorter, and breaks up the action with recent
interviews with historians, who delve deeper on the "why" of what happened.

The second one skips a few important things, so I recommend the older to fill
in a few gaps even if you don't watch both.

------
programmingpol
I highly recommend The Making of the Atomic Bomb. I listened to the audiobook
last year. It starts with the scientific advances, beginning in the late 19th
century, and continues up through the achievement of a chain reaction and the
dropping of the bombs on Japan. The final part of the book, detailing the
eyewitness accounts of the bombings, is the most harrowing thing I’ve ever
listened to.

------
ErikAugust
Feynman on Hiroshima is fascinating:
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p018w6rc](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p018w6rc)

------
bamboozled
The thing about all of this is that these bombs were dropped on children and
innocents.

Children on their way to school, the innocent and the weak were the victims of
nuclear bombs, people were left without skin, their faces melted, bodies
deformed and with radiation poisoning.

Sorry but it's a disgusting and weak act no matter how you people try spin it,
I can never truly get past the facts and some of the footage of the aftermath
available.

------
sorokod
Kazutoshi Hando, The Pacific War Research Society, Japan's Longest Day (Tokyo:
Kodansha International, Ltd., 1968), pp. 11-53.

[https://web.archive.org/web/20110225124451/http://www.mtholy...](https://web.archive.org/web/20110225124451/http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/hando/hando.htm)

------
mcguire
The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II: A Collection of Primary Sources
[https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/index.htm](https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/index.htm)

------
hermitcrab
Japan and Germany were both utterly humbled by the war. They learnt the
lessons and are now respected and vibrant democracies.

UK and USA were on the winning side. This bred myths of British and American
exceptionlism, which led eventually to Brexit, catastrophic handling of
COVID19 and (perhaps) Trump.

History often has a sting in it's tail.

