60th Anniversary: Americans Divided on Use of A-Bombs in 1945

Just wanted to let everyone know who is interested...

Tune in to Charlie Rose Show (on PBS) right now, they are going to discuss in the first segment the use of the nuclear bombs on Japan during WWII.

Just a heads up

 

Professor Martin Sherwin (author of a book about Oppenheimer, called "American Prometheus").

His said that he didn't believe through his research that the a-bomb was 'needed' to end the war with Japan. He said Truman wanted to avoid having the Soviets come in and fight against the Japanese, because it would have involved them in the rebuilding of Japan and gave them a 'share' in influencing policies in Japan.

He said that what has led to the armed race was the Soviet perception that the only reason the US used the a-bomb on an already "defeated enemy" (Japan) was to send an 'unfriendly' message to the Soviets, which they viewed as a threat, leading them to accelerate the development of their own a-bomb, which they did only 4 years later.

In his view, the current accepted theory that the bombs "ended the war" legitimizes the use of nuclear weapons, meaning that they would continue to be included as a crucial part of a nation's military arsenal; this contradicts what Oppenheimer wanted, which was having nuclear energy come under heavy international restrictions that would ban individual states from owning nuclear weapons as part of their arsenal.

He also said that while he is willing to accept a debate on the legitimacy of using the first bomb on Hiroshima, but there is no doubting the use of second a-bomb on Nagasaki was unnecessary.

 

just think this way, if japan feels that its justified in whitewashing it war time history, America is justified in saying the nukes had to be used to end the war.