PDA

View Full Version : Japan Official Resigns Over Bomb Comment


SteelersMongol
07-03-2007, 11:06 PM
Japan's defense minister resigned Tuesday after suggesting the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were inevitable, a remark that stirred furious criticism in a nation where many consider the attacks an unjustified slaughter of civilians.

Defense Minister Fumio Kyuma, a native of Nagasaki, said he did not mean to condone the 1945 bombings, which Washington has argued were necessary to end World War II without a potentially bloody land invasion.

"I just meant that there was nothing we could do about it," he said after tendering his resignation to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, whose administration has seen its popularity plunge ahead of parliamentary elections this month. "I don't think people understood what I meant."

He hit a very sore nerve, however.

Kyuma's comments generated angry criticism from survivors of the bombings, opposition lawmakers and fellow Cabinet members. The mayor of Nagasaki was among the most vocal critics, telling Kyuma to stay away from a ceremony marking the bombing anniversary next month and saying the comment "tramples on the feelings of A-bomb victims."

In a speech Saturday, Kyuma said the atomic bombings caused great suffering. But he added that Japan would have otherwise kept fighting and ended up losing a greater part of its northern territory to the Soviet Union, which invaded Manchuria on the day Nagasaki was bombed.

"I understand that the bombings ended the war, and I think that it couldn't be helped," he said.

Though Kyuma's statement was similar to the interpretation in the United States that the bombings hastened the war's end and thus saved lives, it contradicted the generally held Japanese stance that the use of nuclear weapons is never acceptable.

A ban on possession of such weapons is a hallowed tenet of Japan's postwar pacifist policies. Kyuma's remarks were slammed as both a tacit acceptance of the U.S. decision in 1945 and of the use of nuclear weapons in general.

"Abe should have said this is outrageous," said Tomoaki Iwai, a political scientist at Nihon University. "The atomic bombings are something that Japanese people can never forgive."

Kyuma was succeeded by National Security Adviser Yuriko Koike, the first woman to assume the defense portfolio in Japan.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Kyuma's resignation was an internal matter for Japan. But he said the United States looked forward to working with Japan's first female defense minister.

Since Abe assumed office last September, controversies over World War II have become front-and-center issues.

Abe himself was the focus of international ire for denying that Japan forced "comfort women" to work at front-line brothels during the war, despite historical evidence to the contrary. And a large faction within Abe's party is rallying for a re-evaluation of the Rape of Nanking, in which the Chinese claim as many as 300,000 people were slaughtered.

The atomic bombings are an even more delicate matter.

On Aug. 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped a bomb nicknamed "Little Boy" on Hiroshima, killing at least 140,000 people in the world's first atomic bomb attack. Three days later, the U.S. dropped another atomic bomb, "Fat Man," on Nagasaki, where about 74,000 are estimated to have been killed.

Japan surrendered on Aug. 15, 1945.

Abe has not made his own position on the bombings public, saying instead that Kyuma "caused misunderstandings" with his remarks.

Koike, Kyuma's successor, also carefully avoided the topic in her first meeting with reporters.

"Japan wants to continue to be a leader toward nuclear abolishment," she said.

Kyuma was among the most outspoken of Abe's Cabinet ministers.

In January, he raised eyebrows in Washington by calling the U.S. decision to invade Iraq a "mistake" because it was based on the false premise that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Japan and the U.S. are close military allies, and Japan hosts some 50,000 American troops under a security treaty.

Kyuma later apologized for that comment, too.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070703/D8Q59ENO0.html

SteelersMongol
07-03-2007, 11:10 PM
A man who told the truth had to resign? I don't understand why these people can be so sensitive about the whole atomic bomb issue, when they ignore other claims such as Japanese brutality in wartime occupied places. I mean, I don't think anyone should ever be a victim of that atomic bomb things, but it was an inevitable, in my opinion.

Preacher
07-04-2007, 01:02 AM
Wow...

Very interesting...

Stlrs4Life
07-05-2007, 09:29 AM
Well, i'm still sensitive that they bombed Pearl Harbor too.

83-Steelers-43
07-05-2007, 09:43 AM
What about the Japanese atrocities during WWII or the casualty rate we would have sustained if we attempted to take the main island of Japan after taking Europe back from Nazi Germany. That goes in one ear and out the other with some of these people. It's not worth it. I guess when it's your own boys taking those casualties it's another story.

If dropping those two bombs means saving millions of American/Allied lives against an enemy who was not going to surrender at any cost, you damn well better believe I agree with the droppings.

Let's hear Japan comment on Bataan, Hsuchow, Manila Massacre, Sook Ching Massacre, Nanking Massacre and Unit 731. Yeah, we don't want to get into that do we? We will just push those incidents under the carpet and pretend they never occured.

Preacher
07-05-2007, 01:54 PM
What about the Japanese atrocities during WWII or the casualty rate we would have sustained if we attempted to take the main island of Japan after taking Europe back from Nazi Germany. That goes in one ear and out the other with some of these people. It's not worth it. I guess when it's your own boys taking those casualties it's another story.

If dropping those two bombs means saving millions of American/Allied lives against an enemy who was not going to surrender at any cost, you damn well better believe I agree with the droppings.

Let's hear Japan comment on Bataan, Hsuchow, Manila Massacre, Sook Ching Massacre, Nanking Massacre and Unit 731. Yeah, we don't want to get into that do we? We will just push those incidents under the carpet and pretend they never occured.

WHich is why I am always happy for a pacifist Japan. Cause if they ever step away from that ideal... That part of the world will explode... The hatred there rivals that of Israel/Arab. The only problem is... they have much bigger standing armies, much more land to bomb, and a much larger population.

83-Steelers-43
07-05-2007, 05:02 PM
The hatred there rivals that of Israel/Arab.

I guess that's the price you pay when your war crimes equal that of the Nazi's at that time in history.

That's fine by me if they have that attitude. If they want their women to jump off cliffs with babies grasped in arms or blow themselves up with grenades, that's fine by me. Just don't expect my army to lose millions while trying to bring you down.

"The atomic bombings are something that Japanese people can never forgive."

IMO, it's over and done with. If the people over there still hold a grudge, that's their problem. But there are two sides to every story and names such as Bataan, Hsuchow, Manila Massacre, Sook Ching Massacre, Nanking Massacre and Unit 731 are rarely mentioned when it comes to the big bad USA dropping it's two bombs to end a very long war.

MasterOfPuppets
07-05-2007, 05:19 PM
i guess if japan would have invented the A bomb, they wouldn't have used it on us....:rolleyes:

fansince'76
07-05-2007, 05:49 PM
I guess that's the price you pay when your war crimes equal that of the Nazi's at that time in history.

One big difference - Germans by and large have owned up to and denounced their country's role in WWII. Complete opposite of what the Japanese have done - playing revisionist history with their school textbooks regarding their role in that war being just one example.

83-Steelers-43
07-05-2007, 05:56 PM
One big difference - Germans by and large have owned up to and denounced their country's role in WWII. Complete opposite of what the Japanese have done - playing revisionist history with their school textbooks regarding their role in that war being just one example.

Excellent point.

Preacher
07-05-2007, 07:25 PM
I guess that's the price you pay when your war crimes equal that of the Nazi's at that time in history.

That's fine by me if they have that attitude. If they want their women to jump off cliffs with babies grasped in arms or blow themselves up with grenades, that's fine by me. Just don't expect my army to lose millions while trying to bring you down.



IMO, it's over and done with. If the people over there still hold a grudge, that's their problem. But there are two sides to every story and names such as Bataan, Hsuchow, Manila Massacre, Sook Ching Massacre, Nanking Massacre and Unit 731 are rarely mentioned when it comes to the big bad USA dropping it's two bombs to end a very long war.

I completely agree... Actually, the hatred over there between china, korea, and Japan goes back WAY before WWII... There is racial hatred from centuries ago...

As as far as the bombing of Japan goes... I actually wrote a paper on the subject of whether the second bombing was necessary...

My conclusion... Absolutely.

I hate war.

However, in war, the object is to kill as many of your enemy as possible while not losing your own people.

Knowing that there were actual CLASSES teaching women and children in Japan how to fight against an American invasion... We would have had to literally go house to house and kill every man, woman, and child that was old enough to pick up a gun, knife, stone, or stick.

In the immortal words of Ozzie....

Thank God for the Bomb.

SteelersMongol
07-06-2007, 12:07 AM
So some of you wouldn't like this huh?

TOKYO (AP) - Japan's military is making international peacekeeping a priority, scrambling to bolster its missile defenses and deepening its coordination with U.S. troops, an annual report said Friday.

The new focus on peacekeeping is part of a major transformation of Japan's post World War II military into a more ambitious institution. The change reflects efforts to make the country a more forceful player on the world stage and Japan's growing concern at China's expanding military might.

Japan has in recent years become more involved in peacekeeping missions, and sent several hundred troops to southern Iraq, where they were involved in reconstruction, water-purification and other humanitarian, non-combat activities.

Japanese navy ships also provide logistical support for coalition forces in Afghanistan.

The country will increase its participation in such missions, according to the "Defense of Japan 2007," which was approved by the Cabinet on Friday.

"International peace cooperation activities are a primary mission," said Defense Ministry spokesman Mamoru Kotaki.

The outward emphasis has been controversial.

Although Japan's military is one of the world's strongest and best-equipped, it is tightly constrained by the 1948 constitution, which bars the use of force to settle international disputes and limits the military to a strictly defensive role.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, citing the threat of a nuclear-armed North Korea and the expansion and modernization of China's military, has championed a constitutional overhaul that would allow for a much freer hand in security policy.

Japan's push to strengthen its military has been backed by Washington, whose own forces are stretched thin by the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.

A stronger Japan has raised concerns of an escalating arms race with China, however, and many Japanese are wary of being drawn into conflicts overseas or of funds being siphoned from social programs for military growth.

Japan spends roughly $42 billion annually on defense. The overall figure has remained relatively static at about 1 percent of GDP, compared with 3 percent in the United States. But experts note Japan is fourth or fifth in the world in defense outlays and that spending on areas like missile defense are swelling.

Kotaki said Tokyo was not seeking fundamental change in its basic defensive policies.

"There is no intention of departing from conventional defense policies or for Japan to become a military power," he said.

On the homefront, the annual report said ballistic missile defense will remain a crucial strategic and budgetary factor.

Working closely with Washington, Tokyo has spent $1.28 billion on ballistic missile defense this year, up from $1.14 billion in fiscal 2006. To further improve coordination, the Japanese Air Defense Command will be moved to a U.S. military base on the outskirts of Tokyo.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070706/D8Q6QQG80.html

Edman
07-06-2007, 12:23 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the U.S warn Japan to surrender at all cost, or face destruction? It's not like we just bombed them from out of nowhere. We gave them a distinct warning to surrender, JP refused, and the rest is history.

Preacher
07-06-2007, 05:44 PM
So some of you wouldn't like this huh?

Here is the really interesting thing...

While everything I said about the hatred in Asia between the Japanese and others are true... right now we need Japan to rise to counterbalance N.Korea and China.

What we are truly seeing, is the next major buildup to the next world order... and maybe world war. And yes, the war in the gulf is a foreshadowing... setting the stage for where allied forces can and cannot base out of for air and ground support.

What many don't realize is that since the cold-war ceased, there has been a massive disorder in the world. However, the pendulum is swinging to a new world order (yeah, this is what Bush 41 was talking about). However, the coming world order will again be based on military and economic strength... as they all are.

the problem.... why it is so foreign to us this time... is because this is the first world order that will be formed outside of the roots of the Roman empire. Thus, this is new ground.