That said, there's lots of unpacking to do.
He will NOT apologize for Aug. 6, 1945. Nor should he.
The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs saved more U.S., Allied — AND Japanese — lives than would have been lost either to an extended blockade (which would have taken months to "bite" and could have killed 1 million or more Japanese due to starvation) or a land invasion.
Besides, the "bomb" killed fewer people than our firebombing of Tokyo. And, Hirohito (remember his name) cited it, NOT the Soviet entry into the war, as the reason to call for peace. (Only a couple of months before, Hirohito himself still hoped to at least keep all of "Greater Japan" conquered up to 1905, if not the Pacific islands taken from Germany during World War I.)
So, revisionist historians like Gar Alperowitz, sit down. This is another area in which, and another reason why, I call myself a skeptical left-liberal.
Second, nuclear proliferation today is a big deal, and one that Obama's not done a lot to help, outside the Iran accord. A purely symbolic visit to Hiroshima will, like many of Obama's purely symbolic actions, be exactly that — purely symbolic. (Obamacare itself is starting to feel more that way.)
Back to the story, starting with this:
After U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visited Hiroshima last month, survivors of the bombing and other residents said that if Obama visits, they hope for progress in ridding the world of nuclear weapons, rather than an apology.
Kerry toured the Hiroshima Peace Memorial and Museum, calling the museum's haunting displays "gut-wrenching." The displays include photographs of badly burned victims, the tattered and stained clothes they wore and statues depicting them with flesh melting from their limbs.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are appreciated, as is at least a modicum of politeness.
Comments are moderated, so yours may not appear immediately.
Due to various forms of spamming, comments with professional websites, not your personal website or blog, may be rejected.