# The Voice of Hibakusha: eyewitness accounts from Hiroshima



## RHFC_piper (5 Feb 2007)

The Voice of Hibakusha: eyewitness accounts from Hiroshima

A collection of articles of eyewitness accounts taken from interviews with victums / survivors of the a-bomb attack on Hiroshima.

Worth reading.


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (12 Feb 2007)

I've read through a few accounts and I must say, its makes my skin crawl just to imagine what hell these people went through.


----------



## 1feral1 (12 Feb 2007)

Call me cold, but they started the war in the Pacific, and the bombings on 06 and 09 Aug 45 ended it, and saved countless 100's of thousands of allied soldiers lives, ending a war sooner than later.

I have no sympathy for them.

Wes


----------



## ClaytonD (17 Feb 2007)

Wesley (Over There) said:
			
		

> Call me cold, but they started the war in the Pacific, and the bombings on 06 and 09 Aug 45 ended it, and saved countless 100's of thousands of allied soldiers lives, ending a war sooner than later.
> 
> I have no sympathy for them.
> 
> Wes



I would have to disagree with you here. Yes, Japan may have caused the war in the Pacific. They also lived under dictatorship and harsh leaders who made the choices for their people. I agree with you that it saved possibly a million lives on the allied side. But having no sympathy for these people 65 years later in my opinion is very callous. It doesn't matter which country these people are born in nor who's country started it.

If one of the allied countries had attacked Japan first would you feel the same lack of sympathy?

I feel sympathy for all civilian casualties, period.


----------



## RHFC_piper (17 Feb 2007)

I have to agree with ClaytonD.  It's not like the child who had the soles of his feet burned off chose to attack Pearl Harbour.

But, with that said, I didn't post this article for sympathy sake... it's just a grim reminder of what war does. 

It also illustrates that not much has changed in the way of warfare and casualties.

It is also and interesting perspective on the end of WW2 and the history from the other side.

 I didn't post it to make anyone feel bad.  What you feel about it is a 'you' problem.


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Feb 2007)

One allied casualty was not worth a million of theirs - PERIOD! The same goes where I am right now.

Those bombs eneded what could have been 1,000,000 more allied casualties, maybe even your relatives. Mine for sure.

We did not attack Japan first. Don't forget The Winnipeg Grenadiers at Hong Kong on Christmas Day 1941, and the countless attrocities Japan committed agaisnt allied PWs and the sickness they committed throughout China. On a twisted note, how many japanese deaths were prevented too, can you imagine who many civlians and military would have been killled if Japan was invaded?? Maybe this was the lesser of two evils overall.

Ya, those civilians suffered (ones that survived the initial blast), some still are, just like the survivors of Dresden today too (or the survivors of the Blitz on london (40,000 killed), but I won't forget my Uncles (Ron and George) who carried the horrors of war for 40 plus yrs in a whisky bottle till their untimely deaths.

All war is insane ( for those of us that have been in the shyte - we know it - for those of us who have lost those close to us, we know it), but sometimes measures have to be taken to preserve ourselves and our freedom.

Civilian casualties are just the way it is, and that war was fought differently than this one.

Wes


----------



## TCBF (18 Feb 2007)

Over 130,000 killed in the firebombing of Tokyo, 90,000 and 70,000 respectively in the LITTLE BOY and FAT MAN drops, and STILL the west is expected to moan and drip for them.

Balls, I say.

What about the two Japanese A-Bomb programs, one of which may have actually exploded or fizzled a small device off a Korean island in 1945?

My favourite A-Bombing survivors were the Allied POWs who were bombed and survived the war.. No complaints from THEM, as the bombings saved their lives.

It's one thing to complain about history - It's another to KNOW IT!


----------



## aesop081 (18 Feb 2007)

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary as far as the war wa concerned, fo all the reasons mentioned by others here.

Not to be forgoten is that the cold war was looming and Truman understood that.  The politics of the cold war had been reality for some time. Using the bomb served a dual purpose: ending the war in the Pacific and served as a show of force towards the USSR.


----------



## TCBF (18 Feb 2007)

Air recce photos showed a massive campaign of total militarization in Japan.  A levee en masse using housewives and pensioners to clear firelanes in major cities and fortify the entire country.  A conventional campaign in Japan would have led to unnacceptable casualties on both sides.  Also recall that, up to this point, most of the Japanese Army had NEVER seen an American soldier.  The bulk of their force was in China/Korea/SE Asia.  That is why the US asked the Russians for help.  Australia, UK and Canada could not come up with the levels of troops the US needed to roll up the enemy if the bombings did not work - only Russia could do that.  Recall that the US was all out of A bombs after Aug 45, and had not many more built even by the Korean War.

Too bad about the Kuriles.


----------



## ClaytonD (18 Feb 2007)

Wesley:



> One allied casualty was not worth a million of theirs - PERIOD! The same goes where I am right now.



I don't think that is a proper statement considering none of us can accurately (or should morally) compare how much one human's life is worth compared to another's. 



> Those bombs eneded what could have been 1,000,000 more allied casualties, maybe even your relatives. Mine for sure.
> 
> We did not attack Japan first. Don't forget The Winnipeg Grenadiers at Hong Kong on Christmas Day 1941, and the countless attrocities Japan committed agaisnt allied PWs and the sickness they committed throughout China. On a twisted note, how many japanese deaths were prevented too, can you imagine who many civlians and military would have been killled if Japan was invaded?? Maybe this was the lesser of two evils overall.



Yes, there were terrible atrocities performed against POWs, chinese civilians, and even their own people, many crimes were commited by their military. Military.

Many deaths were in fact probably prevented by the bombs, on both sides. This does not mean that the bombs happening were a good thing. In fact, you say the lesser of two evils. Having no sympathy for the people who had a terrible thing happen to them, (a very possibly undeserved thing) just because they were on the other side during the war, is a bit off in my opinion. Unless of course you have no sympathy for allied civilian sufferers of war.



> Ya, those civilians suffered (ones that survived the initial blast), some still are, just like the survivors of Dresden today too (or the survivors of the Blitz on london (40,000 killed), but I won't forget my Uncles (Ron and George) who carried the horrors of war for 40 plus yrs in a whisky bottle till their untimely deaths.



There are thousands of people that are still suffering from attacks by the Germans and Japanese today (Dresden and London as you say). If you share sympathy for them I would believe you to have a hypocritcal viewpoint. I have the same feeling of sympathy for them as I do for the Japanese sufferers. 

Let's please not forget that the war was 65 years ago.



> All war is insane ( for those of us that have been in the shyte - we know it - for those of us who have lost those close to us, we know it), but sometimes measures have to be taken to preserve ourselves and our freedom.



I'm sorry but I can not relate to being at war and losing a friend from war, maybe I will some day, maybe I wont. I do agree with you that measures have to be taken to preserve our freedoms. The A-Bombs were one of those measures.

(Sorry if my responses are a bit hard to read. Sometimes I have trouble articulating my points.)


To TCBF



> Over 130,000 killed in the firebombing of Tokyo, 90,000 and 70,000 respectively in the LITTLE BOY and FAT MAN drops, and STILL the west is expected to moan and drip for them.
> 
> Balls, I say.
> 
> ...



Where in any of those accounts do you see the Japanese people complaining?


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Feb 2007)

Clayton, your only 17, when you get some life experience and your balls drop, get back to us. Don't go playing some type of Anti-nuke advocate. We're all professional soldiers here.

1945 was only yesterday for some (it was not that long ago - I was born 14 yrs after the end of it), and if you favoured more allies killed to save the lives of the enemy locals who would have fought to the death (and they would have), well thats a disgrace.

Before you gob off, read the actual history of what happened, including what was going on behind the scenes, the reasons why, etc. Not relying on whatever source you are using.

It was total war in those days pal, everyone was the enemy, just like back in Canada, Boy scouts on scrap steel drives, and Moms growing veggies in their small back yard gardens, to have for themselves, so the soldiers could have more. gasoline, sugar and beef rationing, all contributing to the overall war effort, thus the enemy in our enemies eyes. Like the women who worked in ammo plants.

Bleeding hearts cost lives! Remember that.

The life of one of our own is worth more than theirs. Same as it is here, right now like today with all the bombing. If the locals are killed, well thats unfortunate (I don't really care anymore) but if that allows the snipers who were using a building (shared with noncombatants -- using them as shields--) to be silenced, and they stop killing more locals and Coalition soldiers, that ensures the job is done, MORE lives are saved, and we advance in securing things making it safe for ALL in the long.

Its called reality Clayton, sometimes reality has things we don't want to know or do, but thats life, life experience, and something much more alive and real than the contents of a text book or school studies.

There is NOTHING glorious about death, dying and killing. Whats more important is allowing us all to maintain the standard and way of life we all enjoy. The 1939-45 war and the sacrifices by over 45,000 Canadians killed has preserved our way of life, now a new generation of Canada's best are paying the price. One can't win a war if its fought trying to appease the left, politically correct and bleeding hearts.

Wes


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Feb 2007)

ClaytonD said:
			
		

> Wesley:
> 
> There are thousands of people that are still suffering from attacks by the Germans and Japanese today (Dresden and London as you say). If you share sympathy for them I would believe you to have a hypocritcal viewpoint. I have the same feeling of sympathy for them as I do for the Japanese sufferers.



Okay Clayton, here is one of your posts (Al Zahraa TV) and I quote you...

Quote "Okay just so you know that I know. I may be out of my lane by commenting on this topic. (Just tell me if I am and I'll refrain from posting again)

But as Bruce said it, we are at war with them, we are at war with their media. The fact of the matter is, Al Zahraa is a propoghanda machine, therefore it is a psychological weapon used (In many forms) against allied nations. Last I checked, we are at war on terrorism. Doesn't Al Zahraa support terrorism? A camera can be a more effective weapon than a gun in many cases. (IMO atleast.)

Raid it, bomb it, whatever, just get rid of it." Unquote.

Raid it bomb it, just get rid of it, eh. Sounds like you are being a bit cold yourself? Do you think that broadcast centre is going to be empty when its destroyed? Its most likely in a high density neighbourhood somewhere here in Baghdaddy. This morning it was still on (as it is every day), pumping shyte into young impressionable minds.

Very well said Clayton, but what if there was a school tour, or 'innocent' broadcasters, or the children of a broadcaster present, or cleaning staff, a spouse maybe. People standing at a bus stop, or a family driving too close in a car.

So who's calling who a hyrocrit?

War is hell pal! People die, always have, always will.

In my perfect world, it would be nice to share things with each other, such as food drink etc from other nations, and we all get along, but that will never happen. I wish it was like that, but its impossible.

I stand behind what I say, and what are you doing today?


Wes


----------



## ClaytonD (18 Feb 2007)

Wesley, I hope you didn't take offense to my comments, because they weren't meant in any way to offend you. I understand that everyone here is a professional soldier, and that I do not have a swathe of experience in life. I greatly respect you and everyone here for what you all do. 

I also understand what you mean by total war in WWII, and I know that was what it was like. 

But as you say, what if there was a school bus or innocent bystanders? I agree with doing what is neccesary for the ending and winning of a war. That does not mean however, that I won't feel bad for civilians that die or suffer. Call me naive, but I just think that civilian deaths (Even neccesary civilian deaths) are worth just a bit of our sympathy. 

By the way I was not calling you a hypocrite either.

And I know what you mean by 'What are you doing today?'   I understand that it's a lot easier for me to make an opinion over here sitting in my computer chair with a coke and a bag of chips.


----------



## TCBF (18 Feb 2007)

Well, it is at least nice to see someone young who knows where Hirosihma and Nagasaki are.  The study of History appears to be dying a slow death, and once it is gone our civilization will follow.

Without comparisons to the past, who can judge the present?

I seem to recall that in Geo. Orwell's 1984, it was a crime to teach history.


----------



## Yrys (18 Feb 2007)

[hijack



			
				TCBF said:
			
		

> I seem to recall that in Geo. Orwell's 1984, it was a crime to teach history.



Yep.



> the theme of a future fascist State where all "true" past history has been erased except for isolated fragments kept in secret, forbidden books.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

hijack]


----------



## Gunnerlove (23 Feb 2007)

I feel that the biggest problem with the two Nukes is that the Japanese have manged to hide their actions during the war behind the mushroom clouds. You want to talk about sympathy... we could have acted the same way as they did with the Chinese, and begun releasing biological weapons in Japanese cities. Never forget that they (as a nation) were a major threat, they started the war, they opened the unconventional toy box and they got kicked in the nuts when we beat them to the punch. 

You can piss and moan all you want about innocents but if the Japanese military could have put a Nuke into San Fran they would have done it in a heart beat without any sympathy for civilian casualties. Remember we only beat them to the punch, they were trying to build Nukes as fast as they could (like the Germans) to use on our soldiers and citizens. Or do you really think they were just looking for cancer treatments?


----------

