The infamous anniversary of US' dropping the A-Bomb

The anniversary of the August 6, 1945 bombing of Hiroshima. One might think that by now historians would agree on all the fundamental issues. The reality, however, is just the opposite: All the major issues involved in the decision are still very much a matter of dispute among experts. An obvious question is why this should be so after so many years. Did the atomic bomb, in fact, cause Japan to surrender? Most Americans think the answer is self-evident. However, many historical studies--including new publications by two highly regarded scholars--challenge the conventional understanding. In a recently released Harvard University Press volume drawing upon the latest Japanese sources, for instance, Professor Tsuyohsi Hasegawa concludes that the traditional "myth cannot be supported by historical facts." By far the most important factor forcing the decision, his research indicates, was the Soviet declaration of war against Japan on August 8, 1945, just after the Hiroshima bombing. Similarly, Professor Herbert Bix--whose biography of Hirohito won the 2000 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction--also writes in a recent article that "the Soviet factor carried greater weight in the eyes of the emperor and most military leaders." Many Japanese historians have long judged the Soviet declaration of war to have been the straw that broke the camels back--mainly because the Japanese military feared the Red Army more than the loss of another city by aerial bombardment. (They had already shown themselves willing to sacrifice many, many cities to conventional bombing!) An intimately related question is whether the bomb was in any event still necessary to force a surrender before an invasion. Again, most Americans believe the answer obvious--as, of course, do many historians. However, a very substantial number also disagree with this view. One of the most respected, Stanford University Professor Barton Bernstein, judges that all things considered it seems "quite probable--indeed, far more likely than not--that Japan would have surrendered before November" (when the first landing in Japan was scheduled.) Many years ago Harvard historian Ernest R. May also concluded that the surrender decision probably resulted from the Russian attack, and that "it could not in any event been long in coming." In his new book Hasegawa goes further: "There were alternatives to the use of the bomb, alternatives that the Truman Administration for reasons of its own declined to pursue." READ MORE HERE: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0803-26.htm

» View the original video «

YouTube | August 9, 2007

Tags:. .considered. .regarded. .htm. .volume. .themselves