And could we throw in the fact that if you were for a sensible equality you should be demanding not bombing anybody and not demand that just different people should have been killed?
Okay kids, gather round because you seem to be under the impression that this website owes you an education AND that your education on this subject is sufficient. Neither of those is true, but I’m gonna help you out anyway!
First, let’s discuss the “reasons for dropping the bomb” that are commonly given, but also happen to be totally wrong:
- Japan wasn’t willing to surrender
Actually, Japan was totally down to surrender! America was very good at cracking Japanese codes, and had intercepted several diplomatic messages sent to other countries where Japan expressed the terms of their conditions, with the only major term being that the emperor remain in power (Which would have been necessary to ensure a peaceful transition to foreign government for the Japanese people). Harry Truman ignored these messages and prolonged the war until the completion of the atomic bomb so that it could be used. More on that later.
In his 1965 study, Atomic Diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam (pp. 107, 108), historian Gar Alperovitz writes:
Although Japanese peace feelers had been sent out as early as September 1944 (and [China’s] Chiang Kai-shek had been approached regarding surrender possibilities in December 1944), the real effort to end the war began in the spring of 1945. This effort stressed the role of the Soviet Union …
In mid-April  the [US] Joint Intelligence Committee reported that Japanese leaders were looking for a way to modify the surrender terms to end the war. The State Department was convinced the Emperor was actively seeking a way to stop the fighting.
- It would have saved more lives than it took
Nah. Japan was actually on it’s last legs, and wouldn’t have been able to fight much longer at all, thanks to effective embargoes, blockades, and traditional bombing. They had all but run out of fuel, ammunition, and other war supplies.
Admiral William Leahy – the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and who was at the center of all major American military decisions in World War II – wrote (pg. 441):
It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
- Destroying two major military targets helped us out
LOL Nagasaki and Hiroshima weren’t selected because they were military targets (Because they weren’t military targets at all!). They were selected because they were large cities where the bombs would have the most devastating affect.
President Truman steadfastly defended his use of the atomic bomb, claiming that it “saved millions of lives” by bringing the war to a quick end. Justifying his decision, he went so far as to declare: “The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians.”
This was a preposterous statement. In fact, almost all of the victims were civilians, and the United States Strategic Bombing Survey (issued in 1946) stated in its official report: “Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen as targets because of their concentration of activities and population.”
General George Marshall agreed:
Contemporary documents show that Marshall felt “these weapons might first be used against straight military objectives such as a large naval installation and then if no complete result was derived from the effect of that, he thought we ought to designate a number of large manufacturing areas from which the people would be warned to leave–telling the Japanese that we intend to destroy such centers….”
As the document concerning Marshall’s views suggests, the question of whether the use of the atomic bomb was justified turns … on whether the bombs had to be used against a largely civilian target rather than a strictly military target—which, in fact, was the explicit choice since although there were Japanese troops in the cities, neither Hiroshima nor Nagasaki was deemed militarily vital by U.S. planners. (This is one of the reasons neither had been heavily bombed up to this point in the war.) Moreover, targeting [at Hiroshima and Nagasaki] was aimed explicitly on non-military facilities surrounded by workers’ homes.
Now, let’s discuss the the actual reasons for dropping the bomb:
- To send a message to the Soviet Union
- That’s it
- It was strictly politicalHistory.com notes:
By August 1945, relations between the Soviet Union and the United States had deteriorated badly. The Potsdam Conference between U.S. President Harry S. Truman, Russian leader Joseph Stalin, and Winston Churchill (before being replaced by Clement Attlee) ended just four days before the bombing of Hiroshima. The meeting was marked by recriminations and suspicion between the Americans and Soviets. Russian armies were occupying most of Eastern Europe. Truman and many of his advisers hoped that the U.S. atomic monopoly might offer diplomatic leverage with the Soviets. In this fashion, the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan can be seen as the first shot of the Cold War.
New Scientist reportedin 2005:
The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 wasmeant to kick-start the Cold Warrather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory.
Causing a fission reaction in several kilograms of uranium and plutonium and killing over 200,000 people 60 years ago wasdone more to impress the Soviet Union than to cow Japan, they say. And the US President who took the decision, Harry Truman, was culpable, they add.
New studies of the US, Japanese and Soviet diplomatic archives suggest that Truman’s main motive was to limit Soviet expansion in Asia, Kuznick claims. Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union began an invasion a few days after the Hiroshima bombing, not because of the atomic bombs themselves, he says.
According to an account by Walter Brown, assistant to then-US secretary of state James Byrnes, Truman agreed at a meeting three days before the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima that Japan was “looking for peace”. Truman was told by his army generals, Douglas Macarthur and Dwight Eisenhower, and his naval chief of staff, William Leahy, that there was no military need to use the bomb.
“Impressing Russia was more important than ending the war in Japan,” says Selden.
So let’s recap:
Harry Truman purposely killed hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians to make a political statement.
The US detonated the world’s first weapon of mass destruction simply to send a message to the Soviet Union and stop Red expansion into Asia.
I’m not saying the fact that one group of people (Who happened to be Asian) was viewed as disposable just to put on a show for another group of people (Who happened to also be white) is an act of racism.
I’m also not saying that we should examine the fact that no German or Italian families living in the US were put into containment camps out of fear of spies, but pretty much all Asian-Americans were (Because Asia is a country, obviously).
I AM saying that maybe you should consider that your history lessons in school were taught from books written by old white men, and they might read a little differently if they weren’t.
Oh, and I’ll leave on this little note from President Truman’s youth. Again, I’m not saying he’s racist or anything, but…
In Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Bomb, Japanese American historian Ronald Takaki writes about the man who made the final decision to destroy two Japanese cities, President Harry Truman. This was the same man who, when he was younger, wrote the following in a letter to his future wife, Bess:
I think one man is as good as another, so long as he’s honest and decent and not a nigger or a Chinaman. My uncle Will says that the Lord made a white man of dust, a n*gger from mud, then threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion that negroes ought to be in Africa, yellow men in Asia, and white men in Europe and America.
Hey look, sources where you can go and educate yourself about all of this, and fact check me while you’re at it!
deleting most of the dumb white bullshit for the historical mic drops
Agent Coulson is down
#gif warning #avengers #okay but why does nOBODY EVER TALK ABOUT THE GENERATION GAP #come on guys this is the MOST INTERESTING THING #look if steve had lived through the war he would have been part of that post-wwii generation #imagine steve in the 60S GUYS #you think he would have put up with those young folks disrespecting those soldiers and his country by protesting the war? HECK NO #remember that scene at the beginning of ca:tfa where he tells off that guy in the movie theater? THAT WOULD BE STEVE IN THE 60S #and tony is in his 40s!! tony is gen x! tony is NOT EVEN A BOOMER #tony is TOO YOUNG TO BE A BABY BOOMER tony is YOUNGER THAN OUR PARENTS #tony doesn’t know what it’s like to live in a country that’s in total war! tony doesn’t know what it’s like for loyalty to your country t… #to be something that almost everyone has! #look guys we make fun of america ALL THE TIME we mock patriotism and nationalism and the usa CON STANT LY #when steve hears the word soldier he equates it with the word hero #and when tony hears the word soldier he hears an insult. #because steve’s war is wwii #and tony’s wars are vietnam and iraq and afghanistan and tony knows that when america fights wars it is not necessarily the good guy! #and steve cannot even BEGIN to comprehend that #steve barely knows what WATERGATE is for god’s sake steve probably still trusts the government #steve doesn’t know about jfk conspiracy theories! steve doesn’t know about the patriot act #(and let me remind you that in 616 canon steve actually fought a war to bring down the expy!patriot act) #god america has grown up SO MUCH since steve’s day #americans are sarcastic and cynical and plugged into the media 24/7 #americans depricate themselves constantly americans hate america more than anybody else does #pearl harbor turned america into a unified force for change in the world; 9/11 turned america into something paranoid and bitter #steve no longer represents america #he represents what america wishes it had ever been #and tony? tony understands the usa a whole lot better than steve does and he knows it and steve never will #and tony understands how war can destroy and steve only understands how it can save #holy christ why would you write porn when you could write about that
Oh my god I
I hate this reading of World War II so
I hate this reading of Steve Rogers so much
Okay I just
Steve Rogers’ story, as much now as it was in 1941, is very much the myth of the United States’ foreign policy identity leading up to, and especially following, the attack on Pearl Harbor. Steve Rogers doesn’t want to kill anyone. Steve Rogers just doesn’t like bullies. Steve Rogers, big strong handsome blond man with a shield, wants to protect the little guy because he knows what it is to be the little guy. Because a weak man knows the value of strength, and knows compassion. It is, therefore, critical to our understanding of Steve Rogers, for the purposes of the cinematic universe, that he should be encased in ice somewhere around 1943 or early 1944, before the U.S. started launching its aerial attacks on the Japanese civilian population. Back when the American strategy in the Pacific was still largely one of island hopping—of pushing the bad guy out of its ill-begotten territories. Along those lines, it is equally important that Steve Rogers’ war is almost exclusively the war in Europe—leaving aside the history of the racialized violence that characterized the war in the Pacific, the European war is one of physically liberating civilians, of pushing the invaders out of people’s homes. Because the U.S., like its captain, does not like bullies.
Steve Rogers was not complicit in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki because on multiple levels, he was not there.
But he would have hated it.
Steve Rogers didn’t go all in for war because his country asked it of him. In fact, until he was chosen to be Captain America, Steve Rogers actively chose to break laws in his attempts to enlist when the army told him that he couldn’t. Steve Rogers went all in for war because it was ideologically sold to him in terms that made sense and that mattered. Because the U.S. was still able to make the argument that it was the country that he wanted it to be. And to say that Steve doesn’t know about Watergate and about Vietnam when all through the Avengers he keeps talking about his lost bearings—(“they didn’t say what we lost”/”I hope I’m the right guy for the job). No, he knows. Whether SHIELD told him up front or he had to ask about it or he went out and sat in the back of a city college classroom to listen to someone about Tony’s age tell him about the sacrifices of his generation that were nothing, from this distance, but the groundwork of the United States becoming the country he never wanted it to be—with the help, of course, of weapons manufacturers like Stark Industries (the weapon you only have to fire once—that’s how America does it.)
of course he knows.
Steve Rogers would have hated the war in Korea. Would have hated the war in Vietnam would have hated the war(s) in Iraq and Afghanistan. Would have wondered why the U.S. didn’t do more earlier to interfere in Bosnia, would have screamed until he couldn’t breathe over its lack of action in Rwanda.
And Steve Rogers isn’t a fool. Steve Rogers knows how public opinion is generated by a man in leggings made out of rationed wool saying empty words in order to sell an identity to a nation in order to convince it to fund a war against unseen others overseas. Saying that America has “grown up” since “Steve’s war” is to ignore the fact that his participation in this machine was always constrained by his own set of ideological terms and conditions—and to ignore the direct lineage that led us from one war into another. And then another. And then another.
Because at the end of the day, America hasn’t grown up. And that’s the point. The point is that Steve Rogers continues to be the dominant myth of our foreign policy identity. Steve Rogers isn’t what we wish we ever were, Steve Rogers is what we think we still are. What we thought we were going into Vietnam in 1954—and what we were convinced we still should have been slinking out of it in 1975. And the basic point, here, for better or worse, is that Steve Rogers isn’t happy with the things that led us from point a to point b. It’s not about the defeat, to him. It’s about the abuse of power, the abuse of strength.
The material point is that Steve Rogers is disappointed.
Steve Rogers is disappointed in part because even the war he was fighting wasn’t the war that he thought it was. And to deny him the reasoning capacity to understand that is basically to reduce him to the same dancing monkey in tights that he was at the start. Steve Rogers gets it, guys. The point is not that he accepts the American mythology uncritically or all the way. The point is that he has been made into the American mythology and that, knowing how it has failed, he now wants to make it right. Because the purpose-driven Captain Rogers has to do something. And where America will not, he still wants to make it right.
Aight so, today I sort of stumbled upon this website. So basically the point of the website is to order milk and have a rich, white woman gargle it, spit it in a jar, then have it shipped to you. The website claims that the gargling of your milk by a white woman somehow “purifies” it. Very scintillating stuff. Above are some of my favorite shots from the site.
put me down for 20 gallons
Is this their new method for spreading smallpox
ANYONE WHO BUYS THIS MESS WILL BRING IT ON THEMSELVES
African Americans and Latinos are stereotyped as “lazy” when they are probably the two that are known for working menial and strenuous jobs due to classism and institutional racism combined. A lot of jobs the average African American can receive without a college education are custodian and…