Nagasaki Was The Worst

Hear me out

Caption* at the end of this post

U.S. bombing of the city of Nagasaki on August 9, just a few days after they had launched the world's first nuclear attack with a different kind of atomic bomb, was an even worse crime than bombing Hiroshima.

Hear me out.

These war crimes are always sold to the U.S. public as having been "necessary" to end WWII without an invasion of the Japanese mainland that was sure to cost the lives of many in the U.S. military. But the Japanese were already negotiating to surrender, and knew the war was lost for them. Some have speculated the U.S. went ahead anyway in order to both test the weapons, and intimidate their WWII ally the U.S.S.R. in a spectacular kick-off to what would become the Cold War.

U.S. citizens knew that some kind of catastrophic weapon had been deployed, and that the Japanese emperor soon surrendered, but it wasn't until John Hersey's long piece in the New Yorker in August, 1946 that many learned the gruesome details. Even then, the protracted suffering from radiation poisoning of the surviving hibakusha (a term that had to be coined) was largely unknown.

My own grandfather, drafted into WWII, was among the first U.S. troops to enter Nagasaki after the bomb. Despite pestering by his daughter (my mother), he would never talk about it. Thus the label, the "Silent Generation."

We of the baby boom generation have lived under the threat of nuclear annihilation our entire lives. We've watched in horror as nuclear weapons and energy have proliferated, despite the  Hiroshima-Nagasaki Protocol and many other efforts to have humans swear off nuclear before it is too late for everybody. 

When young people find out about the disaster visited on Hiroshima, they ask an essential question: Why did the U.S. drop an atomic bomb on the people of Hiroshima? I think this propaganda film made by the Army about Okinawa is a succinct explanation of the overall strategy, though it leaves out the build-up to Pearl Harbor engendered by blocking oil shipments to rapacious Imperial Japan.

Here's my argument for why Nagasaki was worse.

What U.S. citizens “know” about Hiroshima 広島市

Bombing it saved untold numbers of U.S. lives by making a ground invasion of Japan unnecessary

What U.S. citizens “know” about Nagasaki 長崎市

The Japanese still didn’t surrender after Hiroshima, so we had to show them we weren’t kidding.

What I “know” about these events

Japan was already negotiating for surrender, and had long since lost the war; their economy was so crushed that they were building kamikaze planes without landing gear in order to save yen; President Truman said: we have spent so much money building these weapons, we have to use them.

We were in too much of a rush to allow three days for Japan to react to Hiroshima with unconditional surrender; we were testing a completely different type of nuclear weapon in Nagasaki; we were making an example of Japan so the Russians i.e. Soviets, the Chinese, and anybody else would think twice before challenging our power to destroy. 

In the 21st century the U.S. has been relentlessly hammering away at Japan's strong post-WWII stance on militarism. Article 9 of their constitution forbids any forces other than self-defense forces. But there are lots of ways to weasel around laws growing dusty on shelves.

Maybe you missed the news that Japan is now a big partner with NATO. Wait, you say, isn't that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization? Prime Minister Kishida Fumio can set you straight. According to Japan's news outlet NHK, "Kishida said the security environments of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific regions are now inseparable."

Nagasaki has been in the news this week because Mayor Suzuki Shiro refused to invite Israel's ambassador to the commemoration ceremony. It appears that he was concerned that pro-Palestine protests -- which have been vigorous in Japan -- might disrupt the ceremony if Israel was represented there. In response to his decision, ambassadors from the UK, France, Australia, and the U.S. (the odious Rahm Emmanuel) announced they would boycott the ceremony.

Because why would the U.S. want to appear contrite and apologetic about one historical act of mass murder when they are actively engaging in genocide with Israel in Gaza?

NHK reported:

Suzuki said August 9 is the most important day of the year for the city of Nagasaki. He said the average age of the atomic bomb survivors is over 85 and some of them will be attending the ceremony amid the severe heat.

He added, "After comprehensively considering the matter, including the risk that an unexpected situation may arise, I made the decision to refrain from inviting the Israeli ambassador."

Good on him. The Japanese Imperial Army committed many crimes against humanity which survivors and descendants in China, Korea, the Philippines, and elsewhere have not forgotten.  Nonetheless, I offer deep apologies to the cities of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. May their people never again be duped into war for empire.

*"My classmates were screaming. Burned on their faces, arms, feet, legs, and backs. Trapped under heavy gates and houses, they screamed for help. Some were crying for help from the river, holding onto the stone embankment against the pull of the rising tide." 

- Kimura Hideo, aged 12 at the time of the blast

Credit: Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, Peace Database