If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Dayton Air Show wanted to "re-enact" Hiroshima, some people had a problem with that   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 38
    More: Dumbass, Dayton Air Show, Blast!, Hiroshima, air shows, film premiere  
•       •       •

5295 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Apr 2013 at 12:23 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-18 01:43:16 PM
4 votes:

HortusMatris: JonnyBGoode: HortusMatris: "Air show officials said the re-enactment was meant to highlight a historic event that helped end the war and save lives that would have been lost if the war had been prolonged."

Oh, I see.  Killing hundreds of thousands of civilians was helpful.  Well that makes it okay then.

It was more like tens of thousands (unless you add both attacks). But the government experts estimated that an invasion of Japan would cost 200,000 to 500,000 more American lives and 3 to 5 million more Japanese lives, including civilians. So in the long run, and in a really sad way, yes, it was helpful. For both sides.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.


Indeed, which is probably why we didn't enter WWII voluntarily. Google 'Pearl Harbor'.
2013-04-18 01:18:10 PM
3 votes:

HortusMatris: "Air show officials said the re-enactment was meant to highlight a historic event that helped end the war and save lives that would have been lost if the war had been prolonged."

Oh, I see.  Killing hundreds of thousands of civilians was helpful.  Well that makes it okay then.


It was more like tens of thousands (unless you add both attacks). But the government experts estimated that an invasion of Japan would cost 200,000 to 500,000 more American lives and 3 to 5 million more Japanese lives, including civilians. So in the long run, and in a really sad way, yes, it was helpful. For both sides.
2013-04-18 01:14:48 PM
3 votes:
A University of Dayton associate professor who was born in a U.S. wartime detention camp for Japanese-Americans said besides the "re-enactment" being offensive, the show's contention that the bomb that killed so many Japanese ended up saving more lives is disputable - some historians say Japan would have surrendered without the atomic bomb attacks.

Japanese historians, no doubt. After all, in their own eyes, the Japanese were an advanced, peace-loving nation who brought, technology, peace, and civilization to the poor backwards countries they occupied. Korean comfort women were all volunteer prostitutes, the rape on Nanking is a lie, they had the upmost respect for and took very good care of Allied POWs. The attacks on Honk Kong, Singapore, and Pearl Harbor were justified responses to Western aggression. They just can't understand why the ignorant, ungrateful Chinese and Koreans loathe them to this day.

As for Japan surrendering without the A-bomb being dropped, I'm not an historian, but I do have an opinion: considering the very large death toll in taking Okinawa where civilians committed suicide en masse and soldiers fought until they died, rather than surrender. Considering also that the Japanese refused to surrender even after Hiroshima received the first Atomic bomb, but that it, in fact, two A-bombs before they did, I very much doubt any revisionist historian's claims that lives were not saved by the A-bombs because Japan would have surrendered even without them.

I would very much like to know who these historians are and what they base their revisionist point of view on.

//we can never know what historical events would have happened had the past unfolded differently.
2013-04-18 01:31:48 PM
2 votes:

trotsky: The war would have been over by October at the latest. Between the blockade of Japan by the US Navy and the Bombings, they really didn't have much time. Besides, various factions wanted to surrender and not surrender at various times.

The bombs were meant to show the world America's new power.


That's a very Western point of view. It is what we would expect a Western country with Western values on the worth of individual lives to do. In what could be glimpsed of the Japanese psyche before and during WWII, there is no reason to believe that the government and people of Japan would have surrendered before hundreds of thousands, if not millions, had either committed suicide or starved to death.  In that respect, it is probably true that the A-bombs and hastened the end of the war and saved many more lives than they took.

Of course, all of this is speculation. We have no accurate way of knowing what would have happened until a real Pr. Farnsworth invents an actual "what if" machine.
2013-04-18 01:13:38 PM
2 votes:

HortusMatris: "Air show officials said the re-enactment was meant to highlight a historic event that helped end the war and save lives that would have been lost if the war had been prolonged."

Oh, I see.  Killing hundreds of thousands of civilians was helpful.  Well that makes it okay then.


Large numbers of deaths were inevitable, whether by nuke or regular bombs or an invasion. Just look at the battles fought up to that point as examples and extrapolate what would have been required to pacify the home islands. Hell, Japanese casualties on iwo jima were something like 99% because they preferred suicide to surrender. On Okinawa (iirc), the soldiers marched their civilians off cliffs first.

Extrapolate that behavior to the whole country; its chilling.
2013-04-18 12:37:12 PM
2 votes:

Galloping Galoshes: We've done it before.  See "Japanese Internment Camps."


You're not that stupid. Japanese internment was shameful and horrific, but they were not slave labor and extermination camps. There was no systematic and mass genocide of the Nisei and their relatives in the United States.

There is no comparison there.
2013-04-18 12:35:38 PM
2 votes:
Aside from the nuke itself it would be a very boring exercise. A single plane and a few observers at a very high altitude. You wouldn't see anything from the ground.
2013-04-18 10:54:18 AM
2 votes:
If anything that sounds really, really boring.

Wouldn't it just be a lone B-52 and two B-29s flying overhead?
2013-04-18 06:38:33 PM
1 votes:

Tsar_Bomba1: If memory served the original first target was Tokyo... but due to an American ambassador who had spent some time there he got them to change it due to the cultural significance of the city.


Kyoto, not Tokyo. We'd already destroyed Tokyo with firebombing anyway.
2013-04-18 06:09:39 PM
1 votes:
2.bp.blogspot.com

upload.wikimedia.org

After reading these books (the first is particularly good) I'm neither proud nor ashamed we dropped the bombs, but I'm glad we did and it ended the war.
2013-04-18 05:26:18 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: fat boy: LeroyBourne: We had a Japanese foreign exchange student during my hs years. One day, in our ethics class the WW2 subject came up and she was visibly very angry over it. She kept saying "YOU" guys didn't have to drop 2 bombs, and she kept say "YOU guys". Everyone in the class was very supportive that people in her family were effected by it, but no one in this class had anything to do with dropping those bombs. Hell, my uncle was at pearl harbor when the shiat went down. I guess I should have thrown that in her face.

IIRC, they were given the chance to surrender after the first.

Yes, we gave them many chances to surrender, but Nagasaki would've also been hit pretty much no matter what. Hiroshima was to show the unbelievable superweapon we created that could literally destroy an entire city with one drop. Nagasaki was to show that it wasn't just a one-time weapon and that we did have more and were not willing to accept anything but unconditional surrender.


Ex wife is Japanese.  Her point of of view (and I guess what they are taught in their version of history class) was that Japan was only days away from surrendering when we dropped the 1st bomb on them and we knew it. And then we didn't accept their surrender until after the second bomb "because we wanted to test the weapon"

It was a sore subject for her because of all the innocent civilians we killed. I brought up the fact that Japan killed an occasional innocent Korean and Chinese civilian and she got all pissy. Apparenty they don't talk about Nanking there.

Also went and saw Pearl Harbor with her. After it was done, I asked her what she thought. "It was like a comedy" she says. WTF, I ask her.
She says because it wasn't realistic. She had a problem with the Japanese generals planning their attack in a garden (they wouldn't have a secret meeting outside!) and that a shot of Tokyo had a couple of women in kimonos. (Those are party dresses! They wouldn't  wear those in a war!) I tried to explain people still had parties, war or not, but she wasn't having it. Out of everything in the movie, that is what she picked to have a problem with.

She also liked to biatch about how "America tries to be the world police". I said "Well of course. Someone has to do it. Might as well be us. You rather it be Germany or China?
2013-04-18 04:05:55 PM
1 votes:
fat boy:
I spend some time in the Philippines, had some long conversations with those who were around during the Japanese occupation, they still have nothing positive to say about the Japanese. farking barbarians

And I have relatives who lived through the occupation in the Philippines and a grandfather who fought against the Japanese (also in the PI).  And they all say the Japanese rule was dreadful.  Although they all forced to speak a little bit of Japanese... so, I guess there's that.

I've never heard anyone say anything nice about being under Japanese rule (unless they were collaborators... and if they were, they're not saying much about that period).  I have no idea why any folks (Filipinos or any other Asians) would say otherwise.
2013-04-18 02:57:49 PM
1 votes:

REO-Weedwagon: What's most surprising is how this thread's military-fellators have yet to somehow use the word "godspeed".


IIRC, that term was used to wish John Glenn 'good luck' on America's first manned orbital launch. I'm not sure how it would apply in this context.
2013-04-18 02:49:40 PM
1 votes:

LeroyBourne: We had a Japanese foreign exchange student during my hs years. One day, in our ethics class the WW2 subject came up and she was visibly very angry over it. She kept saying "YOU" guys didn't have to drop 2 bombs, and she kept say "YOU guys". Everyone in the class was very supportive that people in her family were effected by it, but no one in this class had anything to do with dropping those bombs. Hell, my uncle was at pearl harbor when the shiat went down. I guess I should have thrown that in her face.


I was living in Tokyo when 9/11 happened and you can bet your bottom dollar there was gloating. They won't forget Hiroshima any time soon.
2013-04-18 02:32:45 PM
1 votes:

stevarooni: FTFA: A University of Dayton associate professor who was born in a U.S. wartime detention camp for Japanese-Americans said besides the "re-enactment" being offensive, the show's contention that the bomb that killed so many Japanese ended up saving more lives is disputable - some historians say Japan would have surrendered without the atomic bomb attacks.

But would have been "total surrender"?  And compared to the firebombing of Tokyo, Nagasaki and Hiroshima had relatively few casualties.


This theory seems to be gaining steam over the past few years. It's sloppy and boils down to historic revisionism, no better than those who try to change the narrative of the Civil War.
2013-04-18 02:22:15 PM
1 votes:
My grandfather was on a 60 day furlough back home from Eurpoe, with orders to the Pacific theater to ready for the invasion, and his brother, a Marine war dog handler, was still dealing with snipers on Okinawa when the atomic bombs went off and ended the war.  They both wound up serving occupation duty, my grandfather in Japan and his brother in China.  To the end of their lives, they both truly believed that if it hadn't been for those bombs, they would have had to invade mainland Japan.

Also, I think one of Truman's advisers pointed out that if, after spending 2 billion dollars and years of research, we didn't drop our superbomb, and even a few thousand more airmen and sailors died before the surrender, due to the bombing campaign and Kamikaze attacks on our ships, if the American public and Congress found out about it, he would be impeached, while the public called for his head with torches and pitchforks.
2013-04-18 02:12:41 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: HortusMatris: JonnyBGoode: HortusMatris: "Air show officials said the re-enactment was meant to highlight a historic event that helped end the war and save lives that would have been lost if the war had been prolonged."

Oh, I see.  Killing hundreds of thousands of civilians was helpful.  Well that makes it okay then.

It was more like tens of thousands (unless you add both attacks). But the government experts estimated that an invasion of Japan would cost 200,000 to 500,000 more American lives and 3 to 5 million more Japanese lives, including civilians. So in the long run, and in a really sad way, yes, it was helpful. For both sides.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

"No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be"

I can quote Isaac Asimov too!


And let's not presume to know what psychohistory (were it a real science) would have predicted to be the ripple effects of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
2013-04-18 01:47:52 PM
1 votes:

HortusMatris: JonnyBGoode: HortusMatris: "Air show officials said the re-enactment was meant to highlight a historic event that helped end the war and save lives that would have been lost if the war had been prolonged."

Oh, I see.  Killing hundreds of thousands of civilians was helpful.  Well that makes it okay then.

It was more like tens of thousands (unless you add both attacks). But the government experts estimated that an invasion of Japan would cost 200,000 to 500,000 more American lives and 3 to 5 million more Japanese lives, including civilians. So in the long run, and in a really sad way, yes, it was helpful. For both sides.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.


"No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be"

I can quote Isaac Asimov too!
2013-04-18 01:40:06 PM
1 votes:

namegoeshere: Tsar_Bomba1: scottydoesntknow: If anything that sounds really, really boring.

Wouldn't it just be a lone B-52 and two B-29s flying overhead?

Nope.  Just the Enola Gay.  Other 2 camera planes got separated/lost... that's why the only footage we have is a quick clip that they shot out of the EG shaky-cam style.

One of my former bosses had a brother who flew on the Nagasaki bombing.  Said when it came time they were told to put on their goggles and cover their eyes and look away.  Right after detonation they all took off their goggles.  He looked down and could see his bones glowing through his boot.

I always thought he was pulling my leg on that, but I ran into an identical account from one of the camera men who worked on the Nevada tests.

Did he die of cancer?


No.  Some kids drove up along side him and fired a shotgun into his face.  He lived for quite a few years afterwards, but I believe complications from that caught up with him.

From what little research I've done as to whether or not we should have dropped the bombs...

The topography of Japan made it that there was only one area where we could do a ground invasion.  We knew it and the Japanese knew it. One way in and one way out.  Predictions were over a million US casualties in just the first year of the land invasion.  The Emperor had already instructed the populace to fight to the last man, woman, and child.  And they were training for it. If memory served the original first target was Tokyo... but due to an American ambassador who had spent some time there he got them to change it due to the cultural significance of the city.

If you're interested in more try Googling "Operation Downfall".
2013-04-18 01:30:33 PM
1 votes:

darth_badger: darth_badger: [media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com image 550x821]

Boston shame.

Wrong thread ... whoops.


Meh, that sign is a good metaphor for most fark threads.
2013-04-18 01:22:23 PM
1 votes:

capt.hollister: A University of Dayton associate professor who was born in a U.S. wartime detention camp for Japanese-Americans said besides the "re-enactment" being offensive, the show's contention that the bomb that killed so many Japanese ended up saving more lives is disputable - some historians say Japan would have surrendered without the atomic bomb attacks.

Japanese historians, no doubt. After all, in their own eyes, the Japanese were an advanced, peace-loving nation who brought, technology, peace, and civilization to the poor backwards countries they occupied. Korean comfort women were all volunteer prostitutes, the rape on Nanking is a lie, they had the upmost respect for and took very good care of Allied POWs. The attacks on Honk Kong, Singapore, and Pearl Harbor were justified responses to Western aggression. They just can't understand why the ignorant, ungrateful Chinese and Koreans loathe them to this day.

As for Japan surrendering without the A-bomb being dropped, I'm not an historian, but I do have an opinion: considering the very large death toll in taking Okinawa where civilians committed suicide en masse and soldiers fought until they died, rather than surrender. Considering also that the Japanese refused to surrender even after Hiroshima received the first Atomic bomb, but that it, in fact, two A-bombs before they did, I very much doubt any revisionist historian's claims that lives were not saved by the A-bombs because Japan would have surrendered even without them.

I would very much like to know who these historians are and what they base their revisionist point of view on.

//we can never know what historical events would have happened had the past unfolded differently.


I spend some time in the Philippines, had some long conversations with those who were around during the Japanese occupation, they still have nothing positive to say about the Japanese. farking barbarians
2013-04-18 01:05:39 PM
1 votes:
CSB: I went to an air show in Ida Grove, Iowa in 1991; they re-enacted the taking of Iwo Jima and the raising of the flag on Mt. Suribachi. Lots of Zeroes and Betties and Corsairs flying overhead, small arms fire, squibs going off. At the end of the show they detonated something that made a big bang and a credible-looking mushroom cloud, and the MC gave a short speech about how nuclear bombs ended the war but at a grave human cost. I'd say it was a pretty classy way to deal with a multifaceted issue.
2013-04-18 01:04:40 PM
1 votes:

fat boy: LeroyBourne: We had a Japanese foreign exchange student during my hs years. One day, in our ethics class the WW2 subject came up and she was visibly very angry over it. She kept saying "YOU" guys didn't have to drop 2 bombs, and she kept say "YOU guys". Everyone in the class was very supportive that people in her family were effected by it, but no one in this class had anything to do with dropping those bombs. Hell, my uncle was at pearl harbor when the shiat went down. I guess I should have thrown that in her face.

IIRC, they were given the chance to surrender after the first.


They were given many opportunities, even before Hiroshima - when loss was already inevitable.
2013-04-18 01:02:41 PM
1 votes:

OldManDownDRoad: dv-ous:  What do you think of civil war reenactors?

Mostly, they are too fat and have all their teeth - two things not commonplace among Civil War regiments.

/27th NC


The ones around here (mostly the ones I've met at Bentonville and Fort Branch) are all right, but there are a few that enjoy glorifying the war as some sort of adventure, at the expense of the important history lessons (namely the 700,000+ casualties, the severe impact of the war on communities where over half of the men between ages 12 and 50 were dead, etc.). You also run into some that are members of the SCV; those are the ones that scare me, as they're neo-Confederates that think honoring their heritage is the first step towards liberating their state from the Union.
2013-04-18 01:02:25 PM
1 votes:

LeroyBourne: We had a Japanese foreign exchange student during my hs years. One day, in our ethics class the WW2 subject came up and she was visibly very angry over it. She kept saying "YOU" guys didn't have to drop 2 bombs, and she kept say "YOU guys". Everyone in the class was very supportive that people in her family were effected by it, but no one in this class had anything to do with dropping those bombs. Hell, my uncle was at pearl harbor when the shiat went down. I guess I should have thrown that in her face.


IIRC, they were given the chance to surrender after the first.
2013-04-18 12:46:04 PM
1 votes:
Ok, firstly, why does it start with the dateline "CINCINNATI -" when the Dayton International Airport is almost 75 miles NORTH of Cinci?

Not sure I'll be able to make it up there this year for the air show... WPAFB is close by so there is always a nice turn out of military aircraft...
2013-04-18 12:42:18 PM
1 votes:
To those of you advocating the nuking of Dayton, fark off. As much as I'd like to see large swaths of Ohio wiped off the map, the USAF Museum is too valuable to risk in any sort of operation.

/last time I was there I spent three whole days in the museum - before the addition of Hangar 3
2013-04-18 12:42:09 PM
1 votes:

bopis: I_Am_Weasel: Damn the PC brigade.

I suppose they're going to protest re-enactments of shower time at Auschwitz too.

Because the US is just as bad as Nazi Germany.


The re-enactment of the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians has no place any more so then re-enacting what happened to Jewish civilians in Germany.
2013-04-18 12:42:04 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: If anything that sounds really, really boring.

Wouldn't it just be a lone B-52 and two B-29s flying overhead?


Nope.  Just the Enola Gay.  Other 2 camera planes got separated/lost... that's why the only footage we have is a quick clip that they shot out of the EG shaky-cam style.

One of my former bosses had a brother who flew on the Nagasaki bombing.  Said when it came time they were told to put on their goggles and cover their eyes and look away.  Right after detonation they all took off their goggles.  He looked down and could see his bones glowing through his boot.

I always thought he was pulling my leg on that, but I ran into an identical account from one of the camera men who worked on the Nevada tests.
2013-04-18 12:36:03 PM
1 votes:

id10ts: I saw a "Tora Tora Tora" performance at a local show.  It was amazing.
Still remember the old-timer in a wheelchair near me.
They did a recitation over the PA, the old guy was gripping his armrests in anger and crying.
Damned near made me cry.

I'm not okay with the Hiroshima thing though.
Unless it's done over Pyongyang as said earlier.


I've been going to the Dayton Air Show every year for darn near 25 years.  They always do the "Tora Tora Tora" performance, and it is the highlight of the show.

/too soon?
//csb
2013-04-18 12:35:54 PM
1 votes:

hardinparamedic: Depending on who you ask (idiots), we're only one step away from opening the concentration camps.


We've done it before.  See "Japanese Internment Camps."
2013-04-18 12:34:03 PM
1 votes:

I_Am_Weasel: Damn the PC brigade.

I suppose they're going to protest re-enactments of shower time at Auschwitz too.


Well, if you ask the Japanese, they were heroes who never did anything wrong during WWII, and were victims of the evil Allied Powers.

No, this is not sarcasm. This is actually a thing in Japan, and it's actually a thing today. Japanese Textbooks in school paint the Rape of Nanking as a False Flag or Chinese Propaganda. Atrocities like the Bataan Death March and the Burma Railroad aren't even mentioned. Unit 731 is denied.

The Japanese shame is that they lost WWII, not that they committed inhuman atrocities.

bopis: Because the US is just as bad as Nazi Germany.


Depending on who you ask (idiots), we're only one step away from opening the concentration camps.
2013-04-18 12:33:36 PM
1 votes:
I'm not normally a sensitive ninny, but I think we need to be done with things blowing up for a while. Not forever, but let's at least get to the end of the month with no newsworthy asplosions.
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-18 12:32:08 PM
1 votes:
I had to listen to a preachy public television biography of Japanese-American politician Patsy Mink while I was in a waiting room a few weeks ago. Luckily I had with me a memoir of the strategic bombing campaign against Japan as an antidote to all the whining about horrible white men.

I vote to nuke Dayton.
2013-04-18 12:30:20 PM
1 votes:
What da plobrem?

2.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com
2013-04-18 12:26:32 PM
1 votes:

DjangoStonereaver: If its 12pm in New York, and 9am in Los Angeles, what time is it in Dayton?

1957

/Old joke from my days working at NCR, which was headquartered in Dayton
//Bocks Car, the B-29 that destroyed Nagasaki, is exhibited at the USAF Museum in Dayton.


================

Come on, Dayton isn't all bad.......Larry Flynt started Hustler in Dayton.  I think most of the girls doing gonzo porn in LA are from Dayton.

/Ohio needs its own tag
2013-04-18 11:21:59 AM
1 votes:
I heartily endorse nuking Dayton. All of Ohio, really.
2013-04-18 11:00:54 AM
1 votes:
During our brush fire season?!  Are they nuts?!
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report