![]() Of those, many died by mass suicide orders given by Imperial Japanese troops. The subsequent Battle of Okinawa illustrated that civilians were not immune from the carnage it is estimated that nearly half of the island’s 300,000 inhabitants were killed. The fight-to-the-last-man Japanese defense of Iwo Jima - a tiny island of less than 10 square miles - resulted in nearly 20,000 Japanese and 7,000 U.S. The increasing deployment of kamikaze pilots as Allied forces advanced was evidence of that. Those losses seemed to strengthen, not weaken, Japanese resolve the surviving high command was drawn increasingly from the ranks of men who would fight to the bitter end, long after eventual defeat was no longer in doubt. Second, by 1945, the Japanese forces had suffered significant losses. Hence, the American decisions taken regarding Japan were made considering that the price of prolonging the war would be very high in terms of continuing brutality. ![]() The Pacific theater did not include a similar genocide, but the conduct of the war there was much more vicious, the battles were more costly, the sadistic treatment of both prisoners and civilians more extreme. And the fighting was unusually fierce, marked by enormous casualties and extreme cruelty.ĭue to the Holocaust of the Jewish people, in Europe and North America World War II is thought of as a historical period of unique depravity. It began earlier, in 1937, with the Sino-Japanese War. ![]() He reminds readers of three critical factors that are often forgotten.įirst, the Pacific War was different - at least in degree, if not in kind - from the European War. A noted historian at Notre Dame, Father Miscamble sketches the end of the Pacific War, drawing on scholarly resources but presenting them in an accessible way. A most helpful guide to the debate is offered by Holy Cross Father Wilson Miscamble in his 2011 book, The Most Controversial Decision: Truman, the Atomic Bombs and the Defeat of Japan. Those are, of course, debatable - and long-debated - points. The key point raised by Truman’s defenders is that there were no credible alternatives to ending the war or, in fact, that all alternatives to ending the war would have cost more lives, both of American and Japanese forces, as well as Japanese civilians. Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was immoral? That highly controverted question has a more complicated answer. The consensus of Catholic moral reflection on the use of nuclear weapons has reflected that the mass killing of civilian populations is not morally permissible.ĭoes it thus follow that President Harry S. On making a distinction between combatants and noncombatants, the tradition is clear. The straightforward answer is that the mass targeting of civilians fails to meet the criteria for the just conduct of war according to the Catholic just war tradition. And each milestone anniversary occasions reflection on the morality of the decision to detonate the atomic bomb in Japan. The closing ceremony would have coincided with the Nagasaki anniversary.Įach year the anniversary invites remembrance of war and a renewed resolve to work for peace. This year’s 75th anniversary - likely the last of the great World War II commemorations - would have garnered worldwide attention had the Tokyo Olympics gone ahead. 9, 1945, for Nagasaki - as symbols of the horrific power of nuclear weapons. The cities hit by the only wartime deployment of the atomic bomb have stood ever since those fateful days - Aug.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |