Which best explains the American decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan?
A. To frighten the Russians into (..something...)
B. The desire to end the war quickly and save American lives.
C. The inexperience of a new President
D. A thoughtless decision by a large bureaucracy
What would you answer to this question? It was one of the questions for my online World Civ 2 class test this week. Answering from the information in the book, the correct answer is B. I really wished that there was an 'E,' an option to combine the factors of A, B, and C. The information in the book on this topic is one of the very few places that I would say reveal a strong bias. Maybe it's just because I disagree with the decision or maybe whoever wrote this section was more biased. I won't ever know. And since it is a world history class, discussion of the United States is fairly limited since there's the whole rest of the (mostly Western) world to think about. I remember talking about this more in my US History class in high school and I remember thinking that my teacher didn't quite 'approve' of the US's decision either. The book gives one sentence to explain the American reasoning (to save American lives, which is reasonable), and then a short paragraph to give the dates of the bombing and Japan's refusal to surrender even afterwards.
But I also remember that the United States was asking for an unconditional surrender, that the Japanese are basically totally under US authority. Would we ever accept an unconditional surrender, to submit the governing of our country completely to another nation? No matter that we think the US's government is better somehow and that we may be more democratic and whatever else. But the book makes it sound like Japan was being ridiculous and unreasonable for refusing to give up and even moreso for insisting that they keep their emperor. Especially in Japan, in a culture based on honor and shame and losing face, being forced to surrender unconditionally, being humiliated by the US, who I don't think they ever liked or trusted, is a big thing. The author made me feel like he thought that Japan should just give up, like it's their fault they got bombed. I don't think they chose for the US's brand new President to drop atomic bombs on two cities primarily housing civilians, not military. The atomic bombs, dropped in two successive days, destroyed most of the cities and killed about half each of their residents, not to mention creating leukemia cells in survivors, which killed a lot more people. Maybe because I read Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes when I was younger, but I empathize more with them than with us.
I know that I'm biased also. I'm pacifistic and idealistic. I know these things. I know that how I think the world should work isn't the way that it does. I have a hard time with the practicality of war and murder. I also know that I'm not very patriotic and think that nationalism is a weird concept. I wouldn't say that I'm proud to be an American. I'm glad sometimes that I am, that I've been blessed to live in a democratic nation where I don't have to worry where my next meal is coming from. I've had a pretty easy life, I admit that, and largely due to living in a suburb in America. But there's more than that in the world. Just like my heart breaks for starving children, for girls and women forced into sex slavery in the US and internationally...reading about the Holocaust and Hiroshima makes me want to cry. This human world is so fallen and so corrupt. I thought about this a lot in Uganda, since I was in a politics class and learning more about politics and such than I had before. The only redemption or salvation for this world is in God. That's really my only hope, the only thread left to cling to when I learn more about the injustice and depravity in the world, whether in Child Protective Services in the US or sex slavery in Cambodia. I don't know how to conclude all my thoughts. God is sovereign. God is faithful. God is good. That's all I've got.
Vaya con Dios.
No comments:
Post a Comment