Hiroshima - The Lost Photographs

<p><a href="http://observatory.designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=7517">

<h1>Hiroshima: The Lost Photographs</h1>

</a> <img src="http://www.designobserver.com/media/images/hiroshima_do_340.jpg" alt="Hiroshima: The Lost Photographs" /> <strong><br /> <strong><br /> Close to a decade ago, in Watertown, Massachusetts, a man was walking his dog on a rainy evening<br /> when, amidst the garbage, he caught sight of a battered suitcase — full of photographs of a bombed<br /> out Hiroshima. </strong> </strong> <br /> <strong><strong></strong> </strong><br>

<strong><strong>August 6th, marks the 64th anniversary of Hiroshima. </strong> </strong> <br /> <strong><strong>On this occasion, Design Observer presents a unique </strong> slideshow of 100 photographs</strong> <br /> <strong><strong>from the ground in the days after the bombing </strong> </strong> <strong>at</strong> <br /> <a href="http://observatory.designobserver.com/media/slideshows/Hiroshima/Hiroshima_01.html">http://observatory.designobserver.com/media/slideshows/Hiroshima/Hiroshima_01.html</a> <strong><strong><br /> .</strong> </strong></p>

<p>Thanks Bob - and three days later the same scenes in Nagasaki (a total of some 220.000 dead). These scenes are shocking every-time they are shown. Hopefully, in the name of humanity, they tell present and future generations never to repeat the act again.</p>

<a href="

<p>Anders, you do know that the Japanese were frantically working on a scheme to produce an atomic weapon, planning to bomb the west coast of the U.S., right?<br>

I hope the lesson learned is not in relation to the specific acts used to bring the war to a close, but instead not to use war as an instrument of statecraft to begin with. Unfortunately, it seems almost every generation has to relearn the lessons in one way or another.<br>

Thank you Bob for posting this. For the first decade of the atomic era, planners, military strategists, etc. had no real understanding of what 'the bomb' would/could do, and still argued for localized use that seems insane in light of today's knowledge. And during most of the Cold War, both sides kept nuclear cannon shells at the ready... despite the fact that the blast danger area was within the throw range of the cannons. In other words, you fire a weapon that gets both sides.</p>

<p>Kombizz, I hope your headline is truly a question and not a statement. You could ask the same question about anyone who has had to kill. I have also heard that the aircrews didn't know what type of weapon they were dropping.</p>

<p>I have visited Hiroshima. And seen the lone remaining structure and the museum and cenotaph at the Peace Memorial Park. Since that time nations have learned how to make hydrogen bombs and,if you think about it, how to destroy our species. Japan has never re militarized. They learned firsthand the horrors of the Bomb.</p>

<p>It is insane that places like North Korea still seek to make these infernal instruments. And sell them to others. As to our guilt for having been the first country to use nuclear weapons,that is not for me to judge.</p>

<p>I was not in the battles of Iwo Jima and Okinawa which were atrocious and I cringe at the thought of aninvasion of Kyushu as an alternative to surrender. The Memorial Park is a Peace Park. I don't think there is any room for nuclear weapons in this world. And I pray we never see or photograph the results of another one anywhere. There won't be anyone left to look at the pictures if that happens.</p>

<p>MUCH easier to view these photos from their root directory:</p>

<p>http://observatory.designobserver.com/media/slideshows/Hiroshima/images/</p>

<p>Very impersonal images--- 90% are just of the buildings damaged from afar to medium shots.</p>

 

<p><em>"Anders, you do know that the Japanese were frantically working on a scheme to produce an atomic weapon, planning to bomb the west coast of the U.S., right?"</em><br>

That's a good try Thomas. The most hear "justification" has been that "The Japanese had demonstrated near-fanatical resistance, fighting to almost the last man on Pacific islands, committing mass suicide on Saipan and unleashing kamikaze attacks at Okinawa. Fire bombing had killed 100,000 in Tokyo with no discernible political effect. Only the atomic bomb could jolt Japan's leadership to surrender." Never heard of any reality behind your hints.<br>

How hard we try, it is very difficult to justify any decision to kill more than 200.000 Japanese. However, this is the "Casual Photo Conversation" forum which is not an obvious place for agreeing on historical facts.</p>

<p>Anders, there is no 'try' to it. Simple declassified archive facts. The Germans sent the Japanese as much info and nuclear material as they could before Nazi Germany fell.<br />As far as justification goes, that's how war works. We also managed to firebomb the Germans into near oblivion in some parts of the country. And had worked on firebombing the Japanese into near oblivion. In wartime, you wage war until the other side gives up. Sorry, but regardless of what Star Trek preaches, we can't turn phasers on stun and be nice about it. If you are convinced that the U.S. was terrible for using the atomic bombs, well, you're entitled to your opinion and I don't care to attempt to dissuade you. Doubtless that falls into the range of opinion that holds that it was demeaning to have the Japanese sign the surrender documents on the deck of an American battleship sitting in the middle of Tokyo Bay.<br />Gerry, my father was a participant at Iwo Jima. The suicide planes took a big toll, and the fighting was difficult. He never wanted to talk about any of it except once, when he mentioned that the ship right next to his was sunk by a suicide plane while they were all lined up like in a parking lot.<br />I certainly don't much care for a nuclear weapons exchange. When it was Soviets vs. the West, at least there was a kind of parity and an agreement not to 'go there'. I suspect we won't expect to see such reserve from the North Koreans, and possibly even the Iranians, since they have already suggested annihilating some other countries.</p>

<p>Since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons have saved millions of lives. The cold war wouldn't have remained cold for very long if neither side had nuclear weapons at their disposal. The very prospect of a nuclear attack is so terrifying that no-one except the most crazed individual would possibly wish to push the red button. Nuclear capability has now virtually wiped out any chance of India & Pakistan going to war over Kashmir. Even North Korea would never dare to use nuclear weapons. They want nuclear weapons capability for the exact same reason China starved millions of its own people for... "No-one listens to a powerless man"</p>

<p>Read an article about the pilot of the Enola Gay. He said that the Japanese soldiers from the war thanked him in one respect. They knew that if the bombs were not dropped, they probably would have had to fight to the last man,etc. Not saying that the bombs were a good thing. But, the 200,000 that did die, if the bombs were not dropped, at least that many and probably more would have been killed during the standard carpet bombing that the allies would have done instead. Also, while we had firebombed the Germans, we can not forget their buzz bomb and V2 rockets on London.<br>

Atomic bombs are a bad thing, but as long as there are countries that have the ability to create them. And, have a regime that has the mindset to deliver them. We need to keep our bombs. And, the subs to deliver them. If, they want to send their bombs to us. They might find some of our subs just off their coast.</p>

<p>Jamie and Jack are of course right that the terror balance that mutual possession of nuclear bombs creates has spared some countries from more laborious ways of killing civilians like the fire bombings of German and Japanese cities during the second world war, but this does still not justify neither Hiroshima, nor Nagasaki. Could we go back to photography where I believe that we are likely to be communicating better. </p>

<p>Gerry mentioned the fact that no humans are present in the some one hundred photos from Hiroshima of the link of Bob. Only total devastation and ruins of buildings are seen. Well, I think that this might be the specific quality of the photos, communicating a very strong messages of death and destruction.</p>

<p>Princeton University's Nanking 1937 photo gallery:</p>

<p> <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/html/main.html">http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/html/main.html</a></p>

<p>I visit this site every so often to remind myself of the nuances of moral relativism--guilt, shame, justice, necessity... an endless list really.</p>

<p>The idea that most of the photographs contained in the site were taken as "souvenirs" has always struck me as something completely outside my frame of reference.<br>

<br /> Be forewarned, these are graphic images of murders in progress.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Anders, you're right that photography is where we should stay... sort of along the lines of agreeing to disagree, suits me as I'm not trying to make any converts nor wish to research and deliver an argument.<br>

As far as documentary photography of war images goes, I always thought it was puzzling the degree to which the NAZIs photographed, inventoried and documented their activities, as though the death camps and ovens were as ordinary as a sunset or snowfall. I had the opportunity to go through the U.S. Army Signal Corps archives and came across the photos of the liberation of Dachau.</p>

 

<p>Remember, while we used the atomic bombs on the 2 cities. At least just as many if not more would have died from regular bombings. And, about the unmercifully use of those weapons. The Nazis killed far more, about 6,000,000 in their camps. Again, not saying the bombs were a good thing. But, it didn't kill more people than if it never happened.<br>

<a href="http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_arguments_for_and_against_the_atomic_bombings_of_Japan_being_justified">http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_arguments_for_and_against_the_atomic_bombings_of_Japan_being_justified</a></p>

<p>Good point, Jack.</p>

<p>If anyone gets the chance, I suggest picking up a copy of the book "Flyboys" which goes into unflinching detail about the war with Japan. Firebombing Japan killed equal to or more people and destroyed more property than both atomic bombs combined. I bring this up not to deflect the terrible reality of the atomic bombs but rather to highlight the terrifying reality that the a-bombs did not kill more people than would have died had they not been dropped. Without the a-bombs Japan would have been systematically annihilated using napalm. That very strategy was being carried out.</p>

<p>War by very nature is atrocity. It can be argued that the almost sterile wars of today breed more war since the costs to life and property do not seem as high as total war would require. In nearly eight years, less lives have been lost in Iraq and Afghanistan than were lost in one day at Antietem during the American Civil War.</p>

<p>To quote Gen. Robert E. Lee, "It is good that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."</p>

<p>John, in my book, anyone who quotes Robert E. Lee is a good guy!<br>

The future conduct of the war in Japan, once the war in Europe ended, was being turned over to an Air Corps that believed strongly in carpet bombing. Japan would have suffered the kind of mass destruction that laid waste to German cities, factories and countryside until nothing was left.<br>

The very thing that upsets people about the atomic bomb drops was the reason for their use. To demonstrate that there was a terrible new weapon about to be turned on Japan. It was a bluff. We couldn't have turned out another weapon for many more months after the 2nd bomb.</p>

<p>Speaking with somone who had been there when it occurred gives a much more graphic and detailed account of what had happened. I spoke to one of my uncles who was in the army and on a ship off the coast waiting for the drop; he was 16 at the time. He told me there were no more men to draft in the Us so they were taking boys to war. I believe he said there were many on the ship as young as 15 and 16. They were on the ships waiting for the bomb to drop. After the bomb was dropped they were deployed to land to go in and see what was left; he said he waded waist deep in ashes, including human remains and ashes, ( He is sure when we spoke they were radioactive). He spoke of what he saw graphicly and emotionally. Most who know him say he never recovered from what he saw when they went ashore. He apparantely came back withdrawn, silent, cold, would break down when alone preferred solitude. He then went into the garage, pulled out his "hidden" bottle of vodka sat alone and drank. He would not finish his story; it was very emotional.</p>

 

<p>James, there was a program on tv a few months ago that featured one of the Japanese women who worked in the military district HQ there at Nagasaki. She was the only survivor from the HQ, and when the command in Tokyo contacted them, she tried to explain what had happened, they would not believe her, could not understand the devastation.<br>

I think the extent and nature of of the destruction from such an explosion is really lost on people. Even looking at the photos doesn't do it justice. And Hollywood doesn't help any, making fake explosions on the screen, pretending that you can toss a grenade over the fence and just duck and everything is fine. The funny-looking wave that precedes the smoke wave in the filmed blasts is the air being pushed forwared, breaking the sound barrier as it does so. Such a blast, even from conventional high explosives, damages internal organs and kills. Add the radiation leftovers to that mix, and you have a lethal, lingering death.<br>

For the curious, the documentary films of various test atomic explosions can be viewed online. They are very sobering to see.</p>

<p>The book "Flyboys" I mentioned earlier has some very moving photographs in it that pertain to both Hiroshima / Nagasaki as well as the results of the fire bombing. Very moving stuff.</p>

<p>I highly recommend the book. Same author as Flags of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima. Incredibly insightful book.</p>