Geoffrey Wheatcroft on the Significance of Hiroshima
“Hiroshima wasn't uniquely wicked. It was part of a policy for the mass killing of civilians.”
Read the rest of the article here.
comments powered by Disqus
Anthony Gregory - 8/7/2005
I tend to think that the firebombings were just as bad, but the atomic bombings were still worse. I know this is a paradox, but contradictions arise sometimes when trying to compare atrocities for their evil.
David T. Beito - 8/6/2005
I have never conviced by this argument. I think that the destructiveness of a single atomic bomb was indeed unique. Is this "presentist" thinking? I don't think so. Even in 1945, it was generally agreed that chemical weapons, the first WMD's, were illegitimate. It wasn't much of a leap for policymakers at the time to conclude that the atomic bomb was in the same category.
- Stanford historian uncovers the dark roots of humanitarianism
- Historian hailed for offering a history of the culture wars
- Scholars to set the West straight about "Apocalyptic Hopes, Millennial Dreams and Global Jihad"
- Why Eugene Genovese’s 2 sentences about Vietnam went viral in 1965
- Historians named to the 2015 class of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences