By Saswat Pattanayak
Welcome to the world of
History-telling. American ishtyle.
Time on its cover story (anniversary special)
educates the readers about Hiroshima, with a Japanese
witness on its cover holding a picture postcard.
The essay by Michael Elliott says:
The atom bombs dropped over Japan ended a terrible
war and persuaded the world never to use nuclear
weapons again. Time quotes Van Kirk on the B-29
remembering that "somebody said—and I thought so
too--'This war is over.'"
Eight days later, Elliot says, it was over. According
to him, if the first bomb was not enough
justification to call it over, the second must have
been, since Nagasaki was attacked on August 9.
Ever since, there has been controversy over when
the war would have ended had the bomb not been
dropped on Hiroshima--a second was detonated over
the city of Nagasaki on Aug. 9—and how many
Japanese and Americans would have died before it
did.
Not only the war was presumably over, the act of
throwing the bomb was a beautiful act also. As Elliot
has a Japanese eyewitness describe the greatest
disaster to have ever caused as something, “like a
burst of light from an unearthly photo shoot, big
enough to cover the sky, "blue-yellow and very
beautiful."
Time goes on:
But, plainly, the most terrible war ever known
ended earlier than it would have because of the
Enola Gay's mission. The bombs cost tens of
thousands of lives—perhaps 120,000 were killed
immediately in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with many
more dying later from the effects of radiation—but
they saved lives too.
More celebrations!
When he heard the news of Hiroshima, writer Paul
Fussell, then a 21-year-old second lieutenant
leading a rifle platoon in France and mentally
preparing for the hell that an invasion of Japan
was bound to be, thought, "We were going to live.
We were going to grow up to adulthood after all."
And the aftermath, according to Time:
An awful weapon had saved lives; a terrible
instrument of war had brought peace…..
Buried in silos in the wheat fields of North
Dakota, tucked into the torpedo tubes of Soviet
submarines parked in the North Atlantic, slung in
the bomb bays of B-52s, the American and Soviet
nuclear arsenals mutually assured the destruction
of both sides if hostilities commenced. The cold
war turned into a long peace.
Sounds sick to my stomach. Such narrative that
proclaims that the world war was over because Japan
was bombed (nay, even more sophisticatedly,
detonated, not attacked!). For, some of us who are
among the rest of those who don’t subscribe to this
narrative know for sure when and how the war was
ended. And if we still wondered why US had to bomb
Japan even
after the war was over, now we
know the news: that the war was not actually over. It
needed one Hiroshima and then again, one Nagasaki to
call it over!
What logic does Elliot has in saying Hiroshima was
not enough to call it over, if at all in his weirdest
philosophy, all we need is some bombings to end wars?
Why did we need another bomb after 8 days? No logic,
just plain statement: “An awful weapon had saved
lives; a terrible instrument of war had brought
peace…..”
Brought peace? For whom? For the generations of
Japanese who lived with the scar and became numb
enough to traverse from royal monarchies to economic
imperialists without an utter?
The underlying theme of the Anniversary Special (see
the celebratory tone! Calling it an anniversary
special than maybe a Guilt-ridden Summer Remembrance)
of the magazine is to say that we needed to bomb
Japan so that we shall have peace. Moreover, it was
not a bad thing to bomb after all. Hey, we got an
eyewitness to say that the after-effects of the
bombing was “blue-yellow and very beautiful”!
Such sick!
And finally Time declares that the bombs (which are
bad in the hands of the “terrorists”, it concludes
too) led to nuclear arsenal competitions leading to
cold war which brought long lasting peace!

Notice the web of lies: First,
that the war got over because of the bomb
(whereas in actual, the war had long ended after
which US surprised everyone by bombing Japan
mercilessly, first Hiroshima and then again
Nagasaki), second, that the after-effects of
bombing was beautiful experience (whereas the
gruesome truth is that all of us know what
happened to generations of people, even as Time
could manage to get an old man stand with a
picture of the bombing as to show how beautiful
event it was to celebrate), third, that the
bombings saved lives (whereas we know that
millions have died for no good reason at all),
fourth, that the people after all grew up to
live well (whereas we know the systematic
tortures on Japanese-Americans which go largely
untold for several suppressive reasons), fifth,
that cold war brought peace (whereas nothing
could be further from the truth).
Cold war was not that cold. We know millions of
innocent civilians who have been systematically
annihilated in the name of protecting them from
Communism (even within the country, McCarthyism was
such a reality) with active interventions in
third-world countries of Asia, Latin America and
Africa. That was the hottest war series ever
continued. And thanks to the whole suspicion trail of
nuclear arsenal acquisitions of rivaling blocs.
And today, after the end of so-called Cold War, we
know that the same bomb greed has led many countries
to feel insecure, join the arms race, whereas they
could involve in developmental works they have
drained out resources to build arsenals to join the
club, we know of the numerous nuclear plant leaks and
disasters--most of which are so embarrassing that
they are not discussed, we also know that many
misguided youth and deliberately led religious
fanatics are in quest of the formula too, not to be
left out of the race.
And the world is most unsafe than ever before. We are
having televised wars and children are bombing
neighbors on their video games. More bombs don’t make
the world safer place. I am sure the readers of Time
know of this. Or I doubt. I am still waiting to read
few letters to the editor.
Tags: Saswat, Cold War, Imperialism, USA, Communism, War, Media, History