Last Hiroshima bomb crewman dies

[webfact]

Last surviving Hiroshima bomb crew member dies

US: -- The last surviving member of the US air crew that dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima has died in Georgia aged 93.

Theodore Van Kirk, also known as "Dutch", was 24 when he became the navigator of the Enola Gay, the aircraft which dropped the bomb.

The attack on Japan on 6 August 1945 killed an estimated 140,000 people.

Van Kirk said he had "no regrets" about the mission and defended its morality, saying it helped to end the Second World War.

His son, Tom Van Kirk, paid tribute to his father, who he said remained active until the end of his life.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28548475

[bbc]2014-07-30[/bbc]
 

[gchurch259]

I was 10 years old at that time, was not a time to celebrate. I will have one for you now, Sir !!

[robblok]

Strange that something like that is not seen as a war crime. It did end the war of course.

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

 

In war there is no good side.. the Brits, Germans Russians French Americans all executed POW's  But when I was young in war movies it was always the Germans doing it until I saw some good documentaries that showed both sides did it.

[fiberman]

Strange that something like that is not seen as a war crime. It did end the war of course.

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

 

In war there is no good side.. the Brits, Germans Russians French Americans all executed POW's  But when I was young in war movies it was always the Germans doing it until I saw some good documentaries that showed both sides did it.

 

Strange that you ignored the execution of POW's by the Japanese who killed more than the rest combined!
 

[Humberstone]

Strange that something like that is not seen as a war crime. It did end the war of course.

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

 

In war there is no good side.. the Brits, Germans Russians French Americans all executed POW's  But when I was young in war movies it was always the Germans doing it until I saw some good documentaries that showed both sides did it.

 

At the Nurnberg Trials the mass bombing of cities was not, as far as I know, used as a war crime against the Germans or the Japanese. To accuse them of this would have been extreme hypocrisy seeing as what the British and Americans did to many German and Japanese cities was way worse.

[Ulysses G.]

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

It is easy to forget that is how war used to be, until very recently. It was country against country and that included civilians. It was not just army against army.
During WW2, all nations used bombing of cities as a method of interfering with war production and demoralizing the enemy. Japan did it in China, Germany did it with the London Blitz, Italy did it in Ethiopia, and the allies did it with the bombing of Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg, as well as Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These strategic bombing campaigns were predicated on the concept of Total War. The civilian population under the control of the enemy was seen as a resource. Therefore, the civilian populace was considered a legitimate target of attack. Edited July 30, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[robblok]

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

It is easy to forget that is how war used to be, until very recently. It was country against country and that included civilians. It was not just army against army.
During WW2, all nations used bombing of cities as a method of interfering with war production and demoralizing the enemy. Japan did it in China, Germany did it with the London Blitz, Italy did it in Ethiopia, and the allies did it with the bombing of Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg, as well as Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These strategic bombing campaigns were predicated on the concept of Total War. The civilian population under the control of the enemy was seen as a resource. Therefore, the civilian populace was considered a legitimate target of attack.

 

I agree that much has been changed since then but Hiroshima and Nagasaki are of a different scale and so bad it has never been seen before. I am pretty sure that most agree it was overkill especially the one on Nagasaki. It was just a show of power towards the Russians. 

 

I thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese but if something was a war crime those things were. But I am also not blind for the argument that Japan would have gone on fighting. But I really see these things.. London Dresden Hiroshima Nagasaki as war crimes. That they all did it does not make it any less bad.

[Ulysses G.]

In that case, all wars are "war crimes". I don't object to that point of view, but mankind have always fought to settle our differences and I'm afraid that we always will. 

[khwaibah]

August of 1995 at the National Atomic Museum at Kirkland AFB Albuquerque, New Mexico I had the honor of of meeting and shaking hands with Paul Tibbets and Charles Sweeney. This was the 50 anniversary of events. They and their crew did their military duty with honor.

[robblok]

In that case, all wars are "war crimes". I don't object to that point of view, but mankind have always fought to settle our differences and I'm afraid that we always will. 

Yes i think they are all "war crimes" and yes we will always fight to settle our differences but civilians should not be targeted. Nowadays we call people who target civilians terrorists. So we have evolved.. though armies now call civilian casualties when they do it collateral damage and when others do it terrorism.  (ok is a difference between really targeting them and accepting the risk that civilians get killed when ordering an air strike but IMHO sometimes they accept that risk too easy)

 

Too add.. would you willingly attack civilians for your country ? I would not. 

Edited July 30, 2014 by robblok

[Ulysses G.]

I would have bombed cities during WW2 and not lost a lot of sleep about it. Things have changed for the better in some regards. 

[tingtongteesood]

Whoever started the war are the bad guys. Those who fought back are the good guys. The good guys won. Sad they had to do what they did to bring the war to an end, but had it not happened, how much longer would the Japanese have fought on and how many more 'Nanking's' might have happened ? How many more would have been vivisected alive at Unit 731 ? How many more Koreans would have been held and used as 'comfort women' ? etc. Whilst I feel immense sympathy for those affected by the atomic bombs, it could be argued they were a necessary evil. These are difficult moral and ethical questions we continue to grapple with. How many people have died in Syria so far ? If you could drop a bomb and kill half as many again but know it would all be over, is that better than letting them fight on another 3 years and kill more people ? I have no answers to these questions.

[RigPig]

The consequences of not using the ¨bomb¨ were far more serious.  Try explaining why another 500,000 (or more) of your own people died when you had the means to prevent it.  To this day Hirohito was never tried for war crimes, and there was a reason for that.  The things the Japanese did in their POW and concentration camps in Manchuria far surpassed some of the thing the NAZI´s did.  They treated the Chinese and allied POW´s worse than the Germans did to Jews and allied commandos, who were soldiers doing their duty in uniform.

 

The man was a hero in my book, but he had no choice, he just did his duty.

 

R.I.P.

[Rimmer]

Troll post and one reply removed

[rickirs]

As early as 1939 Germany, Japan, and the US began research to develop technology to build nuclear bombs. Obviously, the US got its bombs operational first. I'd rather have the US be accused of war crimes for dropping nuclear bombs than either Japan or Germany getting the first drop on the US and the Allies. If the US hadn't been the first, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion in english. Auf Wiedersehen and Sayounara to all.

[LesT21]

Had the honor of meeting Dutch in 2010, a quiet gentleman. May he rest in peace!

[slipperylobster]

Better living, (not for everyone),  through German Technology.

 

Assembled and deployed by......popular demand Throughout the Allied Forces.

 

 

[sauvagecheri]

 

Strange that something like that is not seen as a war crime. It did end the war of course.

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

 

In war there is no good side.. the Brits, Germans Russians French Americans all executed POW's  But when I was young in war movies it was always the Germans doing it until I saw some good documentaries that showed both sides did it.

 

Strange that you ignored the execution of POW's by the Japanese who killed more than the rest combined!
 

 

 

What about the sacking of Nanking ,in China ,and the taking of Manilla ,and the genocide of Chinese by the Japanese ..Check it on youtube    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

http://www.tribo.org/nanking/

Six million Chinese massacred at the hands of the Japanese plus wholesale rape .I don't know how many Philipinos ..Not pretty .

They needed to be stopped fast .

 

Edited July 30, 2014 by sauvagecheri

[robblok]

I would have bombed cities during WW2 and not lost a lot of sleep about it. Things have changed for the better in some regards. 

 

With the morality of back then you probably would have.. but with your morals of now ?

 

Anyway I can't imagine that none of the people responsible for the atomic bom on Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not loose any sleep over what they had done. Even for those days it was a pretty big thing.

[robblok]

 

 

Strange that something like that is not seen as a war crime. It did end the war of course.

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

 

In war there is no good side.. the Brits, Germans Russians French Americans all executed POW's  But when I was young in war movies it was always the Germans doing it until I saw some good documentaries that showed both sides did it.

 

Strange that you ignored the execution of POW's by the Japanese who killed more than the rest combined!
 

 

 

What about the sacking of Nanking ,in China ,and the taking of Manilla ,and the genocide of Chinese by the Japanese ..Check it on youtube    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

http://www.tribo.org/nanking/

Six million Chinese massacred at the hands of the Japanese plus wholesale rape .I don't know how many Philipinos ..Not pretty .

 

 

Actually ignored them by mistake... they were the same if not worse. Nanking was bad. 

 

What is hypocritical of all the powers of the day is that many of the Drs experimenting on humans did not get procecuted as long as they worked with the allies later on to help their own research ahead.

[puukao]

1.  only the losers have "war criminals"  winners have "heroes"

2.  if no bomb, i think russia would have invaded and the US didn't want to lose out

3.  nanking was horrible, russia in berlin might have been worse.  nobody will every know.

4.  it's all pretty horrible....war is HE double hockey sticks.  

[JenksB]

 

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

It is easy to forget that is how war used to be, until very recently. It was country against country and that included civilians. It was not just army against army.
During WW2, all nations used bombing of cities as a method of interfering with war production and demoralizing the enemy. Japan did it in China, Germany did it with the London Blitz, Italy did it in Ethiopia, and the allies did it with the bombing of Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg, as well as Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These strategic bombing campaigns were predicated on the concept of Total War. The civilian population under the control of the enemy was seen as a resource. Therefore, the civilian populace was considered a legitimate target of attack.

 

I agree that much has been changed since then but Hiroshima and Nagasaki are of a different scale and so bad it has never been seen before. I am pretty sure that most agree it was overkill especially the one on Nagasaki. It was just a show of power towards the Russians. 

 

I thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese but if something was a war crime those things were. But I am also not blind for the argument that Japan would have gone on fighting. But I really see these things.. London Dresden Hiroshima Nagasaki as war crimes. That they all did it does not make it any less bad.

 

 

 

[transam]

 

In that case, all wars are "war crimes". I don't object to that point of view, but mankind have always fought to settle our differences and I'm afraid that we always will. 

Yes i think they are all "war crimes" and yes we will always fight to settle our differences but civilians should not be targeted. Nowadays we call people who target civilians terrorists. So we have evolved.. though armies now call civilian casualties when they do it collateral damage and when others do it terrorism.  (ok is a difference between really targeting them and accepting the risk that civilians get killed when ordering an air strike but IMHO sometimes they accept that risk too easy)

 

Too add.. would you willingly attack civilians for your country ? I would not. 

 

 

One thing you can be sure of, if the Japs or Gery's had the "bomb" first, they would have used it.
 

[Confuscious]

Remember what started this nuclear war:
 

The attack on Pearl Harbor^{[nb 4]} was a surprise military strike conducted by the Imperial Japanese Navy against the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on the morning of December 7, 1941 (December 8 in Japan). The attack led to the United States' entry into World War II.

The attack was intended as a preventive action in order to keep the U.S. Pacific Fleet from interfering with military actions the Empire of Japan was planning in Southeast Asia against overseas territories of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the United States. There were simultaneous Japanese attacks on the U.S.-held Philippinesand on the British Empire in Malaya, Singapore, and Hong Kong.

From the standpoint of the defenders, the attack commenced at 7:48 a.m. Hawaiian Time.^[13] The base was attacked by 353^[14] Japanese fighters, bombers and torpedo planes in two waves, launched from six aircraft carriers.^[14] All eight U.S. Navy battleships were damaged, with four being sunk. All but one (Arizona) were later raised, and six of the eight battleships were returned to service and went on to fight in the war. The Japanese also sank or damaged three cruisers, three destroyers, an anti-aircraft training ship,^{[nb 5]} and one minelayer. 188 U.S. aircraft were destroyed; 2,403 Americans were killed^[16] and 1,178 others were wounded. Important base installations such as the power station, shipyard, maintenance, and fuel and torpedo storage facilities, as well as the submarine piers and headquarters building (also home of the intelligence section) were not attacked. Japanese losses were light: 29 aircraft and five midget submarines lost, and 65 servicemen killed or wounded.One Japanese sailor was captured.

The attack came as a profound shock to the American people and led directly to the American entry into World War II in both the Pacific and European theaters. The following day (December 8), the United States declared waron Japan. Domestic support for non-interventionism, which had been strong,^[17] disappeared. Clandestine support of Britain (e.g., the Neutrality Patrol) was replaced by active alliance. Subsequent operations by the U.S. prompted Germany and Italy to declare war on the U.S. on December 11, which was reciprocated by the U.S. the same day.

[kamahele]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

 

 

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

It is easy to forget that is how war used to be, until very recently. It was country against country and that included civilians. It was not just army against army.
During WW2, all nations used bombing of cities as a method of interfering with war production and demoralizing the enemy. Japan did it in China, Germany did it with the London Blitz, Italy did it in Ethiopia, and the allies did it with the bombing of Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg, as well as Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These strategic bombing campaigns were predicated on the concept of Total War. The civilian population under the control of the enemy was seen as a resource. Therefore, the civilian populace was considered a legitimate target of attack.

 

I agree that much has been changed since then but Hiroshima and Nagasaki are of a different scale and so bad it has never been seen before. I am pretty sure that most agree it was overkill especially the one on Nagasaki. It was just a show of power towards the Russians. 

 

I thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese but if something was a war crime those things were. But I am also not blind for the argument that Japan would have gone on fighting. But I really see these things.. London Dresden Hiroshima Nagasaki as war crimes. That they all did it does not make it any less bad.

 

The atomic bombings were not a show put on for the Russians, it was to save a lot of American lives (and might have even saved Japanese lives unintentionally). A full scale invasion of Japan would have been very costly in regards to American / human life. The Japanese put up a good fight to the death as should be noted by looking at the fighting in the Pacific between the US and Japan. The military leadership and emperor were informed of the weapon prior to the first bombing and then still did not surrender so the second bomb was dropped. Firebombing Tokyo never seems to be mentioned even though it killed just as many people. The Atom bomb is a terrible thing but if you had a family member fighting in the military at the time, I'm sure you were damn grateful for it.

[BlueSkyCowboy]

Strange that something like that is not seen as a war crime. It did end the war of course.

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

 

In war there is no good side.. the Brits, Germans Russians French Americans all executed POW's  But when I was young in war movies it was always the Germans doing it until I saw some good documentaries that showed both sides did it.

 

The Israelis also killed prisoners in the dessert to save drinking water. Unfortunately, we only talk about the crimes of the loser.  If the US had not dropped those bombs in WW2, it would have happened later and a much bigger bomb. The lunatics in the Japanese military did not care about the civilians and many more people on both sides would have been killed or worse, crippled and a great cost to society during rebuilding. Look at HAMAS now, use their civilians as shields since the sheeple are of no use

Edited July 30, 2014 by BlueSkyCowboy

[JenksB]

 

 

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

It is easy to forget that is how war used to be, until very recently. It was country against country and that included civilians. It was not just army against army.
During WW2, all nations used bombing of cities as a method of interfering with war production and demoralizing the enemy. Japan did it in China, Germany did it with the London Blitz, Italy did it in Ethiopia, and the allies did it with the bombing of Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg, as well as Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These strategic bombing campaigns were predicated on the concept of Total War. The civilian population under the control of the enemy was seen as a resource. Therefore, the civilian populace was considered a legitimate target of attack.

 

I agree that much has been changed since then but Hiroshima and Nagasaki are of a different scale and so bad it has never been seen before. I am pretty sure that most agree it was overkill especially the one on Nagasaki. It was just a show of power towards the Russians. 

 

I thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese but if something was a war crime those things were. But I am also not blind for the argument that Japan would have gone on fighting. But I really see these things.. London Dresden Hiroshima Nagasaki as war crimes. That they all did it does not make it any less bad.

 

 

 

It's very hard for us to understand what happened then, you have to live through the experience to really understand what went on, Hiroshima & Nagasaki were messages to the Japanese, they had already said that they would fight to the last man, if America had not used the bombs they would have had to have invaded the Japanese mainland and fought every inch of the way to a decisive end, it would have cost hundreds of thousands of lives for the Japanese as they would not have surrendered, they were not allowed to do so by their creedo, how many allies would have died as well, they had to drop the 2nd bomb to prove to the Japanese that the first was not a fluke and that they really could destroy all of Japan to force the Emporer to order a surrender, dont forget many Japanese even after the surrender carried on fighting untill they were killed or died and many Army Officers & soldiers commited ritual suicide rather than surrender, even as late as the 60's some when some were still being found in the jungles of Malaysia and elswhere still fighting because they could not believe the Emporer & Japan would ever surrender, we can not as westerners understand the mentality of the Japanese at that time or even today to some extent, In Japan at that time there were very few civilians as defined today, they were 100% supporting the Emporer and were mostly prepared to die for the cause, yes the bombing of Nagasaki & Hiroshima were horrendous and casualties where unbelievable but do you really think that the casualties would have been less if the bombs hadn't been dropped,when every man woman and child in Japan had been ordered to defend the homeland at all costs.

Hind sight is not always 20/20 because it always depends on personal opinion, but if we, as allies, had not used the weapons to end the war, they may well have been used later turning the "cold war" very hot I think that one ofthe reasons no Nukes have been used in anger since is because we knew in reality not in theory how bad these weapons were and unfortunately the Genie cannot be put back into the bottle. As to war crimes would you have seen Churchill & Roosevelt in the dock along side Stalin & Hirohito, war is a crime unto itself and the winners decide who was to blame but its the soldiers who pay the price, young men fight the war for old mens glory.

 

[KarenBravo]

II thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese 

 

Not to take anything away from the Americans that died in Europe, BUT, three-quarters of all German losses of men and equipment were on the eastern front.

The Russians could have won the war in Europe on their own, but, it is estimated that it would have taken another two years.

 

Over 20 million Russians died during the war and not enough credit is given to them by the public (historians are well aware of their contribution).

[robblok]

 

II thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese 

 

Not to take anything away from the Americans that died in Europe, BUT, three-quarters of all German losses of men and equipment were on the eastern front.

The Russians could have won the war in Europe on their own, but, it is estimated that it would have taken another two years.

 

Over 20 million Russians died during the war and not enough credit is given to them by the public (historians are well aware of their contribution).

 

Sure.. the Russians played a major part in it, without them it would have been a lot harder. But in the end both the US and Russia both wanted as much land as possible for the after war period. 

[dao16]

 

 

I am sure they did see the bombing of London as a war crime and not the fire bombing of Dresden.

It is easy to forget that is how war used to be, until very recently. It was country against country and that included civilians. It was not just army against army.
During WW2, all nations used bombing of cities as a method of interfering with war production and demoralizing the enemy. Japan did it in China, Germany did it with the London Blitz, Italy did it in Ethiopia, and the allies did it with the bombing of Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg, as well as Tokyo and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These strategic bombing campaigns were predicated on the concept of Total War. The civilian population under the control of the enemy was seen as a resource. Therefore, the civilian populace was considered a legitimate target of attack.

 

I agree that much has been changed since then but Hiroshima and Nagasaki are of a different scale and so bad it has never been seen before. I am pretty sure that most agree it was overkill especially the one on Nagasaki. It was just a show of power towards the Russians. 

 

I thank the USA for helping us get rid of the Germans and Japanese but if something was a war crime those things were. But I am also not blind for the argument that Japan would have gone on fighting. But I really see these things.. London Dresden Hiroshima Nagasaki as war crimes. That they all did it does not make it any less bad.

 

The fire bombings did much more damage and killed many more people...most people now don't think about those because they were more "conventional" at the time. Also, people seem to forget that it isn't like we bombed the cool Japan that you can go visit now. It was a country under a mass hysteria under an emperor who could do no wrong in their eyes. Arguably, they were more loyal and dedicated to their emperor than Germans were to Hitler.

           I hope these kinds of weapons never get used again....