Project Petaling Street Blog

The atomic bomb is nothing more than a full stop at the end of a paragraph, in the history of human conflict. That paragraph represents the penultimatum of organized, mechanized, global conflict whence conflagration would involve the engagement of large armies or other armed forces, of two or more sides, each banging up the heads of the other in a series of crude, brutal, and blood-thirsty battles.

This had been going on for centuries. The Romans developed the science (and craft) of organized warfare, and it had developed since. The events of the deployment of nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was simply the milestone that indicated that such forms of warefare had at last, become outdated and obsolete. By themselves, those nuclear events mean little. The end of the era that it marked, however, is indeed significant.

But what does it really mean ? I don't think it means too much. These days, no one would think about large scale warfare as in the previous two world wars - That would be suicidal. But there is still the same old world wide conflict, but simply fought on different terms. The main difference between now and then is that, the enemy now fights from within, and battles are now fought in the very centres of civilization that are supposed to be away from the battle fronts. The notion of war however, remains unchanged and is still basically the same as it was, centuries ago. Hence, begins a new paragraph in the ago old chapter of human comflict.

We have merely exchanged one fight for another. What is the point of celebrating the anniverasry of this exchange ?

Respectfully, I have to disagree with you. It was the Greeks who developed the science and craft of organized warfare, which in turned influenced the Romans.

Yes, as you mentioned, the atomic age had tremendous significance for the scale of armed conflict. No longer would total war be a viable option, and in fact, in the years since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this has held true.

The presence of nuclear weapons forced the Soviet Union and the United States to devote more efforts to diplomacy. This accelerated the development of the United Nations and modern concepts of peacekeeping. This Cold War was actually a long peace.

It has also caused liberal democracy to flourish. This significance may seem unimportant, but consider the fact that democratic countries with proper diplomatic institutions do not attack each other.

This is why it is so important to remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

You write this: "...battles are now fought in the very centres of civilization that are supposed to be away from the battle fronts."

This is patently untrue.

Allied bombing campaigns over Tokyo in Japan and Dresden in Germany killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. This was total war at its worst, and as you mentioned, done at the centres of civilization supposed away from the battle fronts.

However, I take it that you mean that we are moving from total war to terrorism as an accepted mode of conflict.

I must disagree.

Terrorism has always been used throughout the ages, from the Jewish Zealouts against Roman rule, to the American colonialists against British rule.

Terrorism is merely one part of warfare. The fact that transnational terrorism is so predominant today just goes to show how much total war has been dismantled.

The notion of war itself has changed tremendously. Let me explain why. In the past, war was about the expansion of territorial power and the acquisition of resources.

But terrorism is the use of violence or threat of violence against a civilian population to further political, ideological or religious goals. It is not concerned with territorial expansion.

Freddie, whatever arguements that we may have, its a fact that many lives were killed, and this day is to pay tribute to those who perished to the atomic bombs. I don't see how your point makes this day any less to remember about.

It also explains why do we study history in school. The japanese occupation has nothing to do with our generation, but it is the past events that shaped our parents who brought us up to be who we are today.

If the anniversary is commemorated as a tribute to the dead, as Yvonne rightly suggested, then there is something to be said.

But if Freddie had alluded to the commemoration of Hiroshima as pointless because the world has not learnt a lesson from it, then I must agree.

The world has never been more vulnerable to nuclear threat. 8 nations are now nuclear armed with more on the horizon. The Nuclear non-proliferation Treaty is a sham and on the verge of total collapse.

And much of the world is still at war albeit in a different mode.

War is about imposing one's polity upon another through the use of violent means. To win a war, one has to win over the hearts and minds of the people. The purpose of war is ultimately material conquest, territorial gain, and acquisition of resources. Ideological and religious goals are simply manifestations of the same.

Before Aug 6, 1945 wars were simpler. We simply beat each other's brains out.

After 1945, we still fought global wars, but on the territories of poor and unfortunate proxies, in Vietnam, Korea, Canbodia, Africa, Afghanistan, etc. And millions of people still died. It was a cold war and certainly no long peace. The indidiousness of a cold war is that millions can still die, and no one even takes notice.

Global war is still very much present today, but it is now literally, being fought for the hearts and minds of people. It is not untrue when many say that we are in a global Jihad. The recent London bombings is a very good example. The authorities on one side, the extremists on the other, and the prize is the hearts and minds of Muslims worldwide and Britain in particular. Insinuated into this, is the unspoken war over the minds and hearts of non-Muslims, in regards to what they think of Muslims.

Terrorism is just a tactical device to be used as and when deemed effective. In the present environment, it appears to work very well.

So Hiroshima is just a milestone, a watershed about how wars are fought. Wars themselves, still go on. That hundreds of thousands died in those few short moments, is very sad and unfortunate and their deaths do deserve to be remembered. But in the larger scheme of things, Hiroshima was just another event of war, albeit a significant one.

Just as food for thought, why is it that so much less attention is paid to the rape of Nanjing, when more people died and under so much worse and unjustifiable circumstances ?