Latest news with #PearlHarbour
NZ Herald
06-08-2025
- Politics
- NZ Herald
Eighty years after Hiroshima, Japan debates military expansion and pacifism
The destruction of the two cities was followed by Japan's submission days later, ending its decades of brutal conquest. However, the bombings also announced a more terrifying age in which human innovation could spark death and destruction on a previously unimaginable scale. As the flattened city of Hiroshima was rebuilt, it dedicated itself to promoting peace. Survivors of the atomic bombing have campaigned for a world free of nuclear weapons. But 80 years on, that dream is fading. Three of Japan's neighbours – Russia, China and North Korea – are nuclear powers, and Tokyo depends on the American nuclear umbrella to protect it. With tensions in the Pacific heightening and firsthand memories of nuclear devastation waning, more Japanese are questioning the national commitment to peace at all costs. Why did Japan go all-in on pacifism after World War II? The Americans forced it to. The Imperial Japanese Armed Forces' harsh invasion of much of Asia, its shock attack on Pearl Harbour and its willingness to sacrifice a generation of young soldiers for the empire, made the victorious Americans adamant that the country should never again wage war. Japan's so-called 'peace constitution', drafted by the Americans who occupied the country for nearly seven years, forever renounced war. Its Article 9 has been interpreted to mean that Japan should never possess a military with offensive capabilities. In return, the US promised to defend Japan should it come under attack. The security treaty made Japan a beneficiary of the theory of nuclear deterrence, in which the fear of nuclear retaliation is thought to deter a first-strike attack. So why does Japan have a military? To take into account these constitutional limitations, Japan's military is called the Self-Defence Forces. It cannot take on combat roles in international conflicts. That hasn't stopped Japan from expanding its arsenal to counter potential threats from Asian neighbours such as China that, in turn, worry about Japan's rearmament, given its wartime record. If budget hikes continue, Japan will soon be among the world's top military spenders. All of this modern hardware is supposed to be only for defensive purposes, although a debate in Japan about its global military profile has been getting louder. What do Japanese think of their country's rearming? While many in the older generations worry about Japan's waning commitment to pacifism, younger Japanese tend to be more sanguine. Supporters of a military expansion say Japan shouldn't be forced into a defensive crouch forever, especially with security threats ratcheting up in the Pacific. In addition to superpower jousting, Japan has territorial disputes with China, Russia and the two Koreas. They worry that the US may not always be a constant security guarantor for Japan, especially under President Donald Trump, who has criticised Japan for relying too heavily on the presence of US military bases. And with first-hand memories of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki disappearing, most Japanese are now removed from the kind of searing testimony that underwrote the country's pacifist, non-nuclear stance. Nippon Kaigi, an ultra-nationalist political bloc that aims to revise Article 9 of the constitution, has significant support among lawmakers from the governing Liberal Democratic Party. Amending the constitution was once unthinkable; it's now a political talking point. What about nukes? Nihon Hidankyo, a group representing atomic bomb survivors, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year for its campaign to rid the world of nuclear weapons. However, Japan has never signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. In 2023, Fumio Kishida, then the Prime Minister of Japan, whose family is from Hiroshima, supported a statement at a Group of Seven summit he hosted in the city that implied nuclear deterrence might bring its own kind of peace. Kishida's stance reflects a growing feeling in Japan that while nuclear weapons are dangerous and their eradication is a noble ideal, the real world also requires deterrence and robust defence. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Hannah Beech Photograph by: Chang W. Lee ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
The South African
06-08-2025
- Business
- The South African
Warren Hammond's Personal View: A warning of missiles, missteps and August risks
Over the weekend, the headlines confirm recent forecasts: Trump moves nuclear subs after Medvedev's threat (July 31) Ukraine strikes Russian energy infrastructure with drones (Aug 1–2) On Friday, 1st August, I published a forecast before these escalations, predicting that August would be geopolitically frustrating and prone to costly missteps. Frustration, stalled momentum, and the underestimation of resilience, logistics, terrain, or intent- these are the classic ingredients of escalation. And history show, when pressure builds, brinkmanship often follows. In Friday's article, I highlight why this week and this month demand vigilance. August 2025 echoes moments from history's most dangerous cycles of frustration and overreach: 1962 – The Cuban Missile Crisis 1951 – The Korean War escalation 1941 – WWII's pivotal miscalculations: Pearl Harbour and Operation Barbarossa Each was triggered by distrust, delay, and rising pressure. So is today. Trump deploys two nuclear submarines after provocative Russian comments. Published before events accelerate, why August may become the most geopolitically frustrating month in years. August will be geopolitically frustrating. And history shows: frustration breeds missteps. Here's why the so-called 'ceasefire' masks rising systemic risk, and what investors must prepare for now. What's your take on August's rising risks and the shadow of history? Share your thoughts below! Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
The Age
05-08-2025
- General
- The Age
Atomic bombs weren't needed to end WWII. We've been misled for 80 years
On August 6, 1945, a B29 bomber named Enola Gay took off from the island of Tinian and dropped a warhead made of uranium-235 on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Three days later, another B29 dropped a plutonium implosion bomb on Nagasaki. Over the following 12 months, some 290,000 people died. Eighty years on, these appalling tragedies demonstrate how nations that begin conflicts as champions of the rules of war can, without intending to do so, end up justifying the mass killing of innocent civilians. In that, they offer unheeded lessons about the geopolitical violence raging today. Hiroshima and Nagasaki remain a tragic story for our times. The commonly understood justification for dropping the atom bombs was that they ended World War II and saved countless Allied lives by negating the need to invade the Japanese home islands. Given the Japanese surrendered on 15 August – just nine days after the Hiroshima attack – it's easy to claim the bombs worked. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (after the fact, therefore caused by the fact). But it wasn't quite that simple. At that point in the war, Japan was already effectively beaten. It was strangled by a naval blockade, its navy and air force had been annihilated, its industries were without raw materials, its soldiers and civilians were starving, and its cities were being burnt to the ground one by one. Loading From late in 1944 onwards, American B29 bombers began pounding Japan. The original intention was to use precision bombing to attack military and industrial targets only, but sundry unforeseen difficulties made this impractical. The proponents of more brutal means, who were determined for revenge on the Pearl Harbour attack, won out; it was decided to burn Japan's highly flammable wooden cities to the ground by dropping thousands of tons of incendiary bombs – essentially huge canisters of napalm. One by one, 60 of Japan's largely undefended cities were torched. The worst raid, in Tokyo on March 8, 1945, saw between 80,000 and 104,500 people burn to death. Across the country, 267,000 people were killed in the firebombing campaign. The immediate post-war bombing surveys concluded that while the atom bombs sped up Japan's surrender, a surrender was inevitable without them. Most present day historians agree.
Sydney Morning Herald
05-08-2025
- General
- Sydney Morning Herald
Atomic bombs weren't needed to end WWII. We've been misled for 80 years
On August 6, 1945, a B29 bomber named Enola Gay took off from the island of Tinian and dropped a warhead made of uranium-235 on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Three days later, another B29 dropped a plutonium implosion bomb on Nagasaki. Over the following 12 months, some 290,000 people died. Eighty years on, these appalling tragedies demonstrate how nations that begin conflicts as champions of the rules of war can, without intending to do so, end up justifying the mass killing of innocent civilians. In that, they offer unheeded lessons about the geopolitical violence raging today. Hiroshima and Nagasaki remain a tragic story for our times. The commonly understood justification for dropping the atom bombs was that they ended World War II and saved countless Allied lives by negating the need to invade the Japanese home islands. Given the Japanese surrendered on 15 August – just nine days after the Hiroshima attack – it's easy to claim the bombs worked. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (after the fact, therefore caused by the fact). But it wasn't quite that simple. At that point in the war, Japan was already effectively beaten. It was strangled by a naval blockade, its navy and air force had been annihilated, its industries were without raw materials, its soldiers and civilians were starving, and its cities were being burnt to the ground one by one. Loading From late in 1944 onwards, American B29 bombers began pounding Japan. The original intention was to use precision bombing to attack military and industrial targets only, but sundry unforeseen difficulties made this impractical. The proponents of more brutal means, who were determined for revenge on the Pearl Harbour attack, won out; it was decided to burn Japan's highly flammable wooden cities to the ground by dropping thousands of tons of incendiary bombs – essentially huge canisters of napalm. One by one, 60 of Japan's largely undefended cities were torched. The worst raid, in Tokyo on March 8, 1945, saw between 80,000 and 104,500 people burn to death. Across the country, 267,000 people were killed in the firebombing campaign. The immediate post-war bombing surveys concluded that while the atom bombs sped up Japan's surrender, a surrender was inevitable without them. Most present day historians agree.
CBC
25-07-2025
- Entertainment
- CBC
Proud Canadian Kim Coates charts his rise from Sask. jock to Hollywood star
Social Sharing How do you go from growing up in Saskatoon, and going to the University of Saskatchewan, to becoming a Hollywood actor featured in blockbuster TV and movies? Kim Coates has one answer — he chalks it up to fate. Before going to university, he described himself as a jock who loved hockey and his classic car, and who'd never even seen a play in a theatre. "I was going to be a history teacher," he told CBC's This is Saskatchewan in its latest podcast featuring the Sask. actor's rise to fame. But when the word "drama" popped out at him as a potential elective he could take at the U of S, he signed up, thinking the class would be an easy pass. "And the rest is history." It started a love of acting on stage. He's still the youngest person to ever play Macbeth at the Stratford Festival in Ontario. He segued into a movie career with roles in Waterworld, Pearl Harbour and Black Hawk Down, and grew into starring roles in shows like Sons of Anarchy and The Walking Dead: Dead City. "I had no idea about the power about being on a show like Sons, which was so huge around the world and what that can do to your career," he said. Next up, Coates has a new rom-com coming out with funny man and friend Kevin James that will be released on Valentine's Day. He also recently wrapped filming in Calgary for a new movie that's yet to be announced. Through it all, Coates has stayed connected to Saskatchewan — his family still lives in Saskatoon — even though he has dual U.S-Canada citizenship. "I just feel at home in Canada and I knew I always would," he said, describing the current state of the U.S. as a "horror show." "And so for me to be a proud Canadian and talk about it every day that I get the opportunity to," he said. "I'll never stop. This is the greatest country in the world." This story is from the This is Saskatchewan podcast — your connection to the stories Saskatchewan is talking about. Every week, the podcast covers local issues that matter. Hear the voices that are creating change, shaping policy and fuelling creativity in Saskatchewan.
