America’s Use Of Atomic Bombs Is Evil But Ongoing Murder Of Millions of Children Through Abortion Is Righteous Freedom

We would have to be astounded at the logic of the left if it weren’t for the reality of sin and rebellion against God. It’s not about logic at all because it is all about defiance.

The ongoing re-education of society through school and the media has been pushing for the vilification of war for decades, especially the actions of the U.S. In using two atomic bombs on Japan in World War Two.

As the 70th anniversary of the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has recently passed, the mainstream media are reminding us again and again how the U.S. was really only making a statement to the USSR and that the dripping of the bombs actually had no impact upon the Japanese regarding surrender, seeing the nuclear annihilation of two cities as no different to normal bombing runs.

Consider the way the ABC presents the history:

The world changed forever when a US bomber dropped the first atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima 70 years ago.

The Americans said they took the drastic step to put an early end to World War II and save the lives of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, but this official narrative is now being overturned.

On an interesting side note, the ABC are seemingly engaged in an endless “overturning” of official narratives, whether in promoting homosexuality as healthy and normal, its attacks on natural and historical marriage, its blurring of biological sex that defines men and women in philosophical theories about fluid gender identity, or in its refusal to mention more than a passing word about the catastrophic but unsurprising revelations about Planned Parenthood’s baby organ trafficking.

Back to their report though:

On August 6, 1945 the world’s first atomic bomb exploded over Hiroshima, wiping out the city centre and killing about 140,000 people by the years’ end.

Keiko Ogura was eight-years-old at the time and only 2.4 kilometres from the hypocentre.

She remembers being engulfed in flames.

“A flash of light and the blast slammed me to the ground and I lost consciousness,” she said.

“I woke up, it was dark and everyone was crying.”

Bomb survivor’s message of peace

Tomiko Matsumoto was 14 when an atomic bomb fell on Hiroshima. Seventy years later, she tells her story.

Keiko said the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and another at Nagasaki three days later, which killed 70,000 more, were war crimes.

Many historians say the bombings did not lead to the Japanese surrender, and the Soviet declaration of war on Japan two days later was a bigger shock.

It put an end to any hope the Soviets would negotiate a favourable surrender for Japan.

The severely-weakened Japanese Imperial army had no capacity to fight the Soviets on a second front in China and Northern Japan.

Japanese historian Yuki Tanaka said the country had no choice because the Soviets would have killed Emperor Hirohito, seen as the heart and soul of imperial Japan.

“The Soviet Union would demolish the emperor system and they would execute the emperor as well as all members of the royal family,” he said.

New bomb not responsible for Japan’s surrender

America believed the shock and awe of the devastating power of the new bombs would force Japan into surrender, but experts say inside Japan it was viewed differently.

The Americans had already destroyed 66 Japanese cities with a massive fire bombing campaign.

In just one night, 100,000 civilians were killed in Tokyo.

Tokyo’s Temple University director of Asian Studies Jeffery Kingston said the new bombs would not have had the impact the Americans would have hoped.

“If you look at it from the perspective of the Japanese military, it doesn’t really make a big difference whether people are dying from fire bombing or atomic bombs … it is [just] two additional city centres that are destroyed,” he said.

The atomic bombings probably did play a part in averting a bloody ground invasion and saving thousands of US lives, but historians like Dr Kinston said the bombs were also about sending a message to the Soviets.

“We have this incredible new weapon, we have a monopoly on it and we are going to emerge as the strongest superpower. In a sense, this was the opening salvo of the Cold War,” he said.

Survivor’s call for future free of nuclear weapons
On the eve of 70th anniversary, the children of Hiroshima sing for a future free of nuclear weapons, but today more countries than ever have the bomb.

America’s atomic attacks on Japan started a nuclear arms race which bought the world to the brink of destruction.

Hiroshima survivor Keiko Ogura wants people to come and see for themselves.

“Some people in the world still do not understand the cruelty of nuclear weapons, and that they are absolute evil. This surprises me. I want them to come to Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” she said.
Most historians agree the official version from the US government — that the bombs were dropped to force an early surrender and saved up to a million American lives from a bloody invasion — is far too simplistic.

Mr Tanaka said it was a criminal act under international law.

“Also, morally it was wrong. So they have to find some non-legal arguments to self-justify the conduct, that they annihilated 210,000 civilians,” he said.

The debate in academic circles now is how much other factors came into play in America becoming the first and still the only nation to drop the atomic bomb in warfare.

The contradictions and denial going on here is impressive, even for a media organisation that specialises in this kind of thing.

On the one hand they would have us believe that the atomic bombs achieved nothing different to normal firebombing:

In just one night, 100,000 civilians were killed in Tokyo.

If you look at it from the perspective of the Japanese military, it doesn’t really make a big difference whether people are dying from fire bombing or atomic bombs.

But then why is the atomic bomb so evil and not firebombing and bombing in general because they make a clear distinction:

Mr Tanaka said it was a criminal act under international law.

“Also, morally it was wrong. So they have to find some non-legal arguments to self-justify the conduct, that they annihilated 210,000 civilians,” he said.

Either the atomic bombs are different from other weapons, which would suggest that the Japanese did respond to the use of the bombs in spite of this report’s claim, or they are no different to other weapons and therefore cannot be considered uniquely cruel or evil as the report would have us believe.

So they want us to see atomic weapons as evil to push their nuclear proliferation goals but they also want to insist that atomic bombs had no part in ending the war because their impact is no greater than conventional warfare.

Which is it?

The more important questions remain unanswered:

  • Is war necessary and what if it is not avoidable?
  • Did the Japanese do horrendous evil, more so that other nations during war?
  • Who gets to define morality?

The answers are that sometimes, war is the only option. The Japanese were not going to just lay down and there is good evidence that a single bomb capable of destroying an entire city was reason enough to cease fighting, unless you agree with the revisionism above that nukes didn’t faze the Japanese at all.

By their own miserable worldview, the left make morality a subjective choice so it comes as no surprise that they fixate on the hundreds of thousands killed in Japan by the U.S. During a war but refuse to mention the 57 million babies murdered by abortion there during peacetime.

The double standards are excruciating!

The left love to push their anti-war stance because they refuse to see the necessity of war against empires that are quenched by no other means. They sincerely believe that enough education (see: re-education) will lead all people into the harmonious unity in the leftist ideology.

That why the West is in such a predicament with Islam, which believes that its religious ideology is superior to every other and will die violently to establish it across the world.

It’s also why the West was in such a predicament with the Japanese empire, which was motivated by a similar Shinto zeal manifest in emperor worship that led to suicide bombing and all manner of cruelty against friend and enemy alike.

The very same delusional thinking is why the left have fought so hard against the death penalty in favour of rehabilitation for heinous criminals, no matter the extent of their crimes.

And it’s their own worship of the self-absorbed individual that ensures abortion is mentioned rarely and only ever in a positive light.

Sometimes, the hard way of war is the only way a people will learn and while war is an evil, it is a necessary one.

That goes for both Islam and the left because this war is inevitable.


7 thoughts on “America’s Use Of Atomic Bombs Is Evil But Ongoing Murder Of Millions of Children Through Abortion Is Righteous Freedom

    • Thanks Michael,

      We certainly need these teachings in the church today, so overpowered by unbiblical pacifist ideas as we are.


  1. The ends justifies the means is often used in war and in other human endeavors. The Allies will claim they were fighting a just war. Be that as it may, the prosecution of a just war does not give license to those fighting it to commit atrocities and war crimes. War crimes were defined by the victorious Allies at Nuremberg after the WW II ended. The Allies themselves were guilty of war crimes per their own definition of such.


    • I agree with you about war crimes – it’s probably accurate to say there has never been a war where crimes weren’t committed on both sides. The question is what would be the consequences of losing a war or failing to fight a necessary war?
      In the case of WW2, specifically the Pacific war, I’ve never seen a good case argued for the continuation of the Japanese empire as a good thing and I think historians know it would have been really bad – worse than the combined casualties of the atomic bombs and not just for the Chinese or others but the Japanese people themselves. Neither have I seen an argument that America’s civil war should not have been fought and you can understand why – the end did justify the war. Not the crimes committed by the victors, but the war itself.
      The West is in a war with Islam and our leaders are closing their eyes and pretending we aren’t – we’re already seeing the fruit of that.
      North Korea an Iran are what you get when necessary wars are avoided. America and Europe today are far more immoral than they were in the last war so it seems that Islam is exactly the kind of consequence murdering hundreds of millions of unborn children deserves.


  2. Not trying to be an apologist for Imperial Japan, but there is another factor to be aware of. FDR’s “New Deal” was an abysmal failure. He prodded and tried to provoke both Japan and Germany. (See Professor Tansill’s book, Back Door To War.) The war got the US out of its economic depression. There is a moral issue with curing economic problems through war.

    Yes, I quite agree with you that we are in a war with Islam and the West has been in such a war since the 7th century A.D. Islam is violence cloaked with a thin veneer of religiosity. I cannot say that current Muslim violence directed at the West is a punishment for the genocide of abortion (in all its forms).

    Here is one thing to bear in mind. There has been a war against Christianity for some time in the highest levels of Western governments. Nagasaki was not a secondary target for the second bomb as we have been led to believe. Nagasaki was home to the Christian minority in Japan. Christian civilians were vaporized on 9 Aug 1945.

    At the time, Japan was seeking peace terms via 3rd party diplomats. We cannot say with certainty that the atomic bombs ended the Pacific War or were necessary to end the war. The USSR entered Manchuria at the same time and defeated the last imperial army of any size so the Japanese knew that they could not continue the war much longer.


    • Certainly, the US is not entirely innocent in their dealings with both of those empires (and far less so today) but they can’t be held responsible for the atrocities of either the Japanese or the Nazis – and “atrocity” is a pleasantry given what they did. Their disdain for human life can’t be attributed to foreign policy or embargoes or the political manipulations of the US – it goes right to the heart of two equally evil national ideologies. They need to bear the full blame of their choices, and the US for theirs.

      I think there is a good case to be made that the US, however imperfect, was used by God to bring an end to Imperial Japan and the Third Reich. It’s just a pity that they are quickly headed in the same God-hating direction these days.

      Christianity is antithetical to the kind of power and influence that many people seem to seek in politics. That, or they lack the maturity to remain righteous in the midst of that authority. I’m not surprised when political leaders go after Christianity but I am not convinced Nagasaki was targeted because of its Christian population – not after the cost and duration of the European and Pacific wars. That said, it is awful that Christians and other innocent were killed. I still don’t think the bombs were the wrong call, given the stakes.

      I’ve read the argument that Japan was seeking peace but if they really were, one bomb would have drawn their surrender – but it didn’t. I think their failure to surrender immediately clearly demonstrates the failure of this argument.

      In the end, Jesus will give justice to every nation and individual and we can confidently hope in his perfect wisdom.

      God bless you.


Feel free to discuss.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s