Fukushima and atomic bombs
This letter is in response to articles about the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster in Japan and the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.
According to the articles: “The unfolding disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant follows decades of falsified safety reports, fatal accidents and underestimated earthquake risk in Japan’s atomic power industry.”
Where have people heard this before? It never fails to amaze me that change always has to be the result of catastrophe. Whether it be Hurricane Katrina, the Indonesian tsunami or the nuclear power plant disaster in Japan, no government officials are ever held accountable for what can only be described as criminal negligence.
It is somewhat satisfying to see that three former executives of Tokyo Electric Power Company are set to face trial. The same needs to happen in the US, especially as it pertains to the financial meltdown that occurred in 2008.
In his 1762 treatise The Social Contract, philosopher, writer and composer Jean-Jacques Rousseau said that “individuals unite into a society by a process of mutual consent, agreeing to abide by certain rules and to accept duties to protect one another from violence, fraud, or negligence.”
Hence the existence of government with its number one priority being the protection of its citizens.
Sadly, this is happening less and less to the point where governments are compromising, and hence forfeiting, the right to govern. The question for Japanese is: Did your government fail to act in your best interests or was it compromised by self-interest? Why must it be accepted that this is “business as usual” and “the way things are done”? When did governing stop including responsibility as a part of its makeup? Perhaps Japanese need to re-examine the character, or lack thereof, of its governing officials and put systems in place that prevent this type of negligence from continuing to occur.
It is obvious from revolutions sweeping the Arab nations that leaders chose to squeeze everything they could from their citizens until it was too late.
Former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, former Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must all be executed — like former Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi — for crimes against humanity. Japan, now it is your turn to make change. Enough with FUK-U-SHIMA.
As for the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, it was fully justified. Japanese had become so barbaric in nature that only a Sodom and Gomorrah type blast could shake Emperor Hirohito to order the military to surrender.
After Nagasaki, the next target was Tokyo.
Hirohito spoke wisely when he said: “If we don’t surrender now, they [the US] will obliterate us from the Earth.”
According to Wikipedia, The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara is “a 2003 US documentary film about the life and times of former US secretary of defense Robert McNamara, illustrating his observations of the nature of modern warfare.”
In that documentary, McNamara says that the wood supporting Japanese pagoda homes was so dry that when the US Army Air Corps dropped incendiary bombs, the fires were so great that far more Japanese died than from the two atomic bombs combined.
Further, it is clear from reading Japanese history that the people did not object to the mass invasions, pillaging, murders and rapes of those in China, Korea and the Philippines, among other places. Those same people would not have been crying for the citizens of the US had they developed the bomb first and dropped it on New York — and yes, they most certainly would have. Those same people thought nothing of the US prisoners of war who were tortured so badly to see how long it would take them to die from the pain inflicted.
Yes, former US president Harry Truman made the right decision to drop the atomic bomb to defeat an evil menace that had become out of control.
Japanese should be grateful that their military was defeated and their country was not exterminated from the Earth. The Fukushima Dai-ichi disaster clearly illustrates that Japan has no real interest in protecting its people from nuclear radiation. Not much has changed in 70 years, has it?
Joe Bialek
Cleveland, Ohio
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under