On Maui: Hiroshima Commemoration

Hiroshima2010

MAUI TIME WEEKLY, JULY 29, 2010

http://www.mauitime.com/Articles-i-2010-07-29-74029.113117_Remembering_Hiroshima_As_An_Act_of_Liberation.html

Remembering Hiroshima As An Act of Liberation

The militarization of Hawaii and its effect on our economy and collective psyche is often overlooked. Activist Kyle Kajihiro wants to change that

July 29, 2010 | 09:33 AM
Outpost of Empire
The militarization of Hawaii and its effect on our economy and collective psyche is often overlooked. Activist Kyle Kajihiro wants to change that

On Friday, August 6, beginning at 6pm, Maui Peace Action will hold a Hiroshima Remembrance Day at UH Maui College, commemorating the 65-year anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb “Little Boy” on the Japanese city. The keynote speaker will be Kyle Kajihiro, director of the anti-war American Friends Service Committee Hawaii.

Ahead of his Maui appearance, we asked Kyle to discuss the legacy of Hiroshima, the militarization of Hawaii and the current state of war and peace.

*

The title of your talk is “Remembering Hiroshima As An Act of Liberation.” Explain what you mean by that.

The world has been held hostage by nuclear terror since the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As the country with the largest nuclear arsenal, the U.S. has used nuclear weapons as the ultimate “big stick” to intimidate, threaten and coerce other countries to do its bidding. In this way, the U.S. uses nuclear weapons the same way that a robber uses a loaded gun to get people to do something. Whether or not the gun is fired, it is still a form of assault.

Today, more than ever, the danger of nuclear weapons hangs over humanity. The nuclear survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been an important voice for peace and the abolition of nuclear weapons. Yet commemorations of these horrific events can become too safe if they don’t address the urgent issues of our time. Remembering Hiroshima must be an act of liberation from nuclear terror and passivity; it should reignite our commitment to the political and moral project of nuclear disarmament and demilitarization.

*

Do you think we’ll see another nuclear weapon used in our lifetime?

I think nuclear weapons have been used many times to terrorize countries without necessarily launching and exploding them. But I am optimistic that the tide of world opinion is against nuclear weapons and will prevent their active use in our lifetime.

*

For those who don’t know, explain, in broad terms, how Hawaii came to be such an important place, militarily, for the United States.

The U.S. invaded and occupied the independent Kingdom of Hawai’i primarily to establish a forward military base in the Pacific as a stepping stone to Asia. From the point of view of American imperialists, once the genocide of American Indians and the taking of their land was completed, the next logical step was to take Hawaii, then the Philippines, Guam and other Pacific nations and extend “manifest destiny” to Asia. The U.S. military still uses Hawaii and its other Pacific island colonies as outposts of empire.

*

What would you say is the most common misconception about—or unknown aspect of—the military presence in Hawaii?

I think most people don’t realize the social, environmental or cultural costs and impacts of the enormous military presence in Hawaii. The impact of the military on land is huge. The military controls nearly a quarter of the island of Oahu, most of it crown and government lands of the Hawaiian Kingdom that were wrongfully taken. On these lands are more than 800 documented and reported contamination sites that include depleted uranium, chemical weapons, lead, mercury, PCB, solvents and unexploded ordnance.

*

As with tourism, when people question the wisdom or necessity of the state’s military bases, proponents cite the economy: where would we be without those military dollars? How do you respond to this?

The military economy is so enormous that it has distorted our development in Hawaii in ways that I would argue have been detrimental to the long-term health of our economy. In many ways, the military-tourism economy is like a fast food diet. You can get plenty of calories from a fast food meal, but if that was the only food you ate, it would eventually make you obese and sick. Fast food diets are also addictive because of the sugar “high” that gives a temporary sense of wellbeing.

The overreliance on tourism and militarism as the only two pillars of the economy have resulted in destructive patterns of overdevelopment, the atrophy of other productive capabilities such as agriculture or clean energy production and the failure to invest in sectors such as education and environmental restoration that are necessary for a sustainable future. There is also the hidden environmental, social and cultural costs of militarism. In a military economy some people get paid, often very well, while others pay the price of lost land, culture and health.

*

What’s your take on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Obama Administration’s strategies and policies thus far?

Despite all the hype about change, the Obama Administration has pretty much followed the failed policies of the Bush Administration. The cost of the wars have just exceeded $1 trillion. The recent Wikileaks disclosures are revealing the disastrous human cost of Obama’s policies.

Ann Wright to speak about her recent trips to Gaza, Japan and Guam

Ann Wright to speak about her recent trips to Gaza, Japan and Guam

Sunday, August 23 at 3pm.

Revolution Books

2626 S King St # 201, Honolulu, HI 96826-3248

(808) 944-3106)

Ann Wright will be speaking at Revolution Books this Sunday afternoon at 3pm. She was also interviewed for a new show on Voices of Resistance (Olelo 56) that will air on Monday evening at 8pm.

Ann will update us on her trip to Gaza/Israel, but focus on her tour of Guam, Okinawa, and Japan, where she continued to speak out against military expansion and empire. At a time when all too many people are sitting home hoping that Obama’s war policies will somehow be better than Bush’s, and while the evidence is proving otherwise, it is tremendously heartening that Ann Wright is continuing to call people to resist the war. Join us on Sunday in welcoming Ann back. As always, there will be light refreshments after her talk and everyone is invited to stay and talk story informally.

Following are some links to articles about Ann’s recent tour:

Guam Resists Military Colonization: Guam/Common Dreams

Ann Wright Goes to Guam-Takes on Empire: Guam/After Downing

In Hiroshima: Huffington Post

Aid sought for 'Atomic Vets'

Source: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090817/NEWS01/908170340/0/NEWS01/Aid-sought-for–Atomic-Vets-

Posted on: Monday, August 17, 2009

Aid sought for ‘Atomic Vets’

Bill would facilitate care for U.S. veterans exposed to radiation

By John Yaukey
Advertiser Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON – Charles Clark knew something was wrong when he started losing his teeth at age 37.

“They just fell out – no blood,” the Hawai’i resident said.

He is virtually certain it had something to do with his Navy service in the Pacific during World War II, when he was exposed to atomic bomb radiation.

On Sept. 23, 1945, the 17-year-old sailor entered Nagasaki, Japan, where six weeks earlier the world’s second nuclear weapons attack had killed 80,000 people. Some died due to massive doses of radiation.

Clark remained in Nagasaki for five days, setting up ship-to-shore communications. It would forever change his life.

Since then, “I’ve had more than 180 skin cancers removed from my face,” he said in a recent interview. “Even today, the cancer keeps recurring. It never stops.”

Clark is among a group called the “Atomic Vets” – American military veterans exposed to radiation from nuclear weapons.

Between 1945 and 1962, half a million U.S. troops participated in more than 250 atmospheric and underwater atomic bomb tests, most in the Pacific and Nevada. Many of these veterans have since suffered a panoply of illnesses commonly associated with radiation exposure, but many have had trouble getting the care they need.

Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai’i, has introduced legislation that would streamline the process and add transparency.

“These veterans are dying every day from diseases caused, at least in part, by their service in atomic tests and other nuclear weapon-related activities,” the 11-term congressman said.

The treatment process is run through the Department of Veterans Affairs using data from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

Typically, the process entails a veteran approaching the VA with a claim. At that point, the agency sends the information to the DTRA, which decides whether the veteran’s service record indicates past exposure to high doses of radiation.

This process, known as “dose reconstruction,” can take months and occurs behind closed doors, critics say.

It can be cumbersome and mysterious, especially for someone already dealing with a life-threatening illness.

The DTRA and the VA recognize 22 types of cancer that qualify as caused by radiation exposure. Some cancers must occur within a particular time frame, such as 20 years from exposure, to qualify.

More than 90 percent of the veterans who apply for benefits outside the set parameters are denied, according to research Abercrombie’s staff has done.

Abercrombie’s legislation, the Atomic Veterans Relief Act, would add transparency by opening up DTRA’s analysis methods.

There is no companion bill yet in the Senate. Abercrombie introduced his legislation around Memorial Day. He hopes it will pick up momentum as stories like Clark’s circulate, and as lawmakers gain appreciation for the sacrifices of war through the prism of two ongoing conflicts.

“We’re trying to get some certainty in the process,” said Abercrombie, who is running for governor in a state with a large retired military population.

DTRA spokeswoman Kate Hooten said the agency has well-established protocols for determining radiation exposure, and she noted that over the decades, many veterans have scattered across the globe and are out of touch with government health care networks.

“This is an important issue,” she said. “We’re always interested in finding out how we can reach out to the public.”

Vets remember

To make the case for his reform legislation, Abercrombie has collected the narratives of some veterans who worked around nuclear tests and are suffering multiple cancers and other ailments.

Edward Blas, who lives on Guam, was stationed in the Marshall Islands during the cleanup on Eniwetok Atoll after 43 nuclear tests there.

“The evidence was overwhelming that we were exposed to high levels of ionizing radiation while we lived on ground zero,” he wrote.

Despite the fact that he has never smoked, Blas is anemic and diabetic and weighs half the 220 pounds he did in the service. But his medical claim was denied on the grounds that veterans who served there after the nuclear tests were not considered “atomic vets.”

But those were different times. Not much was known about radiation exposure.

In the early days of the nation’s nuclear program, Cold War imperatives overrode most other concerns.

“I’ve talked to people who were pretty casual about radiation in the early going,” said Richard Rhodes, author of the 900-page Pulitzer Prize-winning book “The Making of the Atomic Bomb.”

“We were at war and we had to take some risks,” Rhodes said in an interview this week.

For Clark, the risks went further than his own body.

His daughter lost both breasts, while his granddaughter suffers from skin ailments, all of which he is convinced can be traced back to Nagasaki.

“We just never understood what we were getting into back then,” Clark said. “We were young kids.”

Ann Wright: In Hiroshima

In Hiroshima

By Ann Wright

I am in the ancient Japanese city of Hiroshima for the annual ceremonies on Aug. 6 to honor the souls of over 140,000 Japanese, South Koreans and Chinese who died instantly and over 300,000 who suffered serious wounds 64 years ago when the United States used weapons of mass destruction — atomic bombs — on the people of Hiroshima, and three days later, on the people of Nagasaki.

The rationale for dropping the atomic bombs was to force the Japanese government to surrender to end World War II, not by killing more of the Japanese military, but by killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and putting fear of a similar fate in the remaining civilian population of Japan.

The U.S. government still tells us that tens of thousands of American military would have been killed if the United States had had to invade the mainland of Japan and that American lives were saved by using these bombs on civilian populations.

Yet historical documents reveal that the United States government knew that because of Japanese losses in the Pacific, the Japanese government would have surrendered — probably within a month. There was no need to have incinerated hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians, except to test for the first time the effects of atomic bombs on a civilian target, thereby sending a warning of U.S. military dominance to not only the Japanese government, military and citizens, but to the rest of the world! Even today, the Department of Energy’s website details the need for scientific data on the effects of the bombs and steadfastly ignores the fact that specific targeting of a civilian population is a war crime. But, history shows us that the victors of war prosecute the losers of wars for their war crimes, while the losers cannot hold accountable the victors for their crimes.

The Japanese targeting of the U.S. military facility Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, which killed 2,402 and wounded 1,282, brought the United States into World War II. The 2,974 civilians killed in the four September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States brought America into the eight year invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and paved the way for the Bush administration to attack Iraq in which hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent civilians have been killed.

Atomic bombs were not the only weapons of mass destruction used by both allied and axis military forces during World War II. Nazi Germany firebombed hundred of British cities and towns and British and U.S. air forces retaliated by firebombing hundreds of cities in Germany.

In 1945, virtually every major city in Japan was fire bombed by the United States. In a three-month period from February to July, 1945, the U.S. Air Force conducted 14 days of air raids sending over 2,500 B-29 bombers to drop firebombs on Tokyo. In one day alone, March 10, 1945, B-29s dropped incendiary bombs that killed over 100,000 people and burned more the 25 percent of the city.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were spared being firebombed so they would be in tact to ensure that the destructive power of the atomic bombs dropped on those two cities could be better measured by the U.S. government. Neither city was a large military town or had huge war industries. Japanese friends have pointed out that Nagasaki was home to one of the largest Christian populations in Japan and have remarked on the irony of a “Christian nation” targeting the Christian population of Japan.

For the past few days I have attended and been a speaker at the 2009 World Conference against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs (http://www.antiatom.org/GSKY/en/discription_gensuikyo.htm). This conference is held annually to re-focus the world’s attention to the horrible destructive power of the atomic and hydrogen bombs and the necessity to abolish them for the sake of the future of the planet.

We heard the emotional and moving testimony of the Habakusha of Japan who survived the 1945 bombings, but have had life-long medical problems. Most Habukusha have now died — victims of cancer from the radioactivity of the bombs. Those still surviving are in their late 70s and 80s and live with the memories of August 6 — stories of having their clothes seared into their bodies, seeing friends and teachers with skin handing from their bodies, faces gone, injured, jumping into the river to try to cool their bodies, people calling for help from under collapsed buildings, thousands of dead lying in the streets — having to help keep cremation fires going for weeks to burn the bodies. Many school children on weekly work details in the city vanished — incinerated with no trace left on this earth. Painful stories retold to educate others to the horrors of nuclear weapons.

We also heard the stories of men and women who were contaminated in the 2000 tests of atomic and nuclear weapons by the British on Christmas Island and in Australia, the French in French Polynesia and Algeria, the Soviet Union in Semi-Palatinsk, and Novaya Zemlya Island, the Chinese in Lop Nor, the Indians in the Rajastan desert, the Pakistanis in Baluchistan, the North Koreans in P’Unggye-yok, the South Africans and Israelis in a suspected test above Prince Edward Island in the Indian Ocean and the United States in the Marshall Islands, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Alaska and Mississippi.

Most of those injured during the testing are still having difficulty getting acknowledgment of their injuries so they may receive treatment.

And we have heard from international delegates from other nations that have been invaded by the United States and suffered the effects of U.S. weapons of mass destruction. Bui Van Nghi, a delegate from Vietnam, told us of America’s use of Agent Orange 45 years ago to defoliate the jungles of Vietnam in order to expose the supply routes of the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese army, but which also exposed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese (and American soldiers) to the cancer causing carcinogens — killing many and causing cancers and deformities in first, second and third generations.

Dr. Sami from Iraq told of targeting and destruction of civil infrastructure facilities in Baghdad in America’s “Shock and Awe” campaign in March, 2003 and purposeful destruction of the city of Fallujah in 2004. As a medical doctor, he is concerned about the effects of depleted uranium used in America weaponry. High levels of cancer in Iraqis exposed to exploded depleted uranium shells and to materials contaminated with low level radioactivity from the depleted uranium during 1990-91 are being tracked, as are still-births and deformities in second generations, reflecting data complied on American military personnel who served in Gulf War I and their families. The six years of U.S. combat in Iraq from 2003 to 2009 has created another wave of exposure of Iraqis and Americans to depleted uranium.

The Japanese people are looking forward to a new approach on nuclear weapons from the United States. Each speaker in the Hiroshima ceremonies referred to President Obama’s April 5, 2009, speech in Prague, Czech Republic, in which he affirmed his commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and his belief that countries with nuclear weapons would move toward disarmament, those without them would not acquire them and that all countries should have access to peaceful nuclear energy. In contrast to the Bush administration, Obama said he is committed to the success of the 2010 NPT review conference to be held in May, 2010 in New York.

The speakers focused on President Obama’s historic comments on nuclear weapons and chose not to mention his military strategy for conventional wars — the largest military budget in the history of the world, the dramatic increase in military operations in Afghanistan and America’s continuing military presence in Iraq.

Our job as citizens is ensure that President Obama follows his words with concrete actions to reduce, and then eliminate nuclear weapons from the planet. It won’t be easy, that’s for sure, but the safety and security of the people on our earth is at stake. The May, 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty conference in New York City, will bring tens of thousands of citizens from around the world committed to abolishing nuclear weapons — come join us!!

Today, Hiroshima looks like any other modern Japanese city, except for the Peace Memorial Park built in the center of the city. In the past 64 years, until the Bush administration arm-twisted the Japanese government to ignore its own Article 9 constitutional prohibition against war to send naval refueling vessels and air transport planes as a part of the coalition of the willing in the war on Iraq, Japan has not participated in military operations against any country.

In these 64 years, the people of Japan have enjoyed the benefits of peace while the United States has begun wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan and has invaded and occupied numerous other countries-Grenada, Haiti, Panama, and has funded and provided weapons for Israel’s wars in the Middle East.

No more Hiroshimas and Nagasakis! No more war!

Ann Wright served 29 years in the US Army and Army Reserves and retired as a Colonel. She was a U.S. diplomat for 16 years and served in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia. She resigned in March, 2003 in opposition to the war on Iraq. She has co-led 3 trips to Gaza since January, 2009. She is the co-author of “Dissent: Voices of Conscience” (www.voicesofconscience.com).

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-wright/in-hiroshima_b_255521.html

Nagasaki mayor calls for nuclear abolition

AFSC Hawai’i and ‘Ohana Koa / Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific attended the Hiroshima atomic bombing commemoration in Honolulu on August 6th. The event featured Mayor Mufi Hanneman, representatives of different religious denominations, representatives from Hiroshima and an Hibakusha (nuclear survivor).  The speeches talked of the horror of the atomic bombing and celebrated peace and friendship. A student from the Pacific Buddhist Academy spoke clearly to the immorality of using the atomic bomb on Japan.

However, the speeches did not address the ongoing suffering and struggles of the many other nuclear survivors:  the Navajo uranium miners;  the U.S. downwinders who were intentionally exposed to radiation to study the human effects; the Marshall Islanders suffering from the horrible health effects of the 67 nuclear tests the U.S. conducted in their islands, who are still struggling to win just and adequate compensation from the U.S. for their ongoing suffering and hardship.   None of the speakers talked about America’s continuing policy of nuclear terrorism and the failure of the U.S. and the other nuclear powers to adhere to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty provisions calling for steady reductions of nuclear arms as the trade off for non-nuclear powers foreswearing the pursuit of nuclear arms.  In May 2010, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference will meet in New York.  Activists and nongovernmental organizations from around the world will convene there to push the nations to adhere to the promise of disarmament.    Let us remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki and resolve “Never Again”.

0986-ha-hiroshima

Kyle Kajihiro from the American Friends Service Committee holds WWII atomic bomb photos during the 64th anniversary marking the bombing of Hiroshima. JEFF WIDENER | The Honolulu Advertiser <http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Site=M1&Date=20090806&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=908060804&Ref=PH&Params=Itemnr=2#gallerytop>

The Nagasaki commemoration tomorrow should be a different affair, more grassroots and political.  Marsha Joyner of the Martin Luther King Jr. Coalition has organized the Nagasaki commemoration for many years.  As you can see from the article below, the tone of the commemoration in Nagasaki speaks much more clearly to the action that is needed today.   We need to hold Obama to his hope to make the world nuclear weapons free.  The U.S. has the most nukes. The U.S. is the only country to have used its nukes against an enemy.  The U.S. must lead nuclear disarmament by example and take the world back from the precipice of nuclear annihilation.

>><<

Updated at 8:30 p.m., Saturday, August 8, 2009

Nagasaki mayor urges worldwide nuclear arms ban

Associated Press

TOKYO – The mayor of Nagasaki called for a global ban on nuclear arms at a ceremony marking the 64th anniversary of the devastating U.S. attack on the Japanese city that killed about 80,000 people.

In a speech given just after 11:02 a.m. – the time when a plutonium American bomb flattened Nagasaki on Aug. 9, 1945 – Mayor Tomihisa Taue said some progress toward eliminating nuclear weaponry had been made but more needed to be done.

He cited a speech by President Obama in April calling on the world to rid itself of atomic weapons, but also noted a nuclear test blast by North Korea in May.

“We, as human beings, now have two paths before us. While one can lead us to a world without nuclear weapons, the other will carry us toward annihilation, bringing us to suffer once again the destruction experienced in Hiroshima and Nagasaki 64 years ago,” he said.

The atomic attack on Nagasaki came three days after one on Hiroshima, in which 140,000 people were killed or died within months. Japan surrendered on Aug. 15, ending World War II.

At Sunday’s ceremony, Nagasaki observed a moment of silence at the moment of detonation 64 years earlier, while a large bell in the city’s Peace Park was rung repeatedly.

Taue invited leaders of countries possessing nuclear arms to come to Nagasaki and speak to survivors of the attack.

Prime Minister Taro Aso and other dignitaries also addressed the crowd of thousands that had assembled for the ceremony.

Source: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090808/BREAKING/90808045/Nagasaki+mayor+urges+worldwide+nuclear+arms+ban

Poll finds support for U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

This article by the AP reveals a very sad and dangerous reality that a majority of the American public supports the U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II.  It is a chilling revelation about the level of awareness and moral confusion among the American public.  The more crucial question that the poll doesn’t ask is why people believe that the bomb was the right or wrong thing to do.   It would probably reveal that most believe the ‘official story’ that the bomb was necessary to end the war quickly and save lives.  However, they would be wrong.  Japan was already seeking an end to the war, but the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. both rejected these diplomatic overtures. The Soviet Union wanted to enter the war against Japan and take part in the spoils of the war – including territory and influence in the post war political arrangement in Asia.  The Truman administration dropped the bomb to demonstrate America’s awesome new weapon and its will to use it as a signal to the Soviet Union to back off.  The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrible, criminal acts of nuclear terrorism.  Joseph Gerson’s book Empire and the Bomb: How the U.S. Uses Nuclear Weapons to Dominate the World gives a sobering picture of the reasons behind the decision to drop the bomb and the ways that the U.S. has used nuclear weapons to threaten other countries in the same way that an armed robber uses a loaded gun.

>><<

Updated at 6:56 a.m., Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Poll finds support for U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki

Associated Press

NEW HAVEN, Conn. – A majority of Americans surveyed believe dropping atomic bombs on Japan during World War II was the right thing to do, but support was weaker among Democrats, women, younger voters and minority voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll.

The poll, released today, found 61 percent of the more than 2,400 American voters questioned believe the U.S. did the right thing. Twenty-two percent called it wrong and 16 percent were undecided.

The first bomb was dropped Aug. 6, 1945, on Hiroshima. An estimated 140,000 people were killed instantly or died within a few months. Tens of thousands more died from radiation poisoning in the years following.

Three days later, another bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, killing about 80,000 people. Japan surrendered less than a week later.

“Sixty-four years after the dawn of the atomic age, one in five Americans think President Harry Truman made a mistake dropping the bomb,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

The poll asked a single question: “Do you think the United States did the right thing or the wrong thing by dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?”

Among voters over 55 years of age, 73 percent of those surveyed approved the decision while 13 percent opposed. Sixty percent of voters 35 to 54 approved, while 50 percent approved among voters 18 to 34 years old, according to the poll.

“Voters who remember the horrors of World War II overwhelmingly support Truman’s decision,” Brown said. “Support drops with age, from the generation that grew up with the nuclear fear of the Cold War to the youngest voters, who know less about WW II or the Cold War.”

Only 34 percent of black voters and 44 percent of Hispanic voters approved the decision, according to the poll. But Brown cautioned that the polling sample was smaller for those groups, so officials said the margin of error was 8 percentage points for blacks and 10 percentage points for Hispanics.

Support for Truman’s decision was much stronger among Republicans than Democrats and among men than women.

Among Democrats surveyed, 49 percent approved, while 74 percent of Republicans supported Truman’s decision.

Among women questioned, 51 percent supported the bombing, compared to 72 percent of men surveyed.

The poll showed about 70 percent of white Protestants, Catholics and evangelical Christians support the bombing, while 58 percent of Jews approved. The margin of error was 12 percentage points for Jewish voters, officials said.

Quinnipiac surveyed 2,409 registered voters from July 27 to Aug. 3. The poll has a margin of error of 2 percentage points.

Source: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090804/BREAKING/90804015/Poll+finds+support+for+U.S.+atomic+bombing+of+Hiroshima++Nagasaki

 OpenCUNY » login | join | terms | activity 

 Supported by the CUNY Doctoral Students Council.  

OpenCUNY.ORGLike @OpenCUNYLike OpenCUNY

false