1945 US 'PIVOT TO ASIA, :Nuclear War, part 1

The Soviet Union, then a revolutionary socialist beacon for brewing working class revolutions in the ‘third world and Europe, was #1 US enemy
U.S NOW WANTS JAPAN TO OFFICIALLY OVERTURN WHAT U.S. IMPOSED ON ITS U.S. OCCUPIED CLIENT STATE POST WW2 “to forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes” and refrain from maintaining military forces

To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal"
Henry A. Kissinger

Shinzo Abe Is the Ally America Needs
Defense One Today April 28, 2015 Dennis Blair
The Japanese leader's visit, which starts Wednesday, will present a stark contrast to those of Iraq's Haider al-Abadi and Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu.

US’ very convincing terror proxy ISIS
Will ISIS Push Japan to Give Up Pacifism and Go to War?
2/2/15 http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/02/02/after_the_killing_of_k...
Joshua Keating is a staff writer at Slate focusing on international affairs.
This shift has been motivated primarily by concerns over China’s growing power and the threat from a nuclear-armed North Korea, but Abe has also waded into conflicts further afield. Last month, before the hostage crisis, he pledged $200 million in nonmilitary aid for the Middle Eastern countries involved in the fight against ISIS. “Should we leave terrorism or weapons of mass destruction to spread in this region, the loss imparted upon the international community would be immeasurable,” the prime minister said during a visit to Cairo....
The videotaped execution of American journalist James Foley was the primary event that galvanized U.S. public support for airstrikes against ISIS. France stepped up its involvement following the terrorist attacks in Paris last month. Will ISIS beheading of Japanese journalist Kenji Goto over the weekend, as well as another Japanese hostage, Haruna Yukawa, a week earlier, draw Japan into deeper involvement in the Middle East and a more militarized foreign policy in general?
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe seems to be implying this, vowing “to make the terrorists pay the price”—an unusual statement for a Japanese leader, but in keeping with Abe’s push for Japan to a Under Article 9 of the constitution imposed by the U.S. following World War II, Japan vows to “forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes” and refrain from maintaining military forces. But the country has been inching away from that stance for a while. Japan’s well-equipped “Self-Defense Forces” are a military in all but name. In 1992 the parliament passed a law over public opposition allowing these forces to participate in peacekeeping operations and they have done so in several cases, including the Iraq War
This movement toward militarization has accelerated under Abe, who loosened the country’s ban on weapons exports, and pushed a revisionist view of World War II history, which holds that the country has been too apologetic for its wartime actions. His Cabinet has reinterpreted the constitution as allowing for “collective self-defense”—coming to the aid of allies under attack—though parliament has to approve this change before the military can actually act on it.... But 64% of the Japanese polled this spring opposed amending the constitution and that opposition has increased...Some in Japan are blaming Abe’s foreign policy for Goto’s and Yukawa’s deaths. ISIS originally demanded $200 million in ransom for the two hostages—the amount Abe pledged to the countries fighting the ISIS last month—demanded the Japanese government give up its “foolish” support for the U.S. Campaign ---and likely to make the case Abe’s militarism has made the Japanese a target. Abe and his allies may see these threats as what a former diplomat called “9/11 for Japan,” large segments of the public will likely see them as evidence the island nation shouldn’t get involved.

Why World War II ended with Mushroom Clouds
The unspoken objective of the atomic bomb was US Hegemony in Asia and the Pacific
6/8/10 by Jacques R. Pauwels http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20478
Jacques R. Pauwels, author of The Myth of the Good War: America in the Second World War, James Lorimer, Toronto, 2002
...War Department study 'Use of Atomic Bomb on Japan' written in 1946 .declassified in the Seventies, found "the Japanese leaders had decided to surrender and were merely looking for sufficient pretext to convince the die-hard Army Group that Japan had lost the war and must capitulate to the Allies."...Eisenhower recorded telling Stimson "Japan was already defeated and dropping the bombs was completely unnecessary" and by Admiral William D Leahy "the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender."...as soon as the bomb was proven to work at the Alamagordo base in New Mexico on 16 July 1945 - the US military and civilian leadership no longer needed Russia. In fact, the bomb was a weapon against Russia. As Secretary of State-designate Byrnes explained, "our possessing and demonstrating the bomb would make Russia more manageable in Europe"... limiting its claims on a postwar set-up in the Far East.

Was the Atomic Bomb Necessary to Win World War II?
www-ckhs.cksd.wednet.edu/ STAFF/ russells/ APUSH..
A top-secret April 1946 War Department Study, ‘Use of Atomic Bomb on Japan’, declassified during the 1970s… found “the Japanese leaders had decided to surrender and were merely looking for sufficient pretext (reason) to convince the die-hard Army Group that Japan had lost the war...
As of April 29, 1945, the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), in a report titled ‘Unconditional Surrender of Japan’, informed the Joint Chiefs of Staff that “increasing numbers of informed Japanese, both military and civilian, already realize the inevitability of absolute defeat.” The JIC further advised that “the increasing effects of air-sea blockade, the progressive and cumulative devastation wrought by strategic bombing, and the collapse of Germany should make this realization widespread within the year...
The military situation 1 June 1945, when the Interim Committee submitted its recommendations on the use of the atomic bomb, was distinctly favorable to the Allied cause. Germany had surrendered in May and troops from Europe would soon be available for redeployment in the Pacific. Manila had fallen in February; Iwo Jima was in American hands; and the success of the Okinawa invasion was assured. Air and submarine attacks had all but cut off Japan from the resources of the Indies, and B-29's from the Marianas were pulverizing Japan's cities and factories. The Pacific Fleet had virtually driven the Imperial Navy from the ocean, and fast carrier plane forces were striking Japanese naval bases in the Inland Sea. Clearly, Japan was a defeated nation.
Though Japan showed no disposition to surrender unconditionally. Japanese troops had demonstrated time and again that they could fight and inflict heavy casualties even when the outlook was hopeless. Allied plans in the spring of 1945 took these facts into account and proceeded on the assumption that an invasion of the home islands would be required to achieve at the earliest possible date the unconditional surrender of Japan---the announced objective of the war and first requirement of all strategic planning.
Other means of achieving this objective had been considered and, in early June, not yet been entirely discarded. One called for the occupation of a string of bases around Japan to increase the intensity of air bombardment. Combined with a tight naval blockade, such a course would, many believed, produce the same results as an invasion and at far less cost in lives. [32] "I was unable to see any justification," Admiral Leahy later wrote, "for an invasion of an already thoroughly defeated Japan. I feared the cost would be enormous in both lives and treasure”... Mac Arthur said the seizure of a ring of bases around Japan would disperse Allied forces even more than they already were and (if an attempt was made to seize positions on the China coast) might very well lead to long-drawn-out operations on the Asiatic mainland.
The U.S. had long since broken the enemy codes... a critical message of July 12, 1945 – just before Potsdam – showed the Japanese emperor himself had decided to intervene to attempt to end the war. In his private journal, Truman bluntly characterized the message as the “telegram from [the] Jap Emperor asking for peace.” ...
Brig. Gen. George A. Lincoln, one of the Army's top planners, wrote in June "probably it will take Russian entry into the war, coupled with a landing, threat of landing on Japan proper by us, to convince them [the Japanese] of the hopelessness of their position."...

Some officials may have believed, too, the bomb could be used as a powerful deterrent to Soviet expansion in Europe, where the Red tide had successively engulfed Rumania, Bulgaria, Jugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary. In an interview with three of the top scientists in the Manhattan Project early in June, Mr. Byrnes did not, according to Leo Szilard, argue the bomb was needed to defeat Japan, but should be dropped to "make Russia more manageable in Europe."[Szilard,"A Personal History of the Atomic Bomb,"pp. 14-15]...
The close sequence of events between 6 and 10 August, combined with the fact the bomb was dropped almost three months before the scheduled invasion of Kyushu while the Japanese were trying desperately to get out of the war, has suggested to some that the bombing of Hiroshima had a deeper purpose than the desire to end the war quickly. This purpose, it is claimed, was nothing less than a desire to forestall Soviet intervention in the Far East ...Certainly nothing in the military situation...In this sense it may be argued that the bomb proved a success, for the war ended with the United States in full control of Japan....

The birth of 'mere terror'
Making war on civilians took a further turn in the Far East... Before August 1945, very many Japanese had already been killed by "conventional" bombing. On one night in Tokyo in March, American bombers killed 85,000 civilians - more than would die at Nagasaki - and at least 300,000 were incinerated in great fire raids over the following months... as Evelyn Waugh put it...in 1948: "To the practical warrior the atom bomb presented no particular moral or spiritual problem. We were engaged in destroying the enemy, civilians and combatants alike....Hiroshima was but one more step.

The myths of Hiroshima
August 05, 2005|Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin, http://articles.latimes.com/2005/aug/05/opinion/oe-bird
SIXTY YEARS ago tomorrow, an atomic bomb was dropped without warning on the center of the Japanese city of Hiroshima. One hundred and forty thousand people were killed, more than 95% of them women and children and other noncombatants. At least half of the victims died of radiation poisoning over the next few months. Three days after Hiroshima was obliterated, the city of Nagasaki suffered a similar fate. The magnitude of death was enormous, but on Aug. 14, 1945 -- just five days after the Nagasaki bombing -- Radio Tokyo announced that the Japanese emperor had accepted the U.S. terms for surrender...This powerful narrative took root quickly and is now deeply embedded in our historical sense of who we are as a nation. A decade ago, on the 50th anniversary, this narrative was reinforced in an exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution on the Enola Gay, the plane that dropped the first bomb. The exhibit, which had been the subject of a bruising political battle, presented nearly 4 million Americans with an officially sanctioned view of the atomic bombings that portrayed them as a necessary act in a just war....The Enola Gay exhibit repeated outright lies such as "special leaflets were dropped on Japanese cities" warning civilians to evacuate. The fact is that atomic bomb warning leaflets were dropped on Japanese cities after Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been destroyed...
Americans were told that use of the bombs "led to the immediate surrender of Japan and made unnecessary the planned invasion of the Japanese home islands."... as J. Robert Oppenheimer, scientific director of the Manhattan Project, said in November 1945, the bomb was dropped on "an essentially defeated enemy." President Truman and his closest advisor, Secretary of State James Byrnes used it primarily to prevent the Soviets from sharing in the occupation of Japan. And they used it on Aug. 6 even though they had agreed among themselves as they returned home from the Potsdam Conference on Aug. 3 that the Japanese were looking for peace....