Two Atomic Bombs

The Japanese word for Japan (日本 or nihon), if translated phonetically rather than based on the meanings of the characters or radicals, might be translated also as “two items (long thin objects: bottles, neckties, pencils, ropes, etc.)”. Although the shape of atomic bombs may have evolved over time, both the ones dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6, 1945 and August 9, 1945, respectively, and modern nuclear missiles may fall within the category of the appropriately shaped objects which might be counted with the -pon/-hon suffix in Japanese. In early August it will once again be time for the annual commemoration of the atomic bombings – and often not much else in many cases in Japan.

Wars may often have some stated objectives. One potential objective might, for instance, involve forcing the enemy to abide by some potentially relevant type of legislation. At the minimum, the enemy might be expected to write its own post-war laws and then actually enforce those laws. If human rights are deemed relevant, self-conceived or enemy-written legislation might also be expected to involve unconditional respect for universal human rights and a duty to actually enforce universal human rights. Alternatively, if humans are viewed merely as, for instance,  one type of “dangerous living creatures” (see among others, a relevant war objective might involve, for instance, the complete annihilation of the enemy as, for instance, “unneeded” (in the words presented on the Japanese television on July 26, 2017) “dangerous living creatures” (In many – if not all – cases TV programs ostensibly focusing on animals might have a communicative intention of describing some of the Cabal’s actions taken against non-cabalists or anti-cabalists. Groups of predators going after their prey might, for instance, describe some of the Cabal’s strategies to monopolize positions of paid authority or to outnumber non-cabalists in specific situations to professionally or physically eliminate them or the killing of vermin might describe, for instance, some of the Cabal’s poisoning campaigns targeted against individuals or populations deemed “unneeded” by the Cabal.)

According to some potentially relevant measures, the US/allied war against Japan may well have been one of their most spectacular, severe or enduring failures ever. More than 70 years after the end of an overt war, Japan may well be among some of the least law-abiding or the most fervently anti-human territories in the world in terms of crimes or human rights violations involving violations of the most important human rights (see Beyond Legality) – and thus, by implication, if not also more directly, the current home to some of the potentially most “dangerous living creatures” in the world (Any potential alleged aliveness of externally controlled “creatures” might be disputed. See Beyond Legality). Furthermore, in the case of Japan, any potential solutions or remedies – no matter how potentially just or inevitable – implemented now rather than more than 70 years ago might well result in significant collateral damage in other areas – if not also the death or the extinction of some or all of those members of the species who might be quite capable of writing and abiding by legislation that enforces the most important human rights. In the case of Finland, for instance, the Soviet invaders might well appeal to, for instance, incompetence as an excuse for not eliminating those elements in Finland which might subsequently have become perpetrators of or apologists for similar types of crime or human rights violations and it might still be quite possible to implement any potential belated solutions or remedies without causing significant collateral damage elsewhere. But what, if anything, could justify the spectacular failures in the case of Japan and the US/allies?

Would it not be appropriate to commemorate – in addition to the dropping of the atomic bombs – also the dismal failures of perhaps anything less than all-out, mutually completely destructive wars in attaining the rule of law, respect for the most important human rights or liberation of specific habitats from the destructive impact of “dangerous living creatures” of all varieties, for that matter? Might the pronunciation of Japan’s name in Japanese not serve as a potential reminder for such commemoration: two atomic bombs – however horrific – were quite insufficient to prevent some of the potentially most serious human rights violations in history which might well have merited to be prevented through the elimination of the offending subsets of – if not the entire – humanity? (Given the fact that few – if any – alleged or self-declared authorities in Japan – or Finland, for that matter – might have openly claimed that such human rights violations within their alleged or self-declared territories have been or continue to be committed exclusively by foreign nationals and requested outside help to eliminate the foreign occupier while still continuing to claim sovereignty over their alleged or self-declared territories, local alleged or self-declared authorities worldwide may well be among the individuals to be eliminated irrespective of the nationalities of the actual perpetrators.)

The option of implementing potentially necessary or sufficient solutions or remedies simply by exposing potentially substantively vacuous or deceptive posturing through no more than two atomic bombs may well be no longer available. The available options may well involve either recognizing the need to destroy all non-consensually extracted personal information and meticulously enforcing such a policy worldwide or the elimination of the entire humanity. The Japanese practice of commemorating samurais – in a sense, warriors in what, from the perspective of contemporary Japan, might be viewed as civil wars – rather than kamikazes, occupiers, colonizers, rapists etc. from World War II (for instance, nicknaming the men’s national soccer team “Samurai Blue” rather than “Kamikaze/Occupier/Colonizer/Rapist Blue”) may be relatively honest or instructive regarding the nature of the ongoing conflict, which might well be a global civil war rather than exclusively a war between alleged or actual nations.


Leave a Reply

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