Home | About | Donate

70 Years After Bombing of Hiroshima, Calls to Abolish Nuclear Weapons


#1

70 Years After Bombing of Hiroshima, Calls to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Sarah Lazare, staff writer

As tens of thousands gathered in Hiroshima on Thursday to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the U.S. dropping of the atomic bomb, people from Japan and across the globe urged world leaders to honor the lives of those killed and wounded by abolishing nuclear weapons once and for all.


#2

To associate nuclear electric power generation with nuclear weapons is a non sequitur. The loss of life and health from all the reactor accidents pales compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


#3

I am 77 years old. I was a young sailor at Bikini for the Redwing series of nuclear tests in 1956. There are not many of us left. Many died from nasty cancers and other illnesses. Many of their children had birth defects. There were many still-births.
* Sadly, to the current crowd of alleged representatives of We the People, nuclear weapons are just toys, a bigger firecracker, something to impress the peasants with.
* They do not know the horror of these things. They set off things like these every day in their computer games. Believe me, folks, that is nothing like the reality.
* Right now, there is a trillion dollar gift to the MICC to modernize and make more efficient our nuclear stockpile. Apparently the logic is if you have the ability to totally destroy life on earth forty or fifty times over, you must build that up to being able to destroy all life on earth a hundred or two hundred times over. After all, the profits for the 0.001% are enormous for this, just like the other billion and trillion dollar increases that profit them and kill or displace millions of human beings.
* End this stupidity now, and work for peace! Use those trillions to heal the planet, rebuild the lives ruined by greed and love of power.
* We are running out of time. Think of the number of people in bunkers everywhere with their fingers poised above the launch button, waiting for the word.
;-})


#6

I listened to the broadcast of the speech made by the mayor of Hiroshima, Kazumi Matsui. He put the PM ABE to shame. Matsui beseeched all nations to agree to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation in a speech that was compassionate, heartrending, and a diplomatic marvel. He referred to the "hibakusha" or victims of the bombing of Hiroshima with deep reverence and regret for their and their progeny's ongoing suffering. The focus was on World Peace and he invited all to come see the devastation wrought by just one atomic bomb and walk through the museum to fully understand the absolute destruction of people and places resulting from the use of nuclear weapons.

Perhaps the Rep. clown car of presidential wannabes should take a group trip to Hiroshima, the sooner, the better!


#7

You are right. That is what the trolls do. "Oh, he died of cancer, but can you prove that it is from that nuclear exposure a few years ago?"
;-})


#8

Or better yet, have them roll up their sleeves and work on cleaning up Fukushima, for as long as they live.
;-})


#9

In 1962 I saw a documentary film with the title, "Mondo Cane" (A Dog's World) that portrayed all the depravity and utter disregard for others exercised by human beings worldwide. One of the most tragic scenes was the sea turtles returning to Bikini Atoll to lay their eggs and the horrific effects that nuclear contamination took on these and other animals on the island. I have never forgotten that scene or the other horrors (consumers in Taiwan picking out black puppies to eat - the puppies were whimpering in cages and their tales were wagging when the person who would soon consume them came by to size them up).

I shake my head in disbelief that there are people in power (i.e., Sen. McCain and Sen. L. Graham) who persist in pushing for using nuclear might to solve disputes/conflicts/perceived problems.


#11

I guess you will have to kill me then. Can you provide me with the data to substantiate your claim of a cancer epidemic in Hawaii?


#12

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#14

If the effect of radionuclides from nuclear power plants or accidents was significant compared to chemical carcinogens - including natural ones like mycotoxins found in nuts and grains stored in excessively moist conditions, or natural radioactive hazards like radon, or just random mutations (the biggest cause of cancer) then there should be a clear statistical signature rising above the noise. But there isn't.

For example, the Pennsylvania Health Department keeps some pretty good cancer data by county throughout the state. There is no evidence of any change in cancer rates in the area around TMI. In fact, the cancer statistics in Dauphin, York and Lancaster counties are quite good compared to formerly heavily industrialized (and natural radon prone) Allegheny county, far from TMI (but full surrounded by coal burning power plants) where I live.

But just like with the 911 kooks, I have no illusion about changing anyone's mind. I'm sure that you will simply snatch tour explanation from thin air that someone regularly snuck in and altered all the health department files.

But I seem compelled by my commitment to logic and rationality to present my arguments anyway...


#15

Unfortunately the PC I am at for some reason blocks the icon to flag your post for making violent threats, but I will flag it when I get home...


#16

Yunzer, why don't you go to Fukushima and clean it up? After all, you know it is perfectly safe, don't you.
;-})


#18

But also, the claim you are making is meaningless without evidence. provide it.


#19

With proper dosimeter monitoring and PPE's I would work there, but I would need to learn Japanese, I'm getting close to retirement, and I already have a job.

Fukushima was about appallingly poorly placed backup generators and a one-in 2000 year tsunami. Had the generators been better located or the one-in-2000 year tsunami not happened, we would not be having this discussion.

But just to match shrillness with shrillness - it is you scientifically illiterate, conspiracy-kook anti-nukers who seem to be perfectly OK with far more destructive coal mining and burning (stories on MTR in West Virginia and coal power plant emissions always get a big yawn from the CD readership), who are threatening to lead us all to global climate catastrophe. What is it about the obvious fact that wind and solar by themselves cannot begin to meet global electrical energy needs - especially in a future carbon-free all-electric transportation infrastructure - do you not get?

So maybe we should be rounding you all up for execution.


#20

Take a hike


#23

Humans developed the power reactors and the bombs. Did anyone think about the consequences? What to do with the waste? How to store it, when it will remain active longer than any of us will remain alive? Leaving it for future generations to deal with, if we haven't annihilated the entire planet by then.
Mini true mentions the recent 1trillion to upgrade these weapons, Israel wants to bomb Iran's nuclear power plants. Have humans gone stark raving mad?? Have they not been taught about radioactive fallout and the devastating effects to humankind, the planet, the water, the air??
Have we not learned from Nagasaki and Hiroshima? Civilian population centers that were annihilated by the orders of an insane lunatic, just because he could, and so he did. 70 years later, have we not learned??
Where is the humangentlelovingkindness??


#26

I find it interesting that you think those of us who are anti-nuke are in favor of coal, oil and gas. We have those damned 100+ coal trains going through town several times a day, interspersed with 100+ oil trains going the other way, and empty coal trains going back to Mordor for another load.
* We are doing what we can to get rid of them, too. Of course, considering who owns the government, we are having a hard time even getting legislation introduced.
* The state of the art on solar is improving every year. I certainly don't think that has peaked. Wind is getting more efficient also. There are some seaborn power generation ideas that work. The big problem is that every idea, every piece of development, is met with roadblocks by Big Oil, Big Gas, Big Coal and Big Nuke. That is where the profit is, and they will spend lavishly to keep anything from supplanting it.
* Granted, if you shut down the Big Four right now, life would be very tough as people are no longer used to living as they did on farmsteads a century ago. However, if money and research is poured into sun, wind and water to improve the technology, and perhaps finding additional sources of renewables, with a goal of getting rid of reliance on Coal, Oil, Gas, and Nuclear, we could well achieve the goal in a few years. Some of the junk we have become used to, or dependent upon, will disappear, but we do have the ability to cope with adversity. Look at how we have put up with the Big Four all these years.
;-})


#27

How can you be so sure of the cause of the triple meltdown at Fukushima when the Japanese government and corporate panels cannot agree on the precise causes? Your statements on the relative safety of radionuclides compared to chemical carcinogens also does not make any sense. Which chemicals are you referring to? Also, the 911 kooks comment is highly offensive to those like myself who have many questions about that day. I think most of understand where you are coming from and therefore your comments really should be ignored. For those of us who are still watching the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe, it has become one of the most significant disasters in modern history and it is still far too uncertain how it will unfold over the ensuing decades.

THREE YEARS AFTER: Quake or tsunami? Panels at odds over cause of Fukushima nuclear disaster
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/analysis_opinion/AJ201403050061


#28

You effectively are supporting coal. Consider the experience of Germany.

And even the best solar panels produce nothing at night and very little on a cloudy day. And the idea that the nuclear industry (Only one US company is still building reactors - Westinghouse) are some kind of big influential industry is hardly the case - they are constantly under attack by coal and gas interests who pitch much harder sells to the utilities.

And there is nothing clean and carbon free about these idyllic farmsteads. Most of them in my area heated their homes with coal (some still do) where I live.

And when you mean you are opposed to nuclear, do you mean all nuclear technologies, including all research, including fusion, forever?


#29

The hunters of the witches in Salem were sure they knew the truth too.

Nobody is suggesting that Fukushima had no impact - it had huge impact to the poeple around the plant - although that impact is much smaller than the impact of the earthquake and Tsunami that killed 18,500 with many hundreds of thousands homeless.

Here is a pretty good assessment of the truth: