Japanese Defense Minister: Atomic Bombings Were An Inevitable Way To End The War
UPDATE: Defense Minister Kyuma has resigned over the massive fallout caused by his explosive comments.
=================================
Original Post:
Defense Minister Fumio Kyuma, who angered some earlier this year by calling the Iraq war a “mistake,” has made another gaffe:
“I understand that the bombing ended the war, and I think that it couldn’t be helped,” Defense Minister Fumio Kyuma said in a speech at a university in Chiba, just east of Tokyo.
Kyuma’s remarks drew immediate criticism from Nobuo Miyake, director-general of a group of Japanese atomic bomb victims living in Tokyo.
“The U.S. justifies the bombings saying they saved American lives,” said Miyake, 78. “It’s outrageous for a Japanese politician to voice such thinking. Japan is a victim.”
Kyuma said later that his comments were misinterpreted. He told reporters he meant to say the bombing “could not be helped from the American point of view.”
“It’s too bad that my comments were interpreted as approving the U.S. bombing,” he said.
[...]
Kyuma, who is from Nagasaki, said the bombing caused great suffering in the city, but he does not resent the U.S. because it prevented the Soviet Union from entering the war with Japan, according to Kyodo News Agency.
Calling the atomic bombings something that is “しょうがない” can hardly be considered a politically correct statement for the member of the government to make here. His remarks were the top story on the evening news today, and the fact that there are a lot of people in Japan who are sensitive about this issue probably makes this statement a lot worse than what he said about the Iraq war.
Full RSS Feed
Well, he isn’t the first government official to say this. Koichi Kido and Hisatsune Sakomizu, two of the members of Japan’s “peace faction” during the war, were thankful (!!!) for the bombing. Kido said “We of the peace party were assisted by the atomic bomb in our endeavor to end the war.”, while Sakomizu called the bombing “a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war”.
Let’s face it, if the bombs weren’t dropped, the US would have to invade. The Soviets would have done so too sooner or later. Result? Millions of deaths (Japanese, American and Soviet) and a divided Japan, aka, Korea part II.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
What Kido said was
http://mamo.huu.cc/bd30410.htm
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Thanks for the translations. My japanese is about as good as my martian. I got those quotes from Wikipedia.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“the military top officers will save face” – this was a key aspect. The official Imperial announcement of surrender makes clear mention of the bombs, saying that Japan is surrendering to save humanity from their use. Japan thus takes the high moral ground. Very nice excuse.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
When I watch programming on the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings I am always saddened by the suffering of the victims. Never though do I see the Japanese nation as a victim as in the eyes of Mr Nobuo Miyake. Japan was a criminal nation that caused suffering in Korea, China and the Phillipines to mention a few places. In August of 1945 the United States did what it had to do in the best interests of its soldiers and at the same time inflicted the due punishment on a nation that viewed others as inferior. It was this notion of Japanese superiority that led to events such as the Baton death march and comfort women. What should be remembered when they gather in Hiroshima every year is not the bombing alone, but the evil acts of Japan and the punishment they received for it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Yeah. That’s a great way to get over it. Perpetual self-flagellation.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Ah, the classic Victor’s Justice.
It never grows old does it?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Japanese accepted the punishment. The government never complained about it nor accused US of dropping A-bombs.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Yeah,USA has the justice and the right to do masscare.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I am a little confused now. It was Japan that attacked the USA if I remember correctly. Would you have preferred that Nagasaki and Hiroshima were fire bombed like Tokyo so they could have died a slower death? Personally I would have preferred the Japanese not have attacked the USA at all. While all war is tragic and I wish unnecessary, evil militant people such as the 1930`s and 40`s Japanese military needed to be beaten back with a big stick. I am grateful we had the big stick with which to do the job. The world should be grateful too. Some day way off in the future when much of the rest of the world pulls its collective head out of its ass, you will be grateful that a brave few had the foresight to face the incredibly evil fanatical Muslim threat that exists today. Things are much the same as the world of the 1930`s. Sad how history must always repeat itself.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
It is sad. It never stops.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I am sure all those people who died of leukaemia and cancer after Hiroshima and Nagasaki would indeed have preferred firebombs. Not so many lingering aftereffects and easier to escape from.
I fail however to see how Imperial Japan resembles Muslim terrorists.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Surely the evil acts of Japanese troop should be remembered.
And indeed, “Sad how history must always repeat itself.”:how many innocent women and children should be killed to terminate “the incredibly evil fanatical Muslim threat”?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
sorry for typo
x masscare
o massacre
Rate this comment:
0 
0
It sure would be nice if innocents did not die in the pursuit of justice and the emlinination of tyrants. I am not going to hold my breath in anticipation of a perfect world. Complacency will lead to the elimination of freedom. Evil tyrants must die and I pray for as few innocent casualties as possible. As for those that suffered after the bombings I feel sadness, but no remorese. Especially for a country that exhibits as little remorese that it does for the horrors it committed on its victims. How does 1930`s Japan resemble todays Muslim fanatics, thats easy. An elite race that looks on others as inferior dogs that are to be abused and killed links the Japanese Empire to the Muslim scurge of today. When the free world awakens to the threat the response should be the same, with all the power and ferocity that free people can muster in defense of their freedom. We did it in beating back the German and Japanese threat over 60 years ago, and will have to do it again … that damn imperfect world and history repeating itsself. What a great nation that USA is by the way. After having to destroy you after your transgressions, we help build you into a mordern free society. History is not littered with many powers that perform that feat. We are still waiting for the thank you.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“War without mercy” by John Dower provides an interesting perspective on how the both sides, the U.S. and Japan, used race laden propaganda in the war time.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Muslims are a religion not a race. The Bali Bombers were SE Asian, not Middle Eastern. As to the “elite” part, you could make that connection with a lot of groups/nations, so why use this forum as a soapbox to go on about the Muslim terrorist threat? The Japanese never tried to destroy the American way of life at least.
How much remorse for its victims do you think “Japan” shows? Do please give examples.
And you seriously haven’t been able to see the Japanese “thank you”? You don’t actually know how much Japan loves America?
What a wonderfully jingoistic post. I can feel my neck getting redder just reading it. Don’t get many like that here.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
wow…. I mean … just wow.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
While my spelling was a little off due to my passion, I beleive my point was made, hence no response. I live in a great but not perfect country. Many of you around the world came here to make up this great nation and in turn create many around the world that should be grateful for its existence and their freedom. At some point in the furture you will come to realize your need for our leadership and once again be greatful for our existence … history repeating itself.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I think the U.S. is a great nation, and I expect her to take a great leadership.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
My previous response was eaten by the system, but this comment is even more jingoistically direct. “Your need for our leadership” – wonderful. Don’t get many Fox News-worthy gems like that here.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Hey everybody, this guy is just trolling. Ignore him.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Whats all the fuss about? “Cant be helped” sounds like a realistic statement, afterall its over 60 years since the end of the war isnt it? Theres still something like causality of events aint it? Sure, the american bombings were war crimes, no doubt about that. But japan, like germany, started the damn war. In the end, everybody except the USA paid a high price for that.
I nevertheless consider it far better for a nation to remember its own war crimes than succumbing to a ritualized commemoration cult like it the one around the a-bomb victims.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
It is important for Japan to remember its own war crimes. but notice in Japan the commemoration functions as strong anti-war sentiments and ideology , not as anti-U.S. sentiments.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I personally think the biggest war crime the USA committed in WW2 was letting the USSR have half of Europe. If the USA had listened to Patton maybe millions would not have had to spend the next 50 years behind the iron curtain.
As for the USA not paying a high price, I find that the 400,000 US dead enough. This war was not ours yet we basically saved Europe from Germany and rid the Pacific of a spreading Japanese threat and domination.
After 60 years of relative peace thanks to American power much of the free world has gone soft. Now a new threat arises in Europe and it festers within. Muslim fanaticism has infiltrated and has begun to poison many countries. Let’s see how long it takes for the tea sipping Nevel Chamberlains of the world to be silenced in shame and then the real work can be done. I am guessing it will take a little more than a few car bombs.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“Shou ga nai” is Kyushu-ben
Hah! Worst excuse ever.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
There’s nothing wrong with Muslism first of all! What is wrong is that the U.S. uses nuclear threat as an excuse to intervene other countries’ interior affairs. They use all kinds of excuses to initiate wars around the world, acting as world wide police. They “conquered” those countries such as Iraq and Afgan with “justice”, and set up “idle” government; what they do is to fulfill their dream of “Super USA”, but not better off the world.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Actually if Uncle Sam didnt nuked Japan, post-war Japan must have been divided like Germany and Kimchi Peninsula. Unfortunately most of Japanese can’t still accept this fact because we are so emotional.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Bill,
I am with you on this one. WW2 was tit-for-tat. american carpet bombings were atrocious but it was in response to an atrocious aggressor. kyuma could have been more tactful, but what he said is not very extreme or unreasonable. the conduct of the japanese nation was not very tactful at that time either. it is ridiculous that he should have to resign for such mild comments. especially, in light of the callous remarks of other politicians recently (eg. no evidence of nanking massacre, continuing comfort women fiasco etc. ) that displayed a complete lack of empathy for the real victims of the war (the common people of asia).
after 3 years of living in japan, i have heard many times from the japanese around me about the horrors of the a-bomb, tokyo firebombing etc but i am yet to hear any sign of acknowledgement from my acquaintances of the wrongs committed by japan during those dark times. if the subject is broached, the typical response is either awkward silence or something like “muzukashii mondai dane”.
jiang,
there is something very wrong with muslims and islam. any organisation that aims to kill people based purely upon not being members forfeits any of the courtesies that we normally extend to others.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned here and I think needs to be, just for some perspective, is that carpet bombing was not exclusive to the US on Japan. Germany got pretty thoroughly pounded as well, and there were smaller-scale efforts by both sides all over the place. The US [conventional] bombing of Japan was not an outlying tactic.
As far as Japanese sense of guilt goes, well – your mileage will vary. Most I’ve talked to have no issues with it, but then most I’ve talked to about it are academics and historians (it’s not usually a subject that comes up otherwise).
The trouble with Islam and the “aims to kill” comment is that Islam isn’t nearly organised enough to make that valid. Certain sections are, and have that belief, and must be expunged. Certain other sections are not, do not, and need not be.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
overthinker.
agreed. germany was bad too. german civilians also got pounded. which is also bad. but no german politician will be forced to resign because they say it couldnt be helped that the allies waged war against nazi germany.
re. guilt. i dont think current japanese need to feel guilty. i think they need to accept their nation did some awful things but it has moved on and at least be able to discuss the nations history. the current mood is we japanese (not those japanese) tried to free asia, but shamefully failed and were the victims of american indiscriminate bombings. this is very one-eyed.
re. muslims. i dont think moderate muslims actually exist. consider how church of england christianity has gutted itself by allowing a little bit of self reflection and reason to be applied to the nonsensical scriptures. you either have faith or not. if you have faith in islam and the koran, it prescribes some nasty, virile hatred and violence – this is the unpleasant truth that we musnt shy away from. whilst those brave enough to carry out bombings are obviously a problem, the root problem is the actual faith of islam.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“Allies waged war” is different to “Allies dropped nukes” – the former is a normal historical war against military forces, the latter a remarkably cruel form of bombing against civilians. A better analogy, though not perfect, might be a German politician getting in trouble for saying it couldn’t be helped that the Allies bombed Dresden. I have no idea if any have or not, as I do not follow German politics. Considering the number of Westerners who agree with Japan that the a-bombs were Cruel and Unusual Punishment, I do not see the Japanese point of view as extreme or alarming. Just political: Kyuma was forced to resign as the victims groups have powerful lobbies.
“The current mood”? You need to be more specific. Seriously, how are you determining that? Opinion polls? This stance, even more right-wing than the Tsukurukai textbook, seems extreme, considering the mood of the times was such that the Tsukurukai text was opposed by so many. The Yomiuri Shimbun poll at http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/syndrome/yoron/sekinin1.html suggests most Japanese associate the war with anti-war feelings. No More War is a clear leader, well above the nukes at number two. “Tragedy” “Invasion” “Starvation” round out the top ten. Further down on that page, 34% believe both the China War and the Pacific War were wars of “Invasion” and 33% that the China War but the Pacific was not. Just 10% claim neither was. There’s a lot of interesting stuff on that page actually.
I have met “moderate” muslims, but then anecdotes are not evidence. And if you have faith in the Bible you believe the universe is 6,000 years old and was created in no more than 144 hours. After all, you either have faith or you don’t, so all those Christians who believe in a multi-billion-year old universe and even evolution must not exist. I am not saying radical muslims do not exist or that they are not a threat, but to assume all muslims are equally likely to strap bombs round their waist and blow up airports is blowing the issue out of all proportion.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
BTW, here’s an article I found about War Responsibility:
＜ 国民の８割が自分に愛国心が「ある」と思い、そのうち９割は先の戦争で日本がアジア諸国におこなった侵略や植民地支配を「反省する必要がある」と考えていることが、朝日新聞社の世論調査（面接）で分かった。歴史問題をめぐり、中国、韓国と日本の摩擦が取りざたされるが、日本人の多くは、愛国心をもちつつ、日本の過去の歴史も冷静に見つめているといえそうだ。＞
日本が過去に起こした戦争は正しかったとして、アジアへの戦争責任を否定する見方が、一部のマスメディアやインターネットなどにありますが、この世論調査の結果は、過去の戦争への反省を、「あまり必要ない」9％、「全く必要ない」2％となっており、そういう見方はごく少数であることが分かります。
(http://nishiha.blog43.fc2.com/blog-entry-512.html)
Quick Translation:
Certain sections of the mass media and internet present a viewpoint that denies Japan’s war responsibility and considers the war just, but from these poll results, with 9% saying “there is not much need” and 2% saying “there is no need” we can see that that viewpoint is a very small minority.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Oops. The first paragraph of the translation vanished somewhere. Here it is:
“An Asahi Shimbun poll found that 80% of citizens had patriotic feelings, and of that, 90% felt “there was a need to reflect (as in repent, rather than just think about)” Japan’s invasion of Asian countries and their colonial rule. There is supposed to be conflict between China and Korea vs Japan regarding historical problems, but we can say from this that most Japanese, while patriotic, look at history rationally/calmly”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“A better analogy, though not perfect, might be a German politician getting in trouble for saying it couldn’t be helped that the Allies bombed Dresden” fair point. it was overkill – literally.
i still maintain, the guy should be able to speak his mind without losing his job.
im not saying all muslims are terrorists. i have mates that are muslim. anyway, i think such people either dont swallow the horseshit of their religion and live a lie due to social obligations (in this case, they are not really muslim), or, they are certified nutters. problem is, we dont know which. i recently had a no pork bbq, knowing that one of the guests was muslim. its a weird dichotomy – respecting and liking the individual but having disdain for their proclaimed set of beliefs.
my point about western christians was exactlty that – most of them are no longer christian. some cling to some component of the religion (theism, community events, etc) most have simply abondoned it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Definite agreement – he should not have been fired. But then politicians are frequently fired for saying things that should fall under ‘free speech’ – it’s a sacrifice, frankly. My SO did not agree with me though – argued vehemently that it was only natural he be canned, because of his position.
I doubt I would ever adjust my menu to cater for a lone muslim (he can have the steak and avoid the pork easily enough anyway) but I know what you mean about liking someone on a personal level and thinking their beliefs are utterly nuts.
As far as I am concerned, anyone who calls themself a Christian is a Christian (ditto for Islam or any religion save Jedi): it is not up to us to say that such-and-such a way of worship is required to be a “true” Christian. Far too much blood has been spilt on that issue already.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I’m sorry Evan, but you appear to be, unfortunately, totally nuts. I would rather you gave an indepth study of what you are arguing about, such as the teachings of Islam, and then comment on it, then simply proclaim it’s evil and the root of the problem.
There were plenty of real, compassionate Christians during the crusades, and yet, those mass-murders still occured.
Perhaps, extremist, insane people are just using Islam as a background and reason to act crazy and murder. They same thing has been happening in Christianity for years. And what’s the answer? Abolish all religion because some people abuse it? I’d rather be allowed to have my own believes then have them dictated to me.
Just because Islam is the most prominent reason cited for terrorist acts, doesn’t mean if it was abolished forcefully that terrorism would stop. Others would rise in its place. Why? Because terrorists breed terrorism, not religion. Whether they cite their reason for it being religion, or insanity, or revenge, terrorism is the problem, not any religion.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I think Kyuma just said something in line with Gar Alperovitz
http://www.amazon.com/Decision-Use-Atomic-Bomb/dp/067976285X
Rate this comment:
0 
0
back to the original topic…
As a veteran of the USAF and having been stationed in Japan (2 yrs- loved it) I am not unfamiliar with the topic. My mother-in-law was near Nagasaki as a girl and her family experienced medical issues which are possibly due to radiation exposure. It’s possible my own children have genetic damage passed on as a result (although I don’t think so). So I think I am entitled to my opinion and have a couple of points to raise:
First, in trying to condemn the US for using the atom bomb. Does anyone doubt what Tojo or Stalin or Hitler would have done if they had them? Really?
WW2 was horrendous for all involved. It is important to question our governments actions, but it is important to do so in an informed, and un-emotional manner- unless you just want to rant. In which case you know nobody really wants to listen.
Trying to compare “your attrocities” against “my attrocities” or “their attrocities” sounds like a pointless kids pissing-match. Early in the war, civilian centers became targets of aerial bombing, and all sides found themselves eventually convinced that it was a military necessity. You don’t bring a knife to a gun fight. Doesn’t make it “right” just the way it was. Somebody should be blamed for starting that policy, but you know it wasn’t the U.S. We were too late to the war to own that one.
That doesn’t address the issue that some sides were actively engaged in genocide. Some attempts were made at bacteriological warfare (spreading bubonic plague amongst enemy civilians- failed) and chemical weapons were used (although I am not familiar with any cases of purposeful targeting of civilians, I suspect it was limited due to cost). The US was not doing that, however. My point is CONTEXT- judge the actions by the standards of the time, if you want to understand them. That’s slightly different than use today’s standards to pass judgement on the past- which is what most people want to engage in (i.e. understanding vs. blame).
You could make the arguement that we (and I include the Japanese in that) live in a world where such things are looked at in hindsight as horrible, and not something we- most of us, anyway experience every day ourselves personally. When was the last time genocide reached out and killed your whole family? When were you last bombed? Never? Ask yourself how it is that your little corner of the world happens to have come to that point today. Is it thanks to YOUR personal action? Or do you have OTHERS to thank? I think a clear honest answer to that should damper people’s ardent furor over blaming the U.S. over a strategic military decision that cost approx. 120,000 lives (about 0.24 percent of the LOW estimate of 50 million WW2 dead). Remember the cost of that decision affects MY family today, before you say I am just some clueless idiot.
None of this means the U.S. is perfect or unquestionable or should not be challenged to explain it’s actions. But ask yourself, of the WW2 governments, which ones accepted THAT principle? And which ones are left? I think Canada, Australia, NZ, UK, and U.S. are the only countries still lead by the same government. Conclusions?
So did you want to argue it wasn’t unavoidable? Or that the U.S. is “bad”? Or how the world would be better if it hadn’t happened (say, Nazis had the nukes instead)?
I have to assume that Mr. Kyuma probably knows better than I do about what was necessary or unavoidable to end the war, he being a first hand witness to the times in Japan and representing the prefecture that includes Nagasaki (re-elected 9 times?). He didn’t dismiss the suffering or horror of the bombings. He didn’t say it was a good thing. I think he challenged the Japanese view that they were the “victims”. His statement was a simple personal view, he accepted that it was unavoidable (from the U.S. perspective) and ended the war.
How people react to that says alot… about them, not Mr. Kyuma.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
First Kyuma’s statement was used to attack Abe cabinet.
Second Japanese are not condemning Americans. Those who condemn Atomic bomb are advocating the abolition of nuclear weapons.
Third, with or without atomic bomb, Starlin had planed to attack Hokkaido if there had been no assurance that the promise at Cairo conference was carried out.(it is my guess)—Starlin tried to attack Hokkaido after the atomic bombs.
Fourth Nanjing massacre ,731 troop, Bataan death march were as cruel and brutal as atomic bombing of Hiroshima, as the massacre of civilians at Korean war, at Vietnam war, as democide and the massacres in China after WWⅡ。
I think there is little ultra nationalists in each country can use for their political agenda, but if not used as nationlaist agenda, there is something we can learn from the past.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Well, I have read that the Mr. Kyuma’s statements contradict PM Abe’s traditional position that Japan was the victim in WW2. Which Americans find amazing by the way, as if the Germans insisted nothing was their fault (they don’t). I doubt Mr. Kyuma meant to do that however. I would defer to anyone who understood that better as I know so little about Japanese politics.
I reallize not all Japanese are anti-American. I was responding more to the reply like above Comment by sai 2007-07-01 16:41:51 “Yeah,USA has the justice and the right to do masscare.” That kind of thing is so common online.
I did some quick homework on Unit 731 I stand corrected, apparently bacteriological weapons were used and the effort did not fail. I knew it failed against the U.S. carried by high-altitude balloon.
By the way, I wish nuclear weapons had never been invented, and I hope to God they are never used again with any rationalization. Same with any WMD aimed at civilians.
However, as people do not seem to have learned yet how to get along… I agree that governments and leaders use situations for their personal benefit with little or no understanding or awareness of what the consequences will be later. That all being said, I am not happy with future prospects for us all. I am afraid it is only a matter of time before some madman (like Kim Jog Il) causes a chain reaction situation that ends the modern world as we know it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Just to add or expand a bit, I’d rate Unit 731 as worse than Hiro-saki (or is it Naga-shima?) as that was deliberate torture, to see how they reacted to extreme suffering. The US didn’t want the bomb victims to suffer as such – they just wanted them dead. The Bataan Death March wasn’t as bad as the nukes as it was not directed at civilian personnel (and not to excuse anything, but it wasn’t a picnic for many of the Japanese troops guarding them, either. It was brutal and inhumane, but at least partially due to the circumstances rather than the actions. Please note the word ‘partially’ here…). Nanking is hard to discuss in these terms without some better idea of the scale – 30,000 or 300,000?
As for urban bombing, the US was keen on pin-point bombing while the UK was more concerned with flattening what they could. However with the limitations of radar and such in the day, the UK method prevailed, up until the very final days (and I mean that literally) of the war when improved radar allowed the US to revert to pinpoint bombing of railways and bridges etc.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
First Kyuma’s statement was used to attack Abe cabinet.
I guess you meant that Kyuma’s statement was used by opposing parties to attack Abe cabinet. Right? Abe tried to defend Kyuma. But the attack from the opposing parties was so strong that Kyuma had to resign his position.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Right, in my understanding, he meant to say not to hold grudge against the U.S. by his statement. Some of the people in his generation has a complex feelings toward the U.S. , I guess.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“the US was keen on pin-point bombing while the UK was more concerned with flattening what they could.”
Historically, that seems not to be accurate.
It was practicable to pinpoint the target, they chose more effective way to destroy the city.
I think that is not unconnected with what McNamara said in this regard.
http://www.asia-watch.com/archives/157#respond.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By this stage the US was basically in line with UK ideas – I was referring to earlier discussions in the years leading up to, and the first few years of, the European theatre. But even as seen in this excerpt, there was still a clash of sorts between original US ideals and later pragmatic concerns. Of course it wasn’t helped by having little accurate way to measure the results of bombing, which led to Arnold’s general idea of the more bombs dropped the better.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
From what I have heard, there is difference in perception of the use of the bomb. UK tended to think highly of psychological effect of bombing. Possibly USA emulated it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Yess., http://aaalbaaa.blogspot.com/2009/01/jessica-alba-gallery-noprob.html jessica alba gallery, nrgam, http://yesmiley.blogspot.com/2009/01/miley-cyrus-nude-nice.html miley cyrus nude, qnjt, http://mileyedu.blogspot.com/2009/01/miley-cyrus-photos-new.html miley cyrus photos, 802, http://albagoogle.blogspot.com/2009/01/jessica-alba-exposed-some-pics.html jessica alba exposed, 9199, http://bailoned.blogspot.com/2009/01/adrienne-bailon-pics-nice.html adrienne bailon pics, zajp,
Rate this comment:
0 
0