Some follow up notes to this post on Hiroshima/Nagasaki memorial ceremonies:
The Nagasaki half of the memorial ceremonies for the atomic bomb dead ended just today and NHK (日本放送協会, NiPPon HoSo KyoKai: Japan Broadcasting Corporation) is reporting as they do every year.
The presence of Ambassador Roos was noticed as the exceptional break with customary American practice that it was. But the facts that (a) no higher level officials were dispatched and (b) that Ambassador Roos made no statement, are provoking a flurry of discussion and conjecture.
Many of the local residents, survivors, children and grandchildren of the local WWII generation are vocal in their disappointment that an apology was not issued. As I have said elsewhere, I believe that people directly connected to those who experienced the atomic blast are exempt from political criticism (about that particular subject) as they are in the grip of powerful emotions around matters of family and grief, and that under very unique circumstances. Other people are a different matter — and fair game.
NHK comentators thus far have adopted a cooler view and express no surprise. On the contrary they assert, exactly as I expected, that the presence of ANY American officials is implicitly apologetic.
They further speculate that dispatching a lower level official to make no public statement indicates that Obama is testing the waters on the American side. It is regarded as a given that Americans would find official attendance at the ceremony objectionable, and NHK speculates that Obama is probing to see just how much criticism he will be subject to as a result. (Cue MSM crickets …)
It is noteworthy that during the broadcast, NHK aired clips of Obama’s speech in Prague in April of 2009, where he said:
Some argue that the spread of these weapons cannot be stopped, cannot be checked — that we are destined to live in a world where more nations and more people possess the ultimate tools of destruction. Such fatalism is a deadly adversary, for if we believe that the spread of nuclear weapons is inevitable, then in some way we are admitting to ourselves that the use of nuclear weapons is inevitable.
… And as nuclear power — as a nuclear power, as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility to act. We cannot succeed in this endeavor alone, but we can lead it, we can start it.
So today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. I’m not naive. This goal will not be reached quickly — perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, “Yes, we can.”
So NHK speculates, as I do, that Obama’s dispatch of his ambassador to these events was part of Obama’s anti-nuclear posturing and his bizarre antagonism toward our own nuclear arsenal — which to my sensibilites smacks of treason — although they describe it in very different terms from mine.
He is testing, gently but determinedly, to see just how far how fast he can sneak America down the path to unilateral nuclear disarmament — while he provides cover and time to the monsters of Tehran to build up a nuclear force of their own.
And who, were he to succeed, would be defending Japan from nuclear China and North Korea? Do I need to mention Obama’s cancellation of the F22 Raptor provision to Japan? Do I need to mention South Korea and Taiwan?
To exploit the grief at Hiroshima and Nagasaki to promote this insane, double-crossing, treasonous agenda is a moral obscenity.