Goodbye, PG

I don't normally respond to editorial cartoons. Left or right, I don't consider the instant, in-your-face opinion worthy of much consideration. Most are funny to look at, and I'm sure AP History students hundreds of years from now will have to respond to some in their document-based questions, just like I did. On the whole, these graffiti-like scribbles are consigned from my thinking as I read a column that is usually better thought-out.

So, when the Post-Gazette's Rob Rogers published a cartoon earlier in August marking the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I found it trite and disgusting, but didn't really think about it. Until today, when Mr. Rogers decided to defend himself in the Forum section. Go ahead and read this, which includes the cartoon, to understand what I'm talking about.

After reading this egotistical, ill-informed column, I called the PG and cancelled my subscription. Let us get some facts straight. Rob Rogers is not comparable to any hockey player, much less Mario Lemieux. Even though he says "some readers will always see me as a cartoon version of Mario Lemieux," Mr. Rogers' work isn't seen on the national stage, much less beyond the confines of Western Pennsylvania. By saying "some readers," I think Mr. Rogers is really thinking "I".

Secondly, he never defends his own cartoon, which he was given a forum to do. Simply printing his own versions of phone messages doesn't defend the point his cartoon raises: was the US acting correctly in dropping those two bombs? By his own admission, he doesn't research his topics that closely. Reading a newspaper article somewhere about the bombing does not inform anyone about the reasons for doing it. Perhaps if Mr. Rogers had referenced Truman, the excellent biography written by President Truman's daughter, or even watched one of the multiple specials on the History channel that week I would at least believe he understood the question he raises, and the position opposite his.

Historical facts: The Japanese had mobilized their civilian population to fight an expected American invasion of the home islands in September 1945. Women were trained to attack tanks with bamboo spears. There were also millions of Japanese regular troops waiting for this invasion. In the war up to that point, they never surrendered. Instead, they fought to the death, forcing American troops to kill all but a few. (For example, Okinawa was held by several hundred thousand Japanese troops when the US invaded in early 1945. Total prisoners after the battle was over numbered less than two thousand.)

Those two atomic bombs killed less than 150,000 Japanese, fewer than the conventional fire-bombing raids on Tokyo. Radiation claimed perhaps another 300,000 more. Allied commanders expected over 100,000 American deaths in the invasion, as well as the deaths of all the Japanese troops and a significant portion of the civilian population. We're talking about millions of people. That calculus alone justifies the bombs.

However, I apply my own judgment seen below in my other political post. Those bombs saved the lives of all those American soldiers, as well as the limbs of hundreds of thousands more. Anybody remember the original reason for building the Pentagon? It was to be the largest hospital in the world to care for the thousands of wounded American soldiers from the invasion of Japan. If I had to choose between those American casualties and 300,000 Japanese dead, I've gotta choose the home team.

Obviously, Mr. Rogers wasn't aware of any of this. Few people who criticize the bombings are. The war needed to end, and this was the best way to end it. Thousands of American soldiers cheered the bomb, because they knew it saved their lives. Because he is uninformed, egotistical and unable to defend his work, and the editors of the PG decided to run both the cartoon and the trite column, I cancelled my subscription. Frankly, I urge anybody who has read this far to do the same.

Categories: Politics, Media