神仙、老虎、狗

本人為美國空軍退役少將查爾斯˙史威尼（Charles W. Sweeney），唯一參與兩次原子彈轟炸日本行動的飛行員，在轟炸廣島的任務裡，我擔任搭載投彈定位儀器的B-29「大表演家」機長，於保祿˙提貝茨的「伊諾拉˙蓋伊」號右翼一起飛行。而在3天之後，也就是中華民國34年8月9日，我負責指揮第二枚原子彈轟炸長崎的任務。而在長崎轟炸後第6天，日本軍隊投降，同時第二次世界大戰也宣告結束。

 

一個國家的靈魂，也是最根本的基礎，就是她的歷史。正是這種集體的記憶說明了每個世代對於自己與國家的想法與信仰。 

在像我們這樣一個自由的社會裡頭，關於我們國家的定位與代表何種價值與角色的辯論永遠不曾間斷；事實上，這樣的開放式的辯論是我們所擁有的自由的基礎。我們作為一個擁有這樣辦論的社會，必須要有思慮所有一切的可能事實的勇氣；必須要有在達成共識之前挺身而出、據理力爭的勇氣。無疑地，在這樣的公開辯論裡，這些可能的事實都會被接受。

 
被原子彈轟炸前的廣島空照圖 (黑水博物館館藏) 

在廣島與長崎轟炸任務即將50周年紀念的此刻，很適合來思考杜魯門總統下令執行轟炸任務的理由是否恰當。或許，我們對結論的堅持有所不同，但至少讓我們盡量誠實地面對當時基本的時間因素，與杜魯門總統做此一艱鉅且重大決定時所必須考量的種種條件。

 
被原子彈轟炸後的廣島空照圖 (黑水博物館館藏) 

作為唯一參與兩次原子彈轟炸任務，同時擔任長崎轟炸指揮官的飛行員，對此一主題的辯論，我要用我親身的經歷來告訴你們當時的狀況為何。我重申我所相信的是鐵的事實，同時也非常清楚那些混淆視聽者可能會刻意地忽略它們，因為這些事實實在太過明顯了—而他們被先入為主的真相版本，以及他們努力為這些任務強加的意義所蒙蔽。 

今晚，作為親身體驗該段歷史的人物，同時相信杜魯門總統的決定不僅在當時的環境下正當合理，而且是別無選擇下的道義命令，我想說說我的看法、觀察和結論。 

如同絕大多數我的同輩一樣，我也不想要戰爭，我們國家的人民並非好鬥之徒，我們並不熱衷這樣的榮耀，我們的人民沒有戰士之類—沒有「武士」—也沒有所謂的優秀種族。 

今日的美國正是如此，50年前亦然。 

當我們的國家在經濟大蕭條中困苦求生之際，日本帝國則戮力於征服鄰國—以「大東亞共榮圈」之名，似乎極端的國家主義一直在找尋好聽的標語來掩飾其背後極其醜陋的邪惡計劃。 

此一共榮圈的目標乃是藉由對中華民國及滿洲國進行全面性的殘忍戰爭行為而達成，日本作為一個國家，認為自己命中注定要統治亞洲，從而占有其自然資源和廣大的土地。因此，日本軍隊以毫無憐憫與遲疑之心，屠殺了無數的男女老少；在慘絕人寰的南京大屠殺中，30萬名手無寸鐵的平民百姓慘遭毒手，而這是罪行。 

這些都是事實。  

為了實現其在亞洲的天命，日本認為唯一真正的阻撓是美國；於是針對我們駐紮珍珠港的太平洋艦隊發動了一場精心策劃的偷襲行動。時間就訂在星期天早晨，目的就是要盡可能地造成船隻與人員的最大傷亡，好使我們的艦隊遭受致命一擊。 

珍珠港的海底至今仍躺著埋有1,700名船員屍體的亞利桑納號戰艦殘骸，就算不是全部，但我相信大多數人從不曉得自己是怎麼死的，而戰爭就是這樣地降臨到美國頭上。 

科雷吉多島戰役的失利與隨之而來對盟軍戰俘的對待方式，即便是在戰爭的背景下，都讓人對日本軍隊的毫無人性作為不再抱持任何幻想 。巴丹死亡行軍正是最極致的夢魘，日本人認為投降是對個人、家庭、國家和神的大不敬，因此對投降的人絲毫沒有憐憫之心。7,000名美軍和菲律賓戰俘遭到毆打、射殺、刺死，以及因生病或筋疲力盡而任憑死去。 

這些都是事實。 

隨著美國在遼闊的太平洋上艱苦且耗費鉅資地向日本緩慢進逼時，他們終於證明日本軍人的確是無情且難纏的殺人機器。不論毫無作用的抵抗、或是極其渺茫的勝算、甚至是大勢底定了，日本軍人均戰到連命都賠上了。而為了獲取更大的光榮，他們盡其所能地努力殺害美國人。 

隨著美軍日益進逼日本本土，他們的行為也變得益加瘋狂。 

塞班島—3,100名美國人遇害，其中1,500人死於日軍進攻初期的幾個小時內。

硫磺島—6,700名美國人死亡，25,000人受傷。

沖繩—12,500美國人喪命，總傷亡人數為35,000名。

而這只是統計所知的白色墓碑數字而已。 

Kamikazes，漢字的意思是「神風」（譯註： 「神風」的起名來源於元朝皇帝元世祖忽必烈的元軍侵日戰爭。元朝軍隊1274年和1281年兩次對日本東征，都因為海上突如其來的颱風，導致元朝的艦隊損失，使得東征告吹。日本人從此將此風稱為「神風」。）自願駕駛裝有炸彈的飛機俯衝美軍戰艦是一種信仰的光榮昇華行為—天上人間沒有比這更光榮的事了，神風特攻隊的自殺式攻擊共計奪走了5,000名美國海軍士兵的性命。 

從首名美軍踏上日本本土的那一刻起，日軍便誓言將要處死所有的盟軍戰俘。在這大規模的行刑裡，他們強迫戰俘們預先挖掘自己的墳墓；即便投降之後，日本還是將部分美軍戰俘處死。 

這些都是事實。 

《波茨坦宣言》要求日軍無條件投降，日本認為這簡直太離譜而完全不值得考慮。從破解的日方密碼中，我們得知他們打算儘量拖延時間，以逼迫盟軍來協商出一個他們能夠接受的投降條件。 

在8月6日之前的幾個月裡，美軍飛機開始對日本本土投擲燒夷彈。這些炸彈所引發的火海將一座座城市都燒成灰燼，數以萬計的日本居民因而喪生；但是日本軍方依舊誓言絕不投降，他們打算犧牲自己人民的性命—不管還要再死多少人—來換取他們心目中的光輝與榮譽。 

即便我軍飛行員事先空投傳單警告即將來襲的轟炸行動，他們還是拒絕疏散百姓。在一次為期3天的大轟炸裡，包括東京、名古屋、神戶和大阪等地在內約88平方公里的區域，完全化成瓦礫之地。

 
 Leaflets like this, dropped by B-29s on Japan during last weeks of war, listed some cities which were slated for attack. (黑水博物館館藏) 

這些都是事實。 

而且即使在原子彈轟炸廣島之後，東條英機、繼任者鈴木貫太郎以及大權在握的日本軍部依然堅信美國就僅此一枚原子彈，而日本可以繼續堅持下去。在8月6日後，日本有3天的時間可以提出投降，但是他們並沒有這麼做，內閣成員之間的爭辯越來越激烈。 

一直等到第二枚原子彈在長崎投下之後，日本天皇才終於要求投降。

 
8月7日報紙頭條，下次原子彈可能襲擊東京。 (黑水博物館館藏) 

而即使是在那時候，日本軍方依然堅持他們還有能力，而且也應該繼續戰鬥下去。有一夥軍官甚至發動政變，試圖攔截並摧毀天皇向其人民宣佈投降所錄製的終戰詔書唱片。 

這些都是事實。 

這些事實有助於說明當時我們所面對的是怎麼樣的一個敵人，這些事實也有助於理解杜魯門總統的決策過程中，所有可能選擇的來龍去脈。當然，這些事實也有助於瞭解為何原子彈的轟炸行動是必要的。 

杜魯門總統所明白的這些事實，每一位服役參戰的美國男女青年也一樣瞭解。傷亡人數並非抽象的統計數字，而是令人傷痛的真實情況。 

原子彈任務是否終結了這場戰爭？是的…這兩顆…辦到了。那麼非得要執行原子彈任務不可嗎？呃，這就是爭議的所在了。 

過去50年來這般未解的困惑，如陰影一樣籠罩著我們國家的記憶；對某些人來說，日本現在成了受害者，而美國則變成貪婪好戰的侵略者，意在尋求報復與征服他國。這些人認為我們使用原子彈乃是不正義且不道德的，因為充滿恐懼的核子世代就此展開。當然，為了支持這項扭曲的謬論，他們必須刻意忽視這些明顯的事實，或是編造符合其說法的新材料；目前這裡頭最荒謬的乃是他們否認日本曾經犯下大屠殺的罪行。 

怎麼會發生這樣的事呢？ 

檢視最近所發生的一些事情，或許可看出端倪。 

最近關於杜魯門總統為何批准這些行動的種種辯論，某些時候已經變成是數字遊戲。在史密森學會籌劃「伊諾拉˙蓋伊」號展覽之時，釋出了一些令人心寒的翻案言論，引發史學界的一陣撻伐。 

該展覽打算紀念「日本人是受害者」這樣一件子虛烏有的事情—我們美國人則變成了邪惡的侵略者，想像你帶著孩子孫子們去參觀這個展覽時會怎麼樣？ 

他們會得到什麼樣的訊息？ 

他們會記得哪些真相呢？ 

他們又會怎麼看待自己的國家呢？ 

而這件事情差點由在名稱與功能上，應毫不偏頗地維護美國重要文物的半官方機構來負責執行。 

現在，預訂的展覽部分遭到取消，僅單純展示了「伊諾拉˙蓋伊」號轟炸機，但真相果真勝出了嗎？ 

未必。 

在一場全國性的電視辯論會上，我聽到一位所謂優秀的歷史學者辯稱原子彈並非必要，當時日本已經準備投降了，杜魯門總統的用意是在威嚇蘇聯。 

當時日本已經準備投降了？他憑什麼這麼說？ 

戰爭結束許多年之後，有些人指出艾森豪將軍曾說過日本即將接受失敗。如果照這說法的話，艾森豪也曾經嚴重地錯估德軍頑強抵抗的意志力，在中華民國33年12月時便指出德國不再有能力進行攻勢。 

那是一個災難性的誤判，結果造就了慘烈的突出部戰役，造成數萬名盟軍毫不必要的犧牲；同時讓德國有可能延長戰事及獲取談判條件的機會。 

因此，認為當時日本即將垮台的說法，應是事後諸葛，決非先見之明。 

根據日軍在太平洋戰爭裡的表現，可以合理地判斷日軍將會比德軍所進行的抵抗更加頑強激烈。 

此外，最近還有個日漸壯大的理論認為如果盟軍隊日本本土發動進攻，我們的實際傷亡將不會高達百萬，而將僅僅只有4萬6千名。 

僅有4萬6千人傷亡！ 

你能想像這種論點有多麼冷酷無情嗎？ 僅僅只有4萬6千名—似乎這些數字為美國人的性命來說是根本微不足道的。 

或許這些所謂的歷史學家的目的只是要賣書。 

但或許他們真的相信事實如此；又或許是我們戰勝的這個事實讓他們覺得不愉快。 

不管他們的理由為何，這個論點滿是誤謬。他們的想法背離事實並重新選擇性地以斷章取義的做法來推想事件的經過。 

此時此刻，我必須承認，我不知道如果進攻日本本土的話，會有多少美國人傷亡—我相信沒有人會知道的。 

我所確知的是，根據日軍戰時的作為，可以合理推斷進攻日本本土的作戰將會耗時費日且傷亡慘重。根據我們當時所獲得的訊息—而非某些人的臆測—是日本絕對不會無條件投降的。 

在硫磺島戰役，共有6,700名美國海軍陸戰隊官兵，喪命在這僅約20點72平方公里大小的太平洋礁島上—傷亡總計超過30,000人。 

但即使那些事後諸葛說對了，進攻日本本土的傷亡僅僅只有4萬6千人，我想問： 

應該死的是哪4萬6千人？ 

誰的爸爸應該死？ 

誰的兄弟應該死？ 

誰的丈夫應該死？ 

沒錯，我只關注美國人的性命。 

日本人的命運掌握在他們自己的手裡，而非美國的手裡。當時數十萬的美軍部隊焦急地在太平洋陣地裡等待進攻的命令，他們的命運取決於日本的下一步。日本可以隨時選擇結束戰爭，但是他們選擇了繼續等待。 

而當日本繼續拖延的時候，每天平均有超過900名美軍隨著戰事的持續進行而傷亡。 

我曾聽到另一種說法，就是我們應該與日本議定和平條約，提出一個日本可以接受的投降條件；可是，我從未聽過有人提議我們應該跟納粹德國和平談判。這是個令人不恥的說法，任何一個有理性的人決不可能說出這樣的話。如果跟這樣一個邪惡的法西斯魔鬼談判，就算你事實上已經擊敗它了，你也同時承認了它的正當性。這不僅僅是當時某種空洞的哲學理論—這些邪惡的勢力必須清楚且徹底地予以鏟除—他們的餘孽同樣難纏。他們的領導人已經完全毫無外交信譽可言；而到底為什麼關於太平洋戰爭的歷史，會這麼輕易就被遺忘了呢？ 

答案或許就是我們的歷史和我們共同的記憶，正逐漸遭到侵蝕與扭曲。 

在戰敗50年後的今天，一些無腦的日本官員竟然以受害者身份自居，說廣島與長崎的轟炸無異於是大屠殺。 

而且，信不信由你，真的有一些美國學者支持這個比擬；這正好給予了50年來，積極試圖重寫他們跟我們國家歷史的日本政府莫大的支持與安慰。 

現在的日本，已經有完整的一個世代不明瞭他們的國家在二戰裡頭的所作所為。 

這也就說明了為什麼他們不能理解日本應該對這些事情道歉： 

•韓國慰安婦。

•於戰俘身上進行醫學實驗道歉，其驚悚程度不輸給納粹德國所進行的人體實驗。

•計劃針對美國西海岸居民進行生化武器攻擊的行動。

•有組織且大規模地屠殺平民百姓。

•以及其它許許多多的罪行。 

在這種病態的顛倒是非思想下，我們如果忘記了自己的歷史，也就等於是在幫助日本的失憶，而這對兩國來說都是不好的。 

不像德國承認自己有罪，日本一再堅持他們所虛構的「他們沒有錯，他們只是為當時局勢所困」的謊言，這種態度只會妨礙兩國人民從所深受的歷史創傷裡，獲得真正癒合的希望。 

唯有回顧歷史並認清事實才能夠真正地原諒，如果選擇遺忘，只會增添重蹈覆轍的危險。 

透過一系列精心策劃的政治活動與公關宣傳，現在日本提議用語氣比較溫和的「太平洋戰爭勝利日」來取代「對日戰爭勝利日」，多麼輕描淡寫的高招啊！ 

他們宣稱這種說法會讓紀念太平洋戰爭的結束不那麼「針對日本」。 

4月5日的華爾街日報登載了一篇署名朵洛西˙拉比諾威茲的文章，精準地論述了這種令人忿怒的現況： 

原因在於有些日本人覺得提到「日本」讓他們不舒服—這也難怪，因為「對日」這兩個字清清楚楚提醒世人，究竟哪個國家在中華民國34年8月被打敗時，舉世歡騰！而為了進一步順應日本的敏感神經，一名美國官員（他很聰明地未表明身份）甚至宣稱該項預定的活動，「我們所籌劃的只是紀念一個事件，而非慶祝一項勝利。」

有人可能會辯說用字遣詞到底有何意義—對日戰爭勝利日跟太平洋戰爭勝利日—我們就慶祝一個事件，不必慶祝一項勝利！ 

我的看法是，用字遣詞就代表了一切，就只是慶祝一個「事件」！？ 

說得好像是在慶祝某家購物中心開幕，而不是一場禍延全球的戰事結束—這場戰爭造成數千萬人的死亡，更多的人身心嚴重受創，還有無數的人無家可歸。 

這種對語言使用的攻擊是非常歐威爾（譯註：George Orwell，《動物農莊》與《1984》的作者）式風格的，它是一種能讓歷史與記憶失焦的武器；事實上，語言的破壞力完全不輸任何武器。 

把向上說成向下。

把奴役他人說成解放自由。

把侵略的暴行說成和平的作為。 

在許多方面來說，此種藉由抹除精確描述的文字，來針對我們的語言與歷史所進行的攻擊，比50年前日本對我們所展開的侵略行動更難察覺也更危險；至少在那時候，危險具體可見，敵人是誰非常清楚。 

今天，日本人很狡詐地打起了種族主義牌，來為自己的戰時作為進行合理化的辯護。他們宣稱自己不是在進行侵略的犯罪勾當，當然不是，日本只是從白人帝國主義手下解放大批被壓迫的亞洲人民。 

沒錯，是「解放」！他們用殺害的方式解放了至少2千萬的亞洲人民！我相信這2千萬人，包括他們的家人以及後代子孫，絕不可能感激日本為解放他們而所付出的高尚情操與努力。 

我經常被問到，對日本投下原子彈的目的是為了報復嗎？史密森學會所舉辦的展覽裡頭有一份草稿也這麼提到，我們投彈乃是試圖摧毀一個古老又光榮的文化。 

下面還有更多令日本難堪的事實。 

第一點，在最初的原子彈轟炸目標清單上，京都榜上有名。即使京都是一個既合情又合理的轟炸目標，在先前的空襲性動中卻也都未予以轟炸。國務卿亨利˙史汀姆森將它從清單上去掉，因為京都是日本的古都，同時也是日本文化裡的信仰中心。 

第二點，戰爭期間我們被嚴格禁止，絕對不能夠對位於東京的日本皇居採取轟炸行動，即便我們能夠輕易地將之夷為平地，然後也可能連同炸死天皇。如果真要報復，機會多的是… 

我常在想，假使日本有機會轟炸白宮的話，他們是否也會如我們一般的克制自己？我覺得未必。 

在這個地方，我要澄清另一個流傳久遠的謠言，指稱我們故意選擇人口集中的都市作為轟炸目標。我們每一個任務的目標城市裡都有著重要的軍事設施—廣島乃是日本南方司令部之所在，負責防衛本州遭受入侵行動，佈有經驗豐富的士兵來執行第一波登陸作戰的防禦。 

長崎是工業中心，三菱重工在此設有兩座大型的兵工廠。事實上，日本將其軍事工業設施和軍隊，部署在廣島和長崎這兩座大都市的核心地帶。 

同任何一場戰爭的目標一樣，我們的目標非常清楚，當然是贏得勝利，因為代價實在太高了，沒辦法輸贏隨便。 

我經常被問到，是否曾想到那些在廣島和長崎轟炸中死去的日本人民？ 

我並沒有因為原子彈轟炸任務結束戰爭這件事而高興，因為雙方陣營都死傷無數，不單單是這兩座城市，全世界都捲入了這場恐怖的戰爭裡。由於戰爭的殘酷本質，不論受害的是我國還是他國的人民，我絲毫沒有感到驕傲或是喜悅，因為每一個生命都是極其寶貴的。 

但對我來說，這個問題更適合拿去直接問那些日本軍閥們，他們如此慷慨地用日本人民的性命來換取他們眼中所謂偉大的共榮願景。是這些發動了戰爭、然後又堅決不肯投降的頑固軍閥們必須負責，難道他們不必為所有犧牲的同胞負起最終的責任？ 

或許，當日本開始認真面對過去，以及他們在戰爭中真正的所作所為時，他們才會發現真正該要為這一切負責的是日本軍部的領導人。這個把悲慘的命運帶給亞洲諸國，最後也賠上自己國民性命的日本軍部，應當給日本人一個交代。當然，如果我們繼續幫助日本抹除歷史真相的話，這一天將永無到來的可能。 

如果日本不追求並接受事情的真相，那麼他們怎麼能夠跟美國、跟自己達成真正的和解呢？ 

我和我的隊員們執行這些任務時，堅信戰爭將因之而終結。我們絲毫沒有喜悅之情，有的是一種使命感和一個承諾，就是我們要回到摯愛的家人身邊。 

今天，好幾百萬的美國及東南亞人民得以繼續活著，乃是因為戰爭在當時真的就結束了。 

此刻，我站在這裡不是為了慶祝我們用了核子武器，正好相反。 

我希望不要再有人執行這樣的任務。 

盼望我們國家能夠棄絕核子武器的存在。 

我衷心期盼。 

但這並不表示時間回到中華民國34年8月依然如此，假設在當時的戰事背景與敵人的頑強抵抗之下，杜魯門總統當然可以使用一切可能的武器來結束這場戰爭。 

我當時贊成杜魯門總統的決定，今日亦然。 

戰爭結束後多年，有人問杜魯門總統當時果真別無選擇了嗎？杜魯門總統肯定地回說，「沒有」。然後他要發問的人回想一下，在珍珠港事變中死去的人，同樣也別無選擇。 

戰爭的代價太高了，如同南北戰爭時羅伯特˙李將軍所言：「還好戰爭如此之殘酷，否則我們可能會愛上它！」 

我為我們擁有這些武器、而非日本和德國擁有這件事，感謝天主。我們的科技已經進步的這個水準，原子彈的發明是遲早之事，你沒有辦法拒絕科學的進步，它終究會找到自我實現的出路。 

關於發展原子彈這類武器是否明智的問題，已經因為它終究會被製造出來的這個事實而不再令人困擾；蘇聯當然會發展他們自己的核子武器；我們別忘了，史達林跟東條英機或是他的前戰友希特勒比起來，可說毫不遜色。在最近的一項統計裡，史達林下令屠殺了至少2千萬的自己人。 

由於德國及日本的法西斯主義未能征服世界，所以這世界變得更加美好。 

加上我們在勝利之後所採取的寬容對待，日本跟德國也變得美好。 

日本和美國的年輕人，得以免於更多無謂的殺戮，能夠繼續長大、成家並終老。 

身為10個孩子的父親、21個孫子的爺爺，我可以說我很感謝戰爭在當時就結束了。 

當然，我不能代表所有的二戰老兵發言。但我深信我在這場重大戰事裡能夠報效國家的榮譽感，跟所有參戰老兵並無二致。這也正是我們為何要保存戰爭真相的原因，我們這些二戰老兵並非膽怯之徒，我們的情感不會因理性和爭議的辯論而破裂，我們的自制力好得很。 

但是我們不會、也無法容許那些坐在太師椅上的事後諸葛們，藉由隱藏事實而不讓美國人民和全世界知道真相，進而操弄辯論的結果。 

我對理性且公正的美國人民深具信心，他們能夠考慮所有的事實，從而針對戰爭的結束做出有事實依據的判斷。 

這是非常重要的辯論，我們國家的靈魂、根基和歷史，正處於岌岌可危的險境。

 
日本帝國即將無條件投降前夕，二兵 ANTHONY PP. FIELD站在中華民國國旗前留影。美國陸軍通信部隊第164通照連拍攝- AUG 7 ,1945— (黑水博物館館藏) 

Statement of Major General Charles W. Sweeney, USAF (Ret.) 

I am Maj. Gen. Charles W. Sweeney, United States Air Force, Retired. I am the only pilot to have flown on both atomic missions. I flew the instrument plane on the right wing of General Paul Tibbets on the Hiroshima mission and 3 days later, on August 9, 1945, commanded the second atomic mission over Nagasaki. Six days after Nagasaki the Japanese military surrendered and the Second World War came to an end. 

The soul of a nation, its essence, is its history. It is that collective memory which defines what each generation thinks and believes about itself and its country. 

In a free society, such as ours, there is always an ongoing debate about who we are and what we stand for. This open debate is in fact essential to our freedom. But to have such a debate we as a society must have the courage to consider all of the facts available to us. We must have the courage to stand up and demand that before any conclusions are reached, those facts which are beyond question are accepted as part of the debate. 

As the 50th anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki missions approaches, now is an appropriate time to consider the reasons for Harry Truman's order that these missions be flown. We may disagree on the conclusion, but let us at least be honest enough to agree on basic facts of the time, the facts that President Truman had to consider in making a difficult and momentous decision. 

As the only pilot to have flown both missions, and having commanded the Nagasaki mission, I bring to this debate my own eyewitness account of the times. I underscore what I believe are irrefutable facts, with full knowledge that some opinion makers may cavalierly dismiss them because they are so obvious — be- cause they interfere with their preconceived version of the truth, and the meaning which they strive to impose on the missions. 

This evening, I want to offer my thoughts, observations, and conclusions as someone who lived this history, and who believes that President Truman's decision was not only justified by the circumstances of his time, but was a moral imperative that precluded any other option. 

Like the overwhelming majority of my generation the last thing I wanted was a war. We as a nation are not warriors. We are not hell-bent on glory. There is no warrior class — no Samurai — no master race. 

This is true today, and it was true 50 years ago. 

While our country was struggling through the great depression, the Japanese were embarking on the conquest of its neighbors — the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. It seems fascism always seeks some innocuous slogan to cover the most hideous plans. 

This Co-Prosperity was achieved by waging total and merciless war against China and Manchuria. The Japanese, as a nation, saw itself as destined to rule Asia and thereby possess its natural resources and open lands. Without the slightest remorse or hesitation, the Japanese Army slaughtered innocent men, women and children. In the infamous Rape of Nanking up to 300,000 unarmed civilians were butchered. These were criminal acts. 

THESE ARE FACTS. 

In order to fulfill its divine destiny in Asia, Japan determined that the only real impediment to this goal was the United States. It launched a carefully conceived sneak attack on our Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor. Timed for a Sunday morning it was intended to deal a death blow to the fleet by inflicting the maximum loss of ships and human life. 

1,700 sailors are still entombed in the hull of the U.S.S. Arizona that sits on the bottom of Pearl Harbor. Many if not all, died without ever knowing why. Thus was the war thrust upon us. 

The fall of Corregidor and the resulting treatment of Allied prisoners of war dispelled any remaining doubt about the inhumaneness of the Japanese Army, even in the context of war. The Bataan Death March was horror in its fullest dimension. The Japanese considered surrender to be dishonorable to oneself, one's family, one's country and one's god. They showed no mercy. Seven thou- sand American and Filipino POW's were beaten, shot, bayonetted or left to die of disease or exhaustion. 

THESE ARE FACTS. 

As the United States made its slow, arduous, and costly march across the vast expanse of the Pacific, the Japanese proved to be a ruthless and intractable killing machine. No matter how futile, no matter how hopeless the odds, no matter how certain the outcome, the Japanese fought to the death. And to achieve a greater glory, they strove to kill as many Americans as possible. 

The closer the United States came to the Japanese mainland, the more fanatical their actions became. 

Saipan — 3,100 Americans killed, 1,500 in the first few hours of the invasion

Iwo Jima — 6,700 Americans killed, 25,000 wounded

Okinawa — 12,500 Americans killed, total casualties, 35,000

These are facts reported by simple white grave markers. 

Kamikazes. The literal translation is DIVINE WIND. To willingly dive a plane loaded with bombs into an American ship was a glorious transformation to godliness — there was no higher honor on heaven or earth. The suicidal assaults of the Kamikazes took 5,000 American Navy men to their deaths. 

The Japanese vowed that, with the first American to step foot on the mainland, they would execute every Allied prisoner. In preparation they forced the POW's to dig their own graves in the event of mass executions. Even after their surren- der, they executed some American POW's. 

THESE ARE FACTS. 

The Potsdam Declaration had called for unconditional surrender of the Japan- ese Armed Forces. The Japanese termed it ridiculous and not worthy of consid- eration. We know from our intercepts of their coded messages, that they wanted to stall for time to force a negotiated surrender on terms acceptable to them. 

For months prior to August 6, American aircraft began dropping fire bombs upon the Japanese mainland. The wind created by the firestorm from the bombs incinerated whole cities. Hundreds of thousands of Japanese died. Still the Jap- anese military vowed never to surrender. They were prepared to sacrifice their own people to achieve their visions of glory and honor — no matter how many more people died. 

They refused to evacuate civilians even though our pilots dropped leaflets warning of the possible bombings. In one 3-day period, 34 square miles of Tokyo, Nagoya, Kobe and Osaka were reduced to rubble. 

THESE ARE FACTS. 

And even after the bombing of Hiroshima, Tojo, his successor Suzuki, and the military clique in control believed the United States had but one bomb, and that Japan could go on. They had 3 days to surrender after August 6, but they did not surrender. The debate in their cabinet at times became violent. 

Only after the Nagasaki drop did the Emperor finally demand surrender. 

And even then, the military argued they could and should fight on. A group of Army officers staged a coup and tried to seize and destroy the Emperor's re- corded message to his people announcing the surrender. 

THESE ARE FACTS. 

These facts help illuminate the nature of the enemy we faced. They help put into context the process by which Truman considered the options available to him. And they help to add meaning to why the missions were necessary. 

President Truman understood these facts as did every service man and woman. Casualties were not some abstraction, but a sobering reality. 

Did the atomic missions end the war? Yes . . . they . . . did. Were they necessary? Well that's where the rub comes. 

With the fog of 50 years drifting over the memory of our country, to some, the Japanese are now the victims. America was the insatiable, vindictive aggressor seeking revenge and conquest. Our use of these weapons was the unjustified and immoral starting point for the nuclear age with all of its horrors. Of course, to support such distortion, one must conveniently ignore the real facts or fabricate new realities to fit the theories. It is no less egregious than those who today deny the Holocaust occurred. 

How could this have happened? 

The answer may lie in examining some recent events. 

The current debate about why President Truman ordered these missions, in some cases, has devolved to a numbers game. The Smithsonian in its proposed exhibit of the Enola Gay revealed the creeping revisionism which seems the rage in certain historical circles. 

That exhibit wanted to memorialize the fiction that the Japanese were the victims — we the evil aggressor. Imagine taking your children and grandchildren to this exhibit. 

What message would they have left with? 

What truth would they retain? 

What would they think their country stood for? 

And all of this would have occurred in an American institution whose very name and charter are supposed to stand for the impartial preservation of signif- icant American artifacts. 

By cancelling the proposed exhibit and simply displaying the Enola Gay, has truth won out? 

Maybe not. 

In one nationally televised discussion, I heard a so-called prominent historian argue that the bombs were not necessary. That President Truman was intent on intimidating the Russians. That the Japanese were ready to surrender. 

The Japanese were ready to surrender? Based on what? 

Some point to statements by General Eisenhower years after the war that Japan was about to fall. Well, based on that same outlook Eisenhower seriously under- estimated Germany's will to fight on and concluded in December, 1944 that Germany no longer had the capability to wage offensive war. 

That was a tragic miscalculation. The result was the Battle of the Bulge, which resulted in tens of thousands of needless Allied casualties and potentially al- lowed Germany to prolong the war and force negotiations. 

Thus the assessment that Japan was vanquished may have the benefit of hind- sight rather than foresight. 

It is certainly fair to conclude that the Japanese could have been reasonably expected to be even more fanatical than the Germans based on the history of the war in the Pacific. 

And, finally, a present-day theory making the rounds espouses that even if an invasion had taken place, our casualties would not have been a million, as many believed, but realistically only 46,000 dead.

ONLY 46,000! 

Can you imagine the callousness of this line of argument? ONLY 46,000 — as if this were some insignificant number of American lives. 

Perhaps these so-called historians want to sell books. 

Perhaps they really believe it. Or perhaps it reflects some self-loathing occa- sioned by the fact that we won the war. 

Whatever the reason, the argument is flawed. It dissects and recalculates events ideologically, grasping at selective straws. 

Let me admit right here, today, that I don't know how many more Americans would have died in an invasion— AND NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE! 

What I do know is that based on the Japanese conduct during the war, it is fair and reasonable to assume that an invasion of the mainland would have been a prolonged and bloody affair. Based on what we know — not what someone surmises — the Japanese were not about to unconditionally surrender. 

In taking Iwo Jima, a tiny 8 square mile lump of rock in the ocean, 6,700 marines died — total casualties over 30,000. 

But even assuming that those who now KNOW our casualties would have been ONLY 46.000 I ask 

Which 46,000 were to die? 

Whose father? 

Whose brother? 

Whose husband? 

And, yes, I am focusing on American lives. 

The Japanese had their fate in their own hands, we did not . Hundreds of thousands of American troops anxiously waited at staging areas in the Pacific dreading the coming invasion, their fate resting on what the Japanese would do next. The Japanese could have ended it at any time. They chose to wait. 

And while the Japanese stalled, an average of 900 more Americans were killed or wounded each day the war continued. 

I've heard another line of argument that we should have accepted a negotiated peace with the Japanese on terms they would have found acceptable. I have never heard anyone suggest that we should have negotiated a peace with Nazi Ger- many. Such an idea is so outrageous, that no rational human being would utter the words. To negotiate with such evil fascism was to allow it even in defeat a measure of legitimacy. This is not just some empty philosophical principal of the time — it was essential that these forces of evil be clearly and irrevocably de- feated — their demise unequivocal. Their leadership had forfeited any expectation of diplomatic niceties. How is it, then, that the history of the war in the Pacific can be so soon forgotten? 

The reason may lie in the advancing erosion of our history, of our collective memory. 

Fifty years after their defeat, Japanese officials have the temerity to claim they were the victims. That Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the equivalent of the Holocaust. 

And, believe it or not, there are actually some American academics who sup- port this analogy, thus aiding and giving comfort to a 50-year attempt by the Japanese to rewrite their own history, and ours in the process. 

There is an entire generation of Japanese who do not know the full extent of their country's conduct during World war II. 

This explains why they do not comprehend why they must apologize — 

• for the Korean comfort women,

• for the Medical experimentation on POW's which match the horror of those conducted by the Nazi's,

• for the plans to use biological weapons against the United States by infecting civilian populations on the West Coast,

• for the methodical slaughter of civilians,

• and for much more. 

In a perverse inversion, by forgetting our own history, we contribute to the Japanese amnesia, to the detriment of both our nations. 

Unlike the Germans who acknowledged their guilt, the Japanese persist in the fiction that they did nothing wrong, that they were trapped by circumstances. This only forecloses any genuine prospect that the deep wounds suffered by both nations can be closed and healed. 

One can only forgive by remembering. And to forget, is to risk repeating history. 

The Japanese in a well orchestrated political and public relations campaign have now proposed that the use of the term "V-J Day" be replaced by the more benign "Victory in the Pacific Day". How convenient. 

This they claim will make the commemoration of the end of the war in the Pacific less "Japan specific." 

An op-ed piece written by Dorothy Rabinowitz appearing in the April 5 Wall Street Journal accurately sums up this outrage: 

The reason it appears, is that some Japanese find the reference disturbing — and one can see why. The term, especially the "J" part, does serve to remind the world of the identity of the nation whose defeat millions celebrated in August 1945. In further deference to Japanese sensitivities, a U.S. official (who wisely chose to remain unidentified) also announced, with reference to the planned ceremonies. 

that "our whole effort in this thing is to commemorate an event, not celebrate a victory." 

Some might argue so what's in a word — Victory over Japan, Victory in the Pacific — Let's celebrate an event, not a victory. 

I say everything is in a word. Celebrate an EVENT! 

Kind of like celebrating the opening of a shopping mall rather than the end of a war that engulfed the entire Earth — which left countless millions dead and countless millions more physically or mentally wounded and countless more millions displaced. 

This assault on the use of language is Orwellian and is the tool by which history and memory are blurred. Words can be just as destructive as any weapon. 

Up is Down.

Slavery is Freedom.

Aggression is Peace. 

In some ways this assault on our language and history by the elimination of accurate and descriptive words is far more insidious than the actual aggression carried out by the Japanese 50 years ago. At least then the threat was clear, the enemy well defined. 

Today the Japanese justify their conduct by artfully playing the race card. They were not engaged in a criminal enterprise of aggression. No, Japan was simply liberating the oppressed masses of Asia from WHITE Imperialism. 

Liberation!!! Yes, they liberated over 20 million innocent Asians by killing them. I'm sure those 20 million, their families and the generations never to be, appreciate the noble effort of the Japanese. 

I am often asked was the bomb dropped for vengeance, as was suggested by one draft of the Smithsonian exhibit. That we sought to destroy an ancient and honorable culture. 

Here are some more inconvenient facts. 

One, on the original target list for the atomic missions Kyoto was included. Although this would have been a legitimate target, one that had not been bombed previously. Secretary of State Henry Stimson removed it from the list because it was the ancient capital of Japan and was also the religious center of Japanese culture. 

Two, we were under strict orders during the war that under no circumstances were we to ever bomb the Imperial Palace in Tokyo, even though we could have easily leveled it and possibly killed the Emperor. So much for vengeance. 

I often wonder if Japan would have shown such restraint if they had the opportunity to bomb the White House. I think not. 

At this point let me dispel one of many longstanding myths that our targets were intended to be civilian populations. Each target for the missions had signif- icant military importance — Hiroshima was the headquarters for the southern command responsible for the defense of Honshu in the event of an invasion and it garrisoned seasoned troops who would mount the initial defense. 

Nagasaki was an industrial center with the two large Mitsubishi armaments factories. In both Hiroshima and Nagasaki the Japanese had integrated these industries and troops right in the heart of each city. 

As in any war our goal was, as it should be, to win. The stakes were too high to equivocate. 

I am often asked if I ever think of the Japanese who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? 

I do not revel in the idea that so many on both sides died, not only at those two places but around the world in that horrible conflict. I take no pride or pleasure in the brutality of war whether suffered by my people or those of another nation. Every life is precious. 

But it does seem to me such a question is more appropriately directed to the Japanese war lords who so willingly offered up their people to achieve their visions of greatness. They who started the war and then stubbornly refused to stop it must be called to account. Don't they have the ultimate responsibility for all the deaths of their countrymen? 

Perhaps if the Japanese came to grips with their past and their true part in the war they would hold those Japanese military leaders accountable. The Japanese 

people deserve an answer from those that brought such misery to the nations of the Far East and ultimately to their own people. Of course this can never happen if we collaborate with the Japanese in wiping away the truth. 

How can Japan ever reconcile with itself and the United States if they do not demand and accept the truth? 

My crew and I flew these missions with the belief that they would bring the war to an end. There was no sense of joy. There was a sense of duty and commitment that we wanted to get back to our families and loved ones. 

Today millions of people in America and in southeast Asia are alive because the war ended when it did. 

I do not stand here celebrating the use of nuclear weapons. Quite the contrary. 

I hope that my mission is the last such mission ever flown. 

We as a nation can abhor the existence of nuclear weapons. 

I certainly do. 

But that does not then mean that, back in August of 1945, given the events of the war and the recalcitrance of our enemy. President Truman was not obliged to use all the weapons at his disposal to end the war. 

I agreed with Harry Truman then, and I still do today.

Years after the war Truman was asked if he had any second thoughts. He said emphatically, "No." He then asked the questioner to remember the men who died at Pearl Harbor who did not have the benefit of second thoughts. 

In war the stakes are high. As Robert E. Lee said, "it is good that war is so horrible, or we might grow to like it." 

I thank God that it was we who had this weapon and not the Japanese or the Germans. The science was there. Eventually someone would have developed this weapon. Science can never be denied. It finds a way to self-fulfillment. 

The question of whether it was wise to develop such a weapon would have eventually been overcome by the fact that it could be done. The Soviets would have certainly proceeded to develop their own bomb. Let us not forget that Joseph Stalin was no less evil than Tojo or his former ally Adolf Hitler. At last count, Stalin committed genocide on at least 20 million of his own citizens. 

The world is a better place because German and Japanese fascism failed to conquer the world. 

Japan and Germany are better places because we were benevolent in our victory. 

The youth of Japan and the United States, spared from further needless slaugh-ter, went on to live and have families and grow old. 

As the father of ten children and the grandfather of 21, I can state that I am certainly grateful that the war ended when it did. 

I do not speak for all veterans of that war. But I believe that my sense of pride in having served my country in that great conflict is shared by all veterans. This is why the truth about that war must be preserved. We veterans are not shrinking violets. Our sensibilities will not be shattered in intelligent and controversial debate. We can handle ourselves. 

But we will not, we cannot allow armchair second guessers to frame the debate by hiding facts from the American public and the world. 

I have great faith in the good sense and fairness of the American people to consider all of the facts and make an informed judgment about the war's end. 

This is an important debate. The soul of our nation, its essence, its history, is at stake. 

原文出處：http://goo.gl/CwFZRF