Last Surviving Crew Member Has 'No Regrets' About Bombing Hiroshima

i am a combat vet ww2 i am 93 iws 18 yrs old in the the invasion of layte,after securing the island i was moved to a embarcation,point unbeknown to me i was being prepared to invade japan whfn i heard the bomb was dropped. lucky me and 1,000.000 more who were estimated to die thank al do

Not only were a lot of American lives saved, but many Japanese as well. While the consensus is that the US military would have suffered up to 1 million casualties, it is estimated that Japanese losses, both military and civilian, would have easily tripled that number. On Okinawa alone, over 100,000 Japanese military and at least 30,000 native Okinawans were killed. It is sad that so many lives were lost in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the alternative would have been much, much worse.

One Doolittle raider left from the first mission and one nuclear raider from the end and all in between, we salute you.

"After 73 years, I do not regret what we did that day. All war's hell."

From a combat vet's point of view, I agree with his reflection upon his participation in that mission. War is hell, as Russel Gackenback states. Regret usually is tied to a wrong comitted that causes one to fell remorse. A righteous act no matter how difficult should not cause regret and I believe he is correct not feeling regret. That mission was conducted in a just war and within the international Law of War.

Respect & Thank U Sir 4 our Freedom

There should not be any regrets... A lot of American Lives Saved.. What Japan did was wrong and they were trying to take over our country... We did what we had to do as a nation. My Hat's off and Salute all who Served and are Serving.

My father, too, was enroute from the Philippines to Tokyo as part of that landing force. I certainly don't have any negative feelings about those bombs being dropped. In my years in the Navy, I moved a lot of weapons that were greatly more sophisticated (and deadly) than Little Boy and Fat Man. Now, I'm very glad we never had to use them.

Moral of the story - don't start wars !!

People made the decision they felt was best at the time for both sides to stop the war, water over the dam, the real challenge to mankind is to try to settle differences without killing each other, maybe wishful thinking on my part but God never intended us to kill each other even though he gave us the ability to learn terrible ways to do just that. Live and let live and forgive us of our sins.

In war, the regrets of the victor should always be much less than those of the vanquished. If The Nazis, Japanese, or even the Russians had had the bomb first, the world would be a very different place and still no or little regret by who used it.

More civilian deaths occurred as a result of firebombing of Japanese cities (this includes any cancer/leukemia deaths years later you may want to attribute). The only difference between that and the atomic bomb was the psychological effect of what a single bomb was capable of.

My dad may have died if these A bombs did not work.. if an invasion of Japan was started on Nov 1945.. Operation Olympia.. it is good we blasted them into eternity..so millions on both sides may live

There were only two bombs completed, however, there were more coming.

A period when secrets meant the difference between survival or death. I really wonder if such a secrets could be maintained today given the 7x24 world we live in and the generational divide from the greatest generation till igen/millenials today.

Saved my dad.

It is just as true today as it was on the 9th of August, 1945:

PEACE - through superior firepower.

Why would he have regrets? You've got to be kidding me! If author Nellie Gilles actually asked the question "do you regret dropping the atomic bomb?" she should have been fired on the spot for journalistic incompetence. What a totally dumb, childish, and idiotic question. Oh wait, this was an NPR article.

Although it's impossible to say, that the Truman administration was aware of it at the time, there definitely was good reason to use the bombs WHEN we did. Not the least of these was to convince the Emperor to stop the war.

Japan was already beaten by every rational measure, but the fanaticism of their armed forces wasn't rational. The Emperor and those members of his cabinet who saw what we had == that they couldn't counter did the trick. They quit.

FDR had invited the Soviet Union to join the war against Japan ,and Stalin had (gleefully) agreed to do so 90 days after the war in Europe was over. In probably the only time in memory that Stalin kept his word, the Soviets declared war on Japan on August 8th, 1945,

The Japanese cessation of hostilities meant that all the Soviet Union was able to do was to seize the southern half os Sakhalin and the Kuriles, b it had NO say in what happened on the Japanese home islands.

Had we not dropped the bombs, when we did, Japan's future would've almost certainly included a Soviet occupation of Hokkaido and northern Honshu.

I loved his reason for not regretting what they did, the Japanese started it, we finished it.

I own 3 gauges from the Enola Gay. She was left rotting in a boneyard in what is now O'Hare Airport back in 1952. My dad was in the Airforce and happened to be in Chicago. He was taken to the airfield by a couple friends and was able to get in her. She was almost stripped bare by then. So he took the gauges that were left. She is now fully restored and in the Smithsonian Air Force Museum in Washington DC. When my father passed in 2014, his wish was for me to return them to the Smithsonian. Can you believe they didn't want them! Incredible! That is why this country is what it is today. No sense of history.

Since the guilt of starting the Pacific War is all on Japan, the question of any regret regarding their destruction (including A-bomb) should be placed on their shoulders, and not on those of the U.S. airmen.

The decision to drop the bomb, and the execution in delivering it, was a righteous one — given the historical context during that hellish time.

An aerial view of Wendover(Google Earth)still shows markings on the ground that was a layout of Hiroshima used for bomber training.

Gandhy.

Peace .

I agree. War is HELL.

"Bomber" Harris, who master-minded area bombing of German cities, retorted to accusations against his morality by simply asking, "Name a violent act of war that IS moral?"
We are rightfully repulsed by the suffering of the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The unspeakable suffering they endured was part of the end result of a successful military tactic: the use of nuclear weapons to force an enemy surrender.
There really are no "moral" or "immoral" acts of war. There are only successful or unsuccessful acts.
We CAN draw moral boundaries. What the Germans did to the Jews in WW II was not a military venture. When the Japanese raped their way through Nanking that, too, was not a military act. The Russian rape-offensive against German women during the spring of 1945, implicitly condoned by Stalin, had no military purpose. These examples were all unnecessary, produced no advantageous military or political results and were unattached to any purpose other than sadism without limits.
The area bombing of German cities was atrociously inhumane but it contributed to German defeat -- although nowhere near what Harris expected. The obliteration of the two Japanese cities led directly to Japanese surrender -- and no soldier, however militant, can conceive of a better outcome.
The US Army Air Force inflicted, via non-nuclear raid by B-29s and then with nuclear weapons, appalling pain on civilians. When Japan stopped fighting the infliction of pain on it stopped too. Never, like the German murder of the Jews or the Japanese or Russian rapes of prostrate humanity, were the air raids ends in themselves. The day after the Japanese surrender no Japanese citizen had a thing to fear from the American military as it enacted official policy.
Yes, of course, the US suppressed accounts of the hell that happened to Nagasaki. Why wouldn't it? America faced the task of occupying, alone, a militaristic nation of 70 million and had no reason to excite local resistance. One wonders -- if a complete airing of the facts had produced armed rebellion and, with it, numerous American and Japanese deaths would today's armchair critics have been happier?
At the two cities the Americans carried out two of the great mass-killings in history. There is this rationale: both were needed to force a quick end to the overall violence of war and, together, both horrors went far to accomplish just that.
The only "moral" from the nuclear bombings is the one we learned as children: Peace is better than war. Historians estimate that 50 million people (3% of the world's population) died in WW II. Taken together, the casualties from the two nuclear attacks amount to roughly one-third of 1% of that total. Most of the other 99.67% of the deaths changed very little. The tiny fraction just cited brought peace to Asia.
There is no logical moral limit to violence in war so long as that violence is directed toward a significant military goal. That was the case at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
It happened, it worked and it was over. Then came peace.

Thank You - again !!!

With Malice Toward Some
58 BW 462 BG

Remember all.... all knew on the three planes for each mission that there was a slight
possibility this was a one way ride....

I read WWII history only nowadays. That the bomb was dropped isn't a travesty and those who claimed to think it was not needed weren't in the Pacific (save for MacArthur and he sent a lot of kids to their deaths) never saw the scorch marks on the coral cliffs at the south end of Okinawa or the phalanges that were left in those caves at Suicide Cliffs (that were still there in the 80s). Having to face such fanaticism on the mainland was something that was dreaded.

None of the books I have read about the bombing has led me to believe that the fliers do not have any remorse for doing such.

Nearly every historian points out that the bombing of Tokyo took more lives the week before than the a-bomb did. That said, Japan would have surrendered if the United States had not demanded the removal of the emperor. Japan could not have survived more conventional bombing and the blockade for more than a couple of months. The American lives lie is just that. We would not have needed to invade. Most historians also agree that the bomb was dropped to impress the Russians and that backfired entirely. The continued testing has cost almost as premature deaths as in Japan. Why do you think we are compensating the Downwinders. Lots of uninformed patriotism here.

I used to deliver for a drug store in Passaic NJ.., to the tail gunner on the telemetry B29’s SSgt. Melvin Bierman for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki missions.
He just past aware about two years ago.
He was in Florida and was bought back to Clifton N J for burial.., remember the primary target for the 2nd mission was Kokura... heavy cloud cover diverted this b29 BoxsCar to Nagasaki... mission orders they had to visually bomb a target.
God Bless Mel and these crews, they saved many lives and evened up the score for Pearl Harbor.,,

In spite of the political and other concerns at the time, one of the targets should have been Tokyo.

I have read that when Eisenhower was informed of this possibility, he said it won't have to happen as they are ready to surrender. WE demanded UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER. The emperor could have simply lost face and gone into seclusion. So many spins. If that is true WE committed the awful single terrorist reaction as a narcissist will do. Think TRUMP.