Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Do you think that an American embassy should be built on ground zero in Hiroshima or Nagasaki

These are the cities that President Truman ordered the Atomic bombs dropped.

Answer Question
 
35yoamom

Asked by 35yoamom at 7:30 AM on Sep. 13, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 20 (10,016 Credits)
Answers (32)
  • too little too late
    Zoeyis

    Answer by Zoeyis at 7:36 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • too little too late

    Answer by Zoeyis


    We should or should not? And Why?
    35yoamom

    Comment by 35yoamom (original poster) at 7:37 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • Fortunately, the Japanese don't have virtual peen issues. Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been completely rebuilt and restored, with memorials included. The use of the rest of the space is irrelevant. We already have a consulate at Nagasaki (along with the rest of the allied nations), which had a far larger "ground zero" than we do. Our Consulate is about a block from one of several memorials. Did you have a point here with this ridiculous comparison, or did you just want to make us look bad by demonstrating how much more forgiving the Japanese are even though we did FAR worse damage to them than has ever been done to us?
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 7:38 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • I've visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki on a few occasions and the Japanese have completely forgive the Americans - There are many American buildings in the general locations of both of the sites and the Japanese are happy to accomodate all. I'm from the UK and the spirit there was more of forgiveness than of any condemnation. I think, not too wildly generalise or anything, but after staying for a Japanese family for a few weeks and experience all their friends and family as well as visiting alone many times that Japanese people are a calmer nation.
    leah_rai

    Answer by leah_rai at 7:44 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • its 2010. I see no reason why not. WAR is not the same as a TERRORIST ATTACK either.
    BlacksheepSati

    Answer by BlacksheepSati at 7:45 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • Oh wow that was so full of grammar mistakes it's untrue - Just try and decipher it people :P

    My point was basically that the Japanese wouldn't mind...
    leah_rai

    Answer by leah_rai at 7:45 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • its 2010. I see no reason why not. WAR is not the same as a TERRORIST ATTACK either.

    ---

    I disagree, killing civilians is killing civilians whichever way you look at it. That bomb killed children, women and men alike.
    leah_rai

    Answer by leah_rai at 7:46 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • It was still an act of WAR not TERRORISM.
    BlacksheepSati

    Answer by BlacksheepSati at 7:49 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • And as an act of war it was basically like our whole country doing it. An act of terrorism was not lead by the whole of the country or religion.

    Alanaplus3

    Answer by Alanaplus3 at 7:58 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

  • its 2010. I see no reason why not. WAR is not the same as a TERRORIST ATTACK either.

    Answer by BlacksheepSati


    Maybe they think that they were at WAR with us. I am just saying, I dont like the idea of a muslim anything being built so close to ground zero. I have not been to Japan only my husband and my sister has lived there for 4 years.
    35yoamom

    Comment by 35yoamom (original poster) at 8:00 AM on Sep. 13, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.