Inside the editorial page
Inside the editorial page

This blog is designed to give readers a glimpse of our editorial-page operation and how we make our decisions. We’ll let you know who we’re meeting with, what they’re telling us, what events and issues we’re looking at. We’ll also pass on information and observations that may not make our print editions. In addition to the editorial board members who post on this blog, the board includes Publisher David Zeeck, Executive Editor Karen Peterson and Managing Editor Dale Phelps.

Editorial board bloggers

Editorial page editor Patrick O’Callahan oversees the online and printed opinion sections of The News Tribune. He came to The News Tribune in 1987 and has worked at Washington newspapers since 1979. E-mail him at patrick.ocallahan@thenewstribune.com

Editorial writer Cheryl Tucker, in addition to writing commentary, manages the daily production of the editorial and op-ed pages and edits letters to the editor. She began her journalism career in 1974 at a Virginia newspaper and came to The News Tribune in 1978. E-mail her at cheryl.tucker@thenewstribune.com.

Editorial writer Kim Bradford manages the online opinion section of The News Tribune and writes commentary. She joined The News Tribune in 2005 after working 11 years at newspapers in Washington and Maryland. E-mail her at kim.bradford@thenewstribune.com.

Guest bloggers

Editor emeritus David Seago retired from The News Tribune in 2008 after 41 years at The News Tribune. E-mail him at sds99@harbornet.com.

Richard Davis’ column on state politics frequently runs in the print edition of The News Tribune. He was president of the Washington Research Council, a statewide think tank, from 1986 through 2006. Currently, as a principal with The Simeon Partnership, Inc. he coordinates the activities of the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy, a business coalition founded by the Research Council, the Association of Washington Business and the Washington Roundtable.

Karen Irwin of University Place, a mother of four, has been a frequent contributor to The News Tribune's print editions. She has also written for Seattle's Child, Puget Sound Parent, the Tacoma Weekly, the Fayetteville Observer Times and the political blog Right Meets Left. She graduated from California Lutheran University with a degree in English literature and is currently working toward a history degree.

Michael Allen, professor of history at the University of Washington Tacoma, was born and raised in Ellensburg. He served with the U.S. Marines in Vietnam from 1969-70. He has written five books, including the prize-winning "Patriot's History of the United States: From Columbus' Great Discovery to the War on Terror," "Rodeo Cowboys in the North American Imagination" and "Western Rivermen, 1763-1861: Ohio and Mississippi Boatmen and the Myth of the Alligator Horse." Allen lives in Tacoma and Ellensburg and has three children.

Follow us on Twitter at twitter.com/tntopinion.

Calendar
November 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          
Archives
XML Feeds
What is RSS?
Misc
Who's Online?
  • MrSinister Email
  • Guest Users: 450
What's on the minds of Tacoma News Tribune editorial writers
Friday, July 31st, 2009
Posted by Patrick O'Callahan @ 07:51:37 pm

Father Bill Bichsel’s Journey of Repentance – an anti-war event in Hiroshima and Nagasaki – appears to be making a big splash in Japan.

A big enough splash that it brought the New York bureau chief of The Asahi Shimbun – Japan’s equivalent of the New York Times – to Tacoma yesterday to interview a supporter and an opponent of the event. Me as well.

Yamanaka Toshihiro, a lanky, soft-spoken man, wanted to talk about an editorial I’d written about the angry local reactions to the “journey” (which I uncharitably described as “moral preening”). The editorial neither defended nor attacked the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki all those years ago; I was attempting to place those bombings in the larger context of a war in which the mass killing of civilians became a deliberate strategy on both sides.

World War II – which left as many as 70 million people dead – was the worst thing that ever happened to humanity, at least in the space of so few years. (The smallpox vaccine might argue to the contrary, but it had centuries on its side.)

Yamanaka wanted to know why so many of our letter writers were upset about the Journey of Repentance. He said Bichsel and company would be received as celebrities in Japan, “like Michael Jackson.”

Obviously, Americans and Japanese are going to have different takes on World War II, especially on the atomic bombings. The Japanese see the latter – quite accurately – as an unspeakable horror in which vast numbers of their countrymen (and women and children) were burned alive. Most Americans to this day tend to see the A-bomb as a brutal necessity that ultimately saved more lives than it destroyed by bringing the war to a quick end.

Still, many Americans have made gestures of sympathy to the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in years past without stirring up the kind of reaction we saw this time.

[More:]

I told Yamanaka that I thought part of the explanation lay in the words “repentance” and “apologize.” (The group’s petition stated, “I apologize to the people of Japan for my country’s atomic bombing ... and ask forgiveness for these atrocities.”)

The problem with the term “Journey of Repentance” is that repenting can be done only by the person who committed the wrong in question. If Harry Truman was wrong to destroy those two cities, it was up to him to do the repenting. Same with War Secretary Henry Stimson or anyone else connected with that dread decision.

But when someone who had no connection to the decision claims to be repenting, it sounds very much as if he is trying to repent on behalf of other Americans. Same with apologizing. The people with the right to “repent,” and apologize on behalf of the country, are all dead.

There are probably some World War II veterans still left in this area who feared they would have had to take part in an invasion of Japan had it not been for the use of the bombs. There are certainly plenty of children and grandchildren of such veterans. A lot more believe the bombings were simply justified under the war’s dire circumstances.

Few of them, probably, feel like apologizing or repenting, and they probably resent what looks like a group of pacifists trying to do it for them.

This isn’t a defense of the bombings. Only a psychopath could be indifferent to the incineration of so many human beings.

But the calculus of lives saved vs. lives destroyed – and the persistent arguments over whether Japan would have surrendered without those holocausts – make this an extremely complex moral question. Nobody should presume to answer it for anyone else.

Categories: Taking notice