DOCSLIB.ORG

The Atomic Bomb, War Room Intrigue and Emperor Hirohito's Decision to Surrender Breaking News Historians DC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Atomic Bomb, War Room Intrigue and Emperor Hirohito's Decision to Surrender Breaking News Historians DC ABOUT US Join our mailing list SUBSCRIBE Departments Home News U.S. World History Features Books Roundup Blogs Job Board Custom Search ; 4/5/2020 NEWS The Atomic Bomb, War Room Intrigue and Emperor Hirohito's Decision to Surrender Breaking News Historians DC News Abroad From Afar, Congress Moves to Oversee tags: Hiroshima, Japan, atomic bomb, Emperor Hirohito, Nagasaki, World War 2 Trump Coronavirus Response A 200-Foot Section of the Berlin Wall Has Been Torn Down to Make Way for 13 Condos, Leaving Historians Appalled Shares The Military Knew Years Ago That a Coronavirus Was Coming "Be Nice" Is Not Needed During Crisis — by David Dean Barrett But A Free Press Is The Prep-School Nazi David Dean Barrett is a military historian, specializing in World War II. He has published work in WWII Quarterly Magazine, U.S. Military History Review, and Global War Studies. He is the Consulting/Producer for Lou Reda Productions' two-hour documentary, " Heroes of the Sky: The Real Mighty Eighth," which will air as a primetime global event on National Geographic in May of 2020. Please visit Mr. Barrett's website at www.onewithhistory.com for more information. TRENDING NOW Trending on HNN The Election of 1940 and the Might- th As the world observes the 75 anniversaries of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Have-Been that Makes One Shudder Nagasaki later this year, Americans have still not reached a consensus about the role of the Getting Medieval on COVID? The Risks of Periodizing Public Health atomic bomb in Japan’s surrender. Was Japan ready to surrender without the bomb? Some The Ruthless Litigant in Chief: James of us believe so, in particular if the Allies would have simply guaranteed the preservation of Zirin Paints a Portrait of Trump Through the Imperial System (with the divine Emperor as the embodiment of all sovereign power in 3,500 Lawsuits the realm). Others contend the Soviet entry into the war actually caused Japan’s surrender. However, a close look at the deliberations of Japan’s Supreme Council at the Direction of War––known as the “Big Six”—evidence which has been available for decades, shows Japan’s leadership deeply divided into two factions. A hardline contingent remained opposed to surrender even after the second atomic attack on Nagasaki and the Soviet Union’s entry into the war. On the flip side, the peace faction used the atomic bombings to engage the Emperor in the surrender decision, an unprecedented move within Japan’s dysfunctional form of government, which required unanimous approval to make any decision. By the summer of 1945, the United States and Japan had finalized their plans for the battle for mainland Japan. Paramount in President Harry S. Truman’s mind were the expected American losses. Multiple sources in the American military estimated the invasion of Japan would result in a quarter of a million to one million U.S. soldiers killed and four times those numbers in total casualties. They also predicted five to ten million Japanese deaths in the invasion; the Japanese themselves thought the total could reach twenty million. From May until early August, Japanese Foreign Minister Shigenori Tōgō, at the behest of the Big Six, carried on a series of vague communications with the Russians that proved futile and never broached the subject of unconditional surrender, an Ally demand since January of 1943. On July 18, Japan’s ambassador to the Soviet Union, Naotake Satō, sent Tōgō a message saying that the Japanese must accept the equivalent of unconditional surrender, excepting the preservation of the Imperial System. Tōgō flatly replied, “With regard to unconditional surrender, we are unable to consent to it under any circumstances whatever.” On July 26, the Allies––excluding Russia––gave Japan an ultimatum known as the Potsdam Declaration. Thirteen terms were listed in the declaration, a break from the blanket unconditional surrender imposed on Germany. For Japan, unconditional surrender had only been applied to Japan’s military. The Allies also included two warnings, that Japan must surrender now or face “prompt and utter destruction” and that the Allies would “brook no delay.” Prime Minister Kantarō Suzuki rejected the declaration, calling it “a thing of no great value.” On August 6, the U.S. exploded the first atomic bomb used in combat over the city of Hiroshima. The Big Six did not meet until three days later on August 9, the same day that the Soviets entered the war against Japan and the United States detonated a second atomic bomb over Nagasaki. The previous day, the Emperor had told Tōgō: “Now that this sort of weapon has been used, it is becoming increasingly impossible to continue the war. I do not think it is a good idea to miss an opportunity to end the war by attempting to secure advantageous conditions.” Nevertheless, the members of the Big Six remained at odds throughout the 9th. The peace faction, which included Suzuki, Tōgō, and Navy Minister Admiral Mitsumasa Yonai, wanted to surrender, preserving only the Imperial System. But War Minister General Korechika Anami, Army Chief-of-Staff General Yoshijirō Umezu, and Navy Chief-of-Staff Admiral Soemu Toyoda demanded three additional conditions: limited occupation or none at all, control of war crimes trials, and control of the disarmament of the nation’s military. Absent these, they wanted to fight the decisive battle on the Japanese homeland, believing they would inflict such high casualties that they could achieve better terms. After hours of heated debate, the peace faction managed to out-maneuver the hardline militarists and convene an Imperial Conference to get the Emperor’s opinion on an issue that clearly had not been agreed upon unanimously. After hearing both sides of the argument, Hirohito told his government he favored the peace faction’s proposal. Baron Kiichirō Hiranuma, President of the Privy Council, demanded that acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration be contingent on "the understanding that the said declaration does not compromise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler.” This proviso preserved the Imperial System and retained Hirohito as Emperor and head of the Japanese government. Anami extracted one further requirement, a promise from the cabinet that the war would continue should the Allies reject the Japanese offer. Upon learning of the offer, Truman immediately called a meeting with Secretary of War Henry Stimson, Secretary of State James Byrnes, Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal, and his Chief of Staff Admiral William Leahy. “Could we even consider a message with so large a ‘but’ as the kind of unconditional surrender we had fought for?” he asked. Forrestal, Stimson, and Leahy wanted to accept the Japanese offer. Stimson said allowing the Japanese to keep the Emperor served American interests by encouraging the military to lay down their arms. Byrnes demurred. In his view, Japan’s phrasing amounted to a refusal to accept the Allies’ offer. Forrestal suggested that some changes to the wording might make the offer acceptable—an idea that appealed to Truman, who asked Byrnes to come up with a counteroffer acceptable to the Allies. Byrnes’ response contained two key points: first, that “the authority of the Emperor… shall be subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers,” and second, that “the ultimate form of government of Japan shall, in accordance with the Potsdam Declaration, be established by the freely expressed will of the Japanese people.” Upon receipt, the Japanese government relapsed into stalemate for two and a half days, with Anami, Umezu, Toyoda, and Hiranuma demanding acceptance of their original four conditions or continuation of the war. On the morning of August 14, American B-29 bombers released millions of leaflets over Japan describing the surrender negotiations. Marquis Kōichi Kido, the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal and the Emperor’s most trusted advisor,found one and warned the Emperor that the leaflets might provoke a rebellion, since the peace negotiations had been kept secret from the Japanese people and military. The Emperor instructed Suzuki to muster another Imperial Conference, where, if necessary, he would “command” the cabinet to accept Byrnes’ counteroffer. After listening to Anami, Umezu, and Toyoda’s now familiar arguments for rejecting the Allies terms, Hirohito told his government he wanted the Byrnes offer accepted. The record of the Imperial Conferences extinguishes any notion that the Japanese government was ready to surrender, that it would have surrendered had the Allies guaranteed the Imperial System, or that it surrendered in response to Russia’s entry into the war. It makes clear two salient facts: that Emperor Hirohito ended the war, and he ended it because of the atomic bomb. He stated as much on four separate occasions: at his meeting with Tōgō on August 8, in his Imperial Rescript (considered by the Japanese to be an inviolable statement from their divine Emperor) on August 15, in a letter to his son on September 6, and when he told Supreme Allied Commander General Douglas MacArthur on September 7 that “the peace party did not prevail until the bombing of Hiroshima created a situation which could be dramatized.” What do you think? 3 Responses Angry Sad Up Down 1 Comment HistoryNewsNetwork ! Disqus' Privacy Policy "1 Login ( Recommend t Tweet f Share Sort by Best Join the discussion… LOG IN WITH OR SIGN UP WITH DISQUS ? Name Dr. J • an hour ago Very interesting resetting of the still controversial decisions in August 1945 and following. Not addressed is the argument that continued saturation bombing of Japanese cities (which killed more persons than even the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs) would have produced the same result.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Emperor Hirohito (1)” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 27, folder “State Visits - Emperor Hirohito (1)” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Ron Nessen donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 27 of The Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE EMPEROR OF JAPAN ~ . .,1. THE EMPEROR OF JAPAN A Profile On the Occasion of The Visit by The Emperor and Empress to the United States September 30th to October 13th, 1975 by Edwin 0. Reischauer The Emperor and Empress of japan on a quiet stroll in the gardens of the Imperial Palace in Tokyo. Few events in the long history of international relations carry the significance of the first visit to the United States of the Em­ peror and Empress of Japan. Only once before has the reigning Emperor of Japan ventured forth from his beautiful island realm to travel abroad. On that occasion, his visit to a number of Euro­ pean countries resulted in an immediate strengthening of the bonds linking Japan and Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Meaning of Victory
    THE MEANING OF VICTORY Beatrice Heuser Strategic Studies University of Reading (currently Paris) “Victories“? • Gulf War I • Afghanistan • Gulf War II • (and the many defeats in the Cold War) Debate about victory • General Petraeus: “This is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home with a victory parade … It’s not war with a simple slogan. (11 Sept. 2008) • Robert Mandel • William Martel • Colin Gray • Angstrom & Duyvesteyn • Boone Bartholomees • Pres. Obama: “Let’s not talk about victory” (June 2011) The Age of the Napoleonic- Clausewitzian Paradigm • 19th century until 1945 (or even later, especially US armed forces – Col Harry Summers) • Obsession with victory for its own sake • Defined as: “imposing one’s will upon the enemy” (Clausewitz), negation of any give- and-take. • And… Pursuit of Victory at all cost • Brian Bond: The Pursuit of Victory from Napoleon to Saddam Hussein • American Civil War: unconditional surrender. • Franco-Prussian War: Peace “Diktat”, unaffordable Reparations, extensive humiliation of defeated party. Perceived injustice. • World War I: Versailles “Diktat”, unaffordable Reparations, extensive humiliation of defeated party. Perceived injustice. • World War II: unconditional surrender. By contrast: earlier thinkers… ARISTOTLE • The end of the medical art is health, that of shipbuilding a vessel, that of strategy victory, that of economics wealth. (Nicomachean Ethics I.1) • We are busy that we may have leisure, and make war that we may live in peace. … no-one chooses to be at war, or provokes war, for the sake of being at war. (Nicomachean Ethics X.7) Just War • Goes back to pre-Christian ROMAN concepts • Preconditions for Just War: – Just cause (self-defence or defence of another) – Just aim: the pursuit of peace – Was is the last resort – Carried out with moderation (proportionality), – And balance of consequences, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Potsdam Declaration from Lisa Bastien
    TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY PROJECT Lesson Title - Potsdam Declaration From Lisa Bastien Grade: 9-12 Length of class period: 86 minute block period Inquiry: (What essential question are students answering, what problem are they solving, or what decision are they making?) Why would the terms of the Potsdam Declaration deter the Japanese from giving an unconditional surrender? Objectives: (What content and skills do you expect students to learn from this lesson?) Students will be able to: • explain the events leading up to the dropping of the atomic bombs • provide examples as to why Japan refused to except the unconditional surrender presented to them prior to the use of the atomic bombs Students will: • analyze a primary source to use as support in response to a given question Materials: (What primary sources or local resources are the basis for this lesson?) Potsdam Declaration (see attached) Activities: (What will you and your students do during the lesson to promote learning?) • Start class by doing a class lecture/discussion on the war in the Pacific (WWII) including specifics on: the Philippines, the battle of Midway, Island Hopping, Guadalcanal, Kamikazes, Iwo Jima, Okinawa and ultimately the Manhattan Project. • Ask the class "what are some ways the US could have warned the Japanese of the nuclear bomb and/or it’s affects without dropping it on a city?" (students may make many suggestions including staging a demonstration so that Japan could understand what the bomb was capable of doing.) • Discuss with the students that staging a demonstration was a consideration that was made. Have them analyze through discussion why it was decided against.
    [Show full text]
  • Mother of the Nation: Femininity, Modernity, and Class in the Image of Empress Teimei
    Mother of the Nation: Femininity, Modernity, and Class in the Image of Empress Teimei By ©2016 Alison Miller Submitted to the graduate degree program in the History of Art and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________________ Chairperson Dr. Maki Kaneko ________________________________ Dr. Sherry Fowler ________________________________ Dr. David Cateforis ________________________________ Dr. John Pultz ________________________________ Dr. Akiko Takeyama Date Defended: April 15, 2016 The Dissertation Committee for Alison Miller certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Mother of the Nation: Femininity, Modernity, and Class in the Image of Empress Teimei ________________________________ Chairperson Dr. Maki Kaneko Date approved: April 15, 2016 ii Abstract This dissertation examines the political significance of the image of the Japanese Empress Teimei (1884-1951) with a focus on issues of gender and class. During the first three decades of the twentieth century, Japanese society underwent significant changes in a short amount of time. After the intense modernizations of the late nineteenth century, the start of the twentieth century witnessed an increase in overseas militarism, turbulent domestic politics, an evolving middle class, and the expansion of roles for women to play outside the home. As such, the early decades of the twentieth century in Japan were a crucial period for the formation of modern ideas about femininity and womanhood. Before, during, and after the rule of her husband Emperor Taishō (1879-1926; r. 1912-1926), Empress Teimei held a highly public role, and was frequently seen in a variety of visual media.
    [Show full text]
  • Manchuria Documents to Examine
    Source 1 Source Information: The Legacy of the Soviet Union Offensives of August 1945 https://amti.csis.org/the-legacy-of-the-soviet-offensives-of-august-1945/ ____________________________________________________________________________ THE LEGACY OF THE SOVIET OFFENSIVES OF AUGUST 1945 BY JEFF MANKOFF | AUGUST 13, 2015 JAPAN, RUSSIA, UNITED STATES The Second World War was an unparalleled calamity for the Soviet Union. As many as 27 million Soviet soldiers and civilians died as a result of the conflict that started with the German invasion of Poland in September 1939 and ended with the Japanese surrender in August 1945. Consumed by this existential struggle along its western border, the Soviet Union was a comparatively minor factor in the Pacific War until the very end. Yet Moscow’s timely intervention in the war against Japan allowed it to expand its influence along the Pacific Rim. With the breakdown of Allied unity soon heralding the onset of the Cold War, Soviet gains in Asia also left a legacy of division and confrontation, some of which endure into the present. By the 1930s, Stalin’s Soviet Union and Imperial Japan both viewed themselves as rising powers with ambitions to extend their territorial holdings. In addition to a strategic rivalry dating back to the 19th century, they now nursed an ideological enmity born of the Bolshevik Revolution and the ultraconservative military’s growing hold on Japanese politics. In 1935, Japan signed the AntiComintern Pact with Hitler’s Germany, laying the foundation for the creation of the Axis (Fascist Italy would join the following year). The two militaries engaged in a series of skirmishes along the frontier between Soviet Siberia and Japanese-occupied Manchuria (Manchukuo) during the late 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of Nationalism in Millennial Japan
    W&M ScholarWorks Undergraduate Honors Theses Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 5-2010 Politics Shifts Right: The Rise of Nationalism in Millennial Japan Jordan Dickson College of William and Mary Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses Part of the Asian Studies Commons Recommended Citation Dickson, Jordan, "Politics Shifts Right: The Rise of Nationalism in Millennial Japan" (2010). Undergraduate Honors Theses. Paper 752. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses/752 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Politics Shifts Right: The Rise of Nationalism in Millennial Japan A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelors of Arts in Global Studies from The College of William and Mary by Jordan Dickson Accepted for High Honors Professor Rachel DiNitto, Director Professor Hiroshi Kitamura Professor Eric Han 1 Introduction In the 1990s, Japan experienced a series of devastating internal political, economic and social problems that changed the landscape irrevocably. A sense of national panic and crisis was ignited in 1995 when Japan experienced the Great Hanshin earthquake and the Aum Shinrikyō attack, the notorious sarin gas attack in the Tokyo subway. These disasters came on the heels of economic collapse, and the nation seemed to be falling into a downward spiral. The Japanese lamented the decline of traditional values, social hegemony, political awareness and engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • Primary Source Document with Questions (Dbqs) the POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction the Dropping of the Atomic Bo
    Primary Source Document with Questions (DBQs) THE POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains among the most controversial events in modern history. Historians have actively debated whether the bombings were necessary, what effect they had on bringing the war in the Pacific to an expeditious end, and what other options were available to the United States. These very same questions were also contentious at the time, as American policymakers struggled with how to use a phenomenally powerful new technology and what the long-term impact of atomic weaponry might be, not just on the Japanese, but on domestic politics, America’s international relations, and the budding Cold War with the Soviet Union. In retrospect, it is clear that the reasons for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan, just like the later impact of nuclear technology on world politics, were complex and intertwined with a variety of issues that went far beyond the simple goal of bringing World War II to a rapid close. The Potsdam Declaration was issued on July 26, 1945 by U.S. President Harry Truman, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China, who were meeting in Potsdam, Germany to consider war strategy and post-war policy. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin also attended the Potsdam Conference but did not sign the Declaration, since the Soviet Union did not enter the war against Japan until August 8, 1945. Document Excerpts with Questions From Japan’s Decision to Surrender, by Robert J.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender?
    Volume 5 | Issue 8 | Article ID 2501 | Aug 01, 2007 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender? Tsuyoshi Hasegawa The Atomic Bombs and the SovietFrank, have recently confronted this issue Invasion: What Drove Japan’s Decision to head-on, arguing that the atomic bombing of Surrender? Hiroshima had a more decisive effect on Japan’s decision to surrender than did Soviet Tsuyoshi HASEGAWA entry into the war.[4] This essay challenges that view. It argues that (1) the atomic Almost immediately following the end of World bombing of Nagasaki did not have much effect War II, Americans began to question the use of on Japan’s decision; (2) of the two factors—the the atomic bomb and the circumstances atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Soviet entry surrounding the end of the Pacific War. More into the war—the Soviet invasion had a more than half a century later, books and articles on important effect on Japan’s decision to the atomic bomb still provoke storms of debate surrender; (3) nevertheless, neither the atomic among readers and the use of atomic weapons bombs nor Soviet entry into the war served as remains a sharply contested subject.[1] As the “a knock-out punch” that had a direct, decisive, 1995 controversy over the Enola Gay exhibit at and immediate effect on Japan’s decision to the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space surrender; (4) the most important, immediate Museum revealed, the issues connected with cause behind Japan’s decision to surrender the dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima and were the emperor’s “sacred decision” to do so, Nagasaki continue to touch a sensitive nerve in engineered by a small group of the Japanese Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal of Japanese Studies, Volumes 1:1 – 44:1 (1974 – 2018) Page 2
    Symposium on Japanese Society. Introduction by Susan B. Hanley. 8,1 Symposium on Ie Society. THE JOURNAL OF JAPANESE Introduction by Kozo Yamamura. 11,1 Symposium: Transition From Medieval to Early Modern Japan. STUDIES Introduction by Michael P. Birt and Kozo Yamamura. 12,2 Special Issue: A Forum on the Trade Crisis. Introduction by Kenneth B. Pyle. 13,2 Index to Volume 1, Number 1 through Symposium: Social Control and Early Socialization. Volume 44, Number 1 Introduction by Thomas P. Rohlen. 15,1 Symposium on Gender and Women in Japan. (Autumn 1974 through Winter 2018) Introduction by Susan B. Hanley. 19,1 Symposium on Contemporary Japanese Popular Culture. Introduction by John Whittier Treat. 19,2 © 2000–2018 by the Society for Japanese Studies Symposium on Teaching and Learning in Japan. Introduction by Thomas P. Rohlen. 20,1 This index is divided into eight parts: Symposia, Articles, Book Reviews, Opinion and Comment, Communications, Publications Symposium on Continuity and Change in Heisei Japan. of Note, Miscellaneous, and a List of Contributors. Introduction by Susan B. Hanley and John Whittier Treat 23,2 ARTICLES SYMPOSIA Akita, George. An Examination of E.H. Norman's Scholarship. 3,2 - Allen, Laura W. Images of the Poet Saigyo as Recluse. 21,1 Workshop on the Economic and Institutional History of Medieval Japan. Allinson, Gary Dean. The Moderation of Organized Labor in Postwar Introduction by Kozo Yamamura. 1,2 Japan. 1,2 Symposium: The Ashio Copper Mine Pollution Incident. Allison, Anne. Memoirs of the Orient. 27,2 Introduction by Kenneth B. Pyle 1,2 Ambaras, David R.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey Shoot and How Adm
    US Navy photo By John T. Correll Battle of the Philippine Sea, Leyte Gulf. It was also overshadowed 1944, the Japanese had scaled back their June 19-20, 1944, marked the by the other war news that month from plans but still hoped to hold a shorter end of Japanese naval airpower halfway around the world: The Allied inner perimeter, anchored on the east by as a signifi cant factor in World War II. landings in Normandy on D-Day, June 6, the Mariana Islands. It was the single biggest aircraft carrier to begin the invasion of occupied Europe. Japan’s greatest hero, Adm. Isoroku battle in history. However, naval history buffs still argue Yamamoto, who had planned the Pearl The fi rst day is remembered as “the about the Turkey Shoot and how Adm. Harbor attack, was dead, his airplane shot Great Marianas Turkey Shoot,” in which Raymond A. Spruance—the non-aviator down over the jungles of New Guinea in US Navy pilots and anti-aircraft gun- in command of the US Fifth Fleet—might 1943 by AAF P-38s. There was no one ners shot down more than 300 Japanese have conducted the battle, but didn’t. of comparable stature to take his place. airplanes. Before the two-day battle was Meanwhile, the US armed forces were over, the Japanese had lost fi ve ships, REVERSAL OF FORTUNES engaged in an intramural argument about including three fl eet carriers, and a total The heyday of the Japanese navy in the strategy. Gen. Douglas MacArthur called of 476 airplanes and 450 aviators.
    [Show full text]
  • General Grant National Memorial
    both as a citizen and soldier. Allegorical figures by J. CAPTAIN SAM GRANT: The future commanding gen­ At Shiloh in April, when a Confederate surprise Massey Rhind representing Grant's youth, military service, eral of the Union armies and President of the United States attack threatened to overwhelm the Federal army, Grant civilian life, and death are between the arches of the ro­ was born in Point Pleasant, Ohio, on April 27, 1822. regrouped his shaken forces and drove the Southerners tunda. Bronze busts sculpted by Mues and J. Juszko of sev­ Baptized Hiram Ulysses Grant, he found when he en­ from the field. The narrowly won victory was a giant eral of Grant's comrades-in-arms are in niches in the walls tered West Point in 1839 that his name appeared on the step forward in the North's conquest of the Mississippi of the crypt. In 1966 three mosaics, designed by Allyn Cox, records as Ulysses Simpson Grant. The record was al­ Valley. representing the battles of Vicksburg and Chattanooga and lowed to stand. To the other cadets his initials suggested Maintaining the initiative in the West, Grant the surrender at Appomattox, each a significant event in the nickname "Uncle Sam," quickly shortened to "Sam." achieved a major goal of Union war strategy on July 4, Grant's career, were placed in the lunettes of the rotunda. At West Point he distinguished himself in horsemanship 1863, when his capture of the Mississippi fortress of Vicks­ THE NATIONAL MEMORIAL: From the time of its and showed ability in mathematics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nuremberg Trials and Crimes Against Humanity
    Portland State University PDXScholar Young Historians Conference Young Historians Conference 2014 Apr 29th, 10:30 AM - 11:45 AM The Nuremberg Trials and Crimes Against Humanity Katie A. Welgan St. Mary's Academy Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/younghistorians Part of the European History Commons, and the Legal Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Welgan, Katie A., "The Nuremberg Trials and Crimes Against Humanity" (2014). Young Historians Conference. 8. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/younghistorians/2014/oralpres/8 This Event is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Young Historians Conference by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! The Nuremberg Trials and !Crimes Against Humanity ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Katie Welgan Portland State University Challenge: Modern European History December 15, 2013 !2 While Germany’s unconditional surrender to Allied forces on May 9th, 1945 marked the conclusion of physical conflict on Western Front, this transfer of power at the end of World War II created a new conflict of an administrative nature. As victors, American, British, French, and Soviet officials were responsible for the development of a system to address the crimes of Nazi leaders. While international law—and popular opinion in several Allied countries—favored executions without trials, prominent leaders including Joseph Stalin
    [Show full text]