Seventy years ago this week, British prime minister Winston Churchill crossed the U-boat-infested North Atlantic to have a top-secret rendezvous with Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt. Churchill’s vessel, the battleship HMS Prince of Wales, had just undergone extensive repairs following her bloody encounter with the German pocket battleship Bismarck. Both warships lost hundreds of men in the battle. Bismarck left behind thousands of men in the water following its sinking. Almost all of these were abandoned to cruel death when British efforts to rescue survivors were suspended. Sonar had picked up German submarines contacts.
Churchill was desperate for U.S. aid. And Roosevelt was eager to help. But he would not commit the United States to go to war against Nazi Germany or Japan. The U.S. was still officially neutral in 1941, that last American summer of peace.
The president stood under an awning on the deck of the USS Augusta, a cruiser anchored in Placentia Bay, off Newfoundland. It was August 9, 1941. He was supported on the arm of his son, Elliott, wearing his Army officer’s uniform. Any movement on land was hazardous for the polio-stricken president. Aboard a ship, with sudden pitches and rolls, every step he took was perilous. But Roosevelt, like Churchill, was an experienced sailor who loved the sea.
The prime minister bowed to the president, handing him a letter of introduction from King George VI. Churchill was then the most famous man in the world, but he was acutely conscious of the fact that he was head of government, while FDR was head of state. The two men met and at once hit it off. This was the first “summit,” so named by Churchill.
The next day, Sunday, was the spiritual summit of this summit. Thousands of British and American sailors crowded together for worship aboard Prince of Wales. “My father is a very religious man,” Elliott had told Churchill in a private meeting. Churchill already knew that. He had planned every detail of the elaborate divine service. He ordered British and American flags placed on the chaplain’s pulpit.
The president and the prime minister led their ships’ companies in a church parade. The sailors shared hymnals. The prime minister selected the hymns — Roosevelt’s favorites, and ones that Winston judged would be known by most of his battle-hardened English ratings. “O God, Our Help in Ages Past,” “Eternal Father, Strong to Save,” and “Onward, Christian Soldiers” were the familiar tunes voiced by 4,000 male voices, their sound reverberating from the forbidding gray mountains that ringed this sheltered bay.
The Royal Navy chaplain read from the book of Joshua. “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee, saith the Lord. Be strong and of good courage.” Roosevelt choked back tears, so moved was he by the scene played out for him. Churchill wept openly.
The young sailors stationed before their leaders that day would need strength; they would need courage. Within just months, although few suspected it that quiet Sunday morning in August, a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on another Sunday would plunge the U.S. and Britain into a war in the Pacific. Many of these same British sailors would die in a Japanese air attack on Prince of Wales the following December. Off Singapore, this warship would become the first capital ship to be sunk by air attack.
For now, though, they delighted in a special gift from America. Each of the visiting British sailors, and the Americans, got a box with chocolate, oranges, and cigarettes. Many of these British fighting men had not seen an orange in years, due to wartime rationing. On top of the box were inscribed the presidential seal and this message: “The Commander-in-Chief, United States Navy, sends his compliments and best wishes, Franklin D. Roosevelt.”
The communiqué that Churchill and Roosevelt issued following their four-day summit soon became known as the Atlantic Charter. It formed the basis for the United Nations. It laid out the principles for which untold millions would fight to rid the world of Nazi tyranny and Japanese imperialism.
This 70th anniversary of the first summit comes just as the U.S. Air Force has backed down ignominiously when challenged by a small, militant group of atheizers. For 20 years, Air Force chaplains have been offering training to those who might be called upon to launch nuclear missiles in the event of a Doomsday scenario. In the course, the Air Force chaplains dared to invoke biblical imagery and offer quotes from Scripture.
Britain’s normally conservative Daily Telegraph hooted at the now-banned course, dubbing it “Jesus Loves Nukes.” Banned as well is anything taught by Augustine of Hippo. His philosophy served for 1,600 years as the basis for just-war doctrine. It is to Augustine we looked to know why the Holocaust was wrong, why the builders of the Gulag were an evil empire. In place of Augustine, we will be directed to the U.N.’s Human Rights Council, where slaughterers of innocents outvote the craven representatives of once-civilized states.
They were the kind of nations whose chosen leaders met at the first summit. Would Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill recognize the world their successors are making? Have we forsaken them and all they did for our freedom? Are we yet men of strength and courage?
— Bob Morrison is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council and served in the Reagan administration.
And today, of course, marks the anniversary of the immoral and unnecessary dropping of the atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki. That might have merited a mention in your post.
We mourn for the scores of thousands of innocent men, women, and children who needlessly died, and those who suffered unspeakable agony for years afterwards.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEnjoy the warm wet satisfaction provided by your righteous indignation, pal. It's not like you were going to take part in the invasion of the home islands, so your grace comes pretty cheap.
Rather than join you, I'll take the opportunity of your comment to thank President Truman and the US Armed Forces for taking the decisive action necessary to shorten the agony of the war by winning it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Buster: I couldn't agree more with your response. It seems the failing of the "modern military," through no fault of their own; that they are besieged by political considerations.
If the C-I-C sends them to fight - then send them to win, decisively. My son, a 4th generation military man, is currently in Afghanistan. It's current state, after 10 long years, is abysmal. We have lost entirely too many lives, as well as spending too much money in this once worthy cause.
Subscribe to Sherman's theory, win big, win ugly, and get it over with.
Mr. Morrison, thank you for an excellent piece of historical perspective.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo be charitable, the claim that the bombing was immoral and unnecessary is -- in the absence of a credible alternative -- contentious, to say the least.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBut why be charitable? He's a troll, and a particularly ignorant one, which is saying something.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI guess you know more about it than the following gentlemen:
"Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."
- Paul Nitze, author of 1946 Strategic Bombing Survey, Secretary of the Navy, Deputy Secretary for Defense, awarded Presidential Medal of Freedom by Ronald Reagan
"In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives."
- 5-Star General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan."
- Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet
"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."
- Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Truck - For every quote you pull up (w/o citation) I could pull up one from a contemporary explaining why the bombing was in fact necessary.
Regardless, you're now in the default leftist position of defending those who would commit state-sponsored rape, murder and genocide on a massive scale, while I'm defending those who would give their lives to stop it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe sources for these quotes would be nice. As for Adm. Leahy's comments about "destroying women and children", I think those fire bombings of the cities of Japan destroyed an awful large number of women and children, too. Japan should have thought about its women and children before they started their war against the US and its Allies. They waged total war against their enemies: the Chinese, Burmese, Dutch Indonesians, Koreans, Phillipinos, etc. They did not spare those women and children.
I suppose as the victors of WW II, we're held to a higher standard, but I think we can all agree that it was better that the US and its Allies were victorious in part because of the use of two atomic bombs then if we lost and did not use those two weapons.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOk. Here are the sources. Now what? Are you claiming these gentlemen are wrong and you are right? Make your case.
Nitze quote: United States Strategic Bombing Survey, Summary Report
Eisenhower quote: His memoirs, "The White House Years"
Nimitz quote: "Was the Atomic Bombing of Japan Necessary, Robert Freeman, 2005
Leahy quote: His memoirs, "I Was There"
Were you there?....
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Are you claiming these gentlemen are wrong and you are right? Make your case."
Nope. I'm claiming you're wrong. You're taking these quotes without context and trying to argue that they're all the support you need for your ignorant, childish statement above. Meanwhile, you completely ignore the lack of any discussion of potential cost of a prolonged war. Few would argue that we wouldn't have won the war, eventually. But at what cost?
You don't seem to care about another few hundred thousand, probably millions of lives lost, not to mention the wealth consumed, which was instead available for use rebuilding Japan, Germany, Europe and the US.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou don't seem to care about making the case that dropping the bomb saved millions of lives. The quotes I give imply or directly state otherwise.
I look forward to considering the merits your argument. As you make your argument, it might be more effective if you take on the specific claims made in the quotes given.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTruck - The quotes you give state nothing of the kind, and do nothing but further the impression that you're an ignorant, dangerously deluded leftist with serious reading comprehension issues.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMaybe you don't read all the responses to you so I'll keep it simple.
Ketsu-Go.
External Link
If you still doubt the horrific casualty estimates after reading this, well, good luck to you.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBut, b-b-but he has quotes! Quotes, d**n you! Quotes that imply that some people *gasp* had second thoughts about dropping the atomic bomb, but that say absolutely nothing about the certain trade-off in innocent lives and treasure from a prolonged war! Quooottttessss!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh, and Truck? They have this thing called "hyperlinks." They're the generally accepted form of citation on this whole interwebs thing. Look into it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTruck, your agenda is anti-nuclear. It's as simple and sad as that.
How many died in the B-29 raids on Tokyo alone? Oh, those were conventional bombs so I guess that was OK. Never mind that those total casualties were on par with the A-bomb deaths.
Like all liberals, you use prevented horrors to further an agenda. Those A-bombs prevented countless American and Japanese fatalities that would have exceeded Hiroshima/Nagasaki 100-fold. You want the luxury of whining about the A-bomb without having to answer for the atrocities it prevented.
This liberal mindset works nonstop. Here's a more recent example: 9/11 changes the strategic playing field for terrorism. We eliminate Iraq's ability to wage terrorism/war. Result? 10 years of no major terrorist attacks on Americans. I think we all know the liberal response to the former while ignoring the latter.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour last paragraph speaks volumes. Thank you for letting me know both the sophistication and accuracy of your worldview.
Again, I await a single person here to justify the claim that millions of lives were saved by dropping the bomb, contra the quotes I provided.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI look forward to your response to the Ketsu-Go information. Japan's own plans. There's your millions.
For your reference in case you doubt Japan's sincerity in planning to defend their homeland:
Okinawa: Japan's strength = 120K with 100K deaths:
Iwo Jima: Strength = 22K. All dead except 212 prisoners. They fought to the death.
Guadalcanal: Strength = 37K. 32K dead.
Tarawa: Strength = 5K. All dead but 17 prisoners. Please read of the "Banzai" suicide attack that ended the battle.
Peleliu: Strenth = 12K. All dead but 12 Japanese soldiers.
Truck, I think I've provided ample evidence of the accuracy of the atrocious casualty estimates in the event of an invasion of Japan.
I have a request of you. Can you provide a single incidence during the war, prior to Hiroshima/Nagasaki, where Japan was pragmatic in the face of obvious defeat? Any battle where a Japanese commander surrendered to avoid the annihilation of his men?
And if you question the impact of Japan's militarism on its civilians and if they would really be able to play a role in defending the homeland, please read about the ending at Okinawa. Mothers took their babies and jumped off cliffs by the dozens to avoid the "barbarians" from America. Nearly 100K civilians died on Okinawa.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat "volumes" does it speak? That liberals are great at stating the obvious while conveniently ignoring the fact that, had you had your way, Saddam would still be in power? We'll never know what horrors he may have committed over that time span and thank God for that. You obviously don't want to talk about that aspect.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI see Truck is trotting out the standard liberal response to criticism.
Any "expert" who agrees with me is not to be questioned in any way shape or form.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAny expert who agrees with you is a warmongering heathen who doesn't know what he is talking about and must be ignored, if not killed.