65th anniversary of Hiroshima

[southsider2k5]

My opinion is...2k5 is half right.

 

If the option was a full invasion of Japan...the death toll was going to be in the millions. By the time you got on shore, there wasn't going to be a surrender.

 

OTOH, and the reason why in hindsight Truman was willing to be more hesitant...if the U.S. was willing before they dropped the bomb to accept some measure of the Emperor maintaining his role as the U.S. did after dropping the bomb, it might have been settled without either invasion or the bomb. Then again...

 

What indication did Japan show of being willing to suffer what to them would have been a world-wide humiliation of surrender?

[Balta1701]

What indication did Japan show of being willing to suffer what to them would have been a world-wide humiliation of surrender?

They'd proposed multiple times that they'd be willing to surrender and accept occupation if the U.S. were willing to accept some level of retention of the emperor.

 

After the bombs were dropped, the U.S. accepted some level of retention of the emperor.

[Balta1701]

I thought the prevailing theory was that Truman feared Russia's advance into Japan which would prolong the war and give them another country. So Truman wanted the war to end immediately.

This was the thought about 10 years ago anyway so I have no clue whether it holds any water.

A lot of people over the years have speculated that Truman only dropped the bomb in some fashion because of the Russians. You can find reasons to believe that, but it's not a theory I buy into. The U.S. really just wasn't as scared of the russians in 1945 as hindsight suggests they should have been.

[DukeNukeEm]

I thought the prevailing theory was that Truman feared Russia's advance into Japan which would prolong the war and give them another country. So Truman wanted the war to end immediately.

This was the thought about 10 years ago anyway so I have no clue whether it holds any water.

 

Bingo. Our WW2 atrocities always followed a Russia power display. Dresden came shortly after the Russians leveled Berlin in a matter of days and the bombs got dropped on Japan once Manchuria was invaded.

 

As for the Japanese mounting a defense, the only question to ask is: with what? During Okinawa the IJN sent every last man they had on a suicide mission after the American carrier fleet with only enough fuel to get there. If they had any planes (which they didn't), they surely didn't have anyone left to fly them. They would've quit once they saw how useless it was fight back.

Edited August 9, 2010 by DukeNukeEm

[Milkman delivers]

Bingo. Our WW2 atrocities always followed a Russia power display. Dresden came shortly after the Russians leveled Berlin in a matter of days and the bombs got dropped on Japan once Manchuria was invaded.

 

As for the Japanese mounting a defense, the only question to ask is: with what? During Okinawa the IJN sent every last man they had on a suicide mission after the American carrier fleet with only enough fuel to get there. If they had any planes (which they didn't), they surely didn't have anyone left to fly them. They would've quit once they saw how useless it was fight back.

 

So, despite the fact that nobody could ever prove this, you have shown me the light.

[southsider2k5]

Bingo. Our WW2 atrocities always followed a Russia power display. Dresden came shortly after the Russians leveled Berlin in a matter of days and the bombs got dropped on Japan once Manchuria was invaded.

 

As for the Japanese mounting a defense, the only question to ask is: with what? During Okinawa the IJN sent every last man they had on a suicide mission after the American carrier fleet with only enough fuel to get there. If they had any planes (which they didn't), they surely didn't have anyone left to fly them. They would've quit once they saw how useless it was fight back.

 

Except there is no proof of that. Everything in their history indicates otherwise. Even when they were utterly defeated on the islands, people held out for long periods of time against impossible odds, and that is on places that meant nothing. I can't imagine the motherland getting any less of a standard than the random Pacific islands got.

[knightni]

You know until the US dropped the bomb, the Japanese Emperor was considered to be a literal god. Infallible and undefeatable.

I don't think that surrender would have happened without the proof that the emperor was fallible by not being able to stop the bombs; and thus, not a god.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Except there is no proof of that. Everything in their history indicates otherwise. Even when they were utterly defeated on the islands, people held out for long periods of time against impossible odds, and that is on places that meant nothing. I can't imagine the motherland getting any less of a standard than the random Pacific islands got.

 

There is no proof of that, of course, because history played out one way and not another. Historic evaluations benefiting greatly from hindsight invariably conclude that Japan was literally incapable of continuing any meaningful war effort. The war in the Pacific had already been won before the first bomb was dropped, though I'll concede that couldn't possibly ave been known at the time.

 

What remains thoroughly striking to me is how detached America was to the reality of what we were unleashing on fellow human beings. Much is made about the fliers dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki prior to the bombings warning the citizenry about what was to come. Far less is made of the fact that we dropped the same fliers over several other cities that didn't get bombed — because we didn't know what the wind and weather conditions would be over any of the potential targets on the days the bombs were to be dropped.

 

We were also amazingle meticulous in selecting target cities that had largely been spared from the routine conventional bombing raids that many other Japanese cities were subject to. This was not because Truman had some relative living in Hiroshima or Nagasaki as the Japanese rumors of the day would have suggested. It was, however, the best way to get a cold and calculated before/after picture of what Fat Man and Little Boy were really capable of.

 

We can demonize the Pearl Harbor attack, but at the very least we can accept that it was a legitimate military target. That cannot be even remotely said about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[knightni]

Both cities were specifically chosen because of their high importance in war weapon production for the Japanese.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Both cities were specifically chosen because of their high importance in war weapon production for the Japanese.

 

Hiroshima was a wartime communications center and ancillary command center, and Nagasaki was an active wartime seaport, yes.

 

That said, the selection of targets having the greatest military effect is unambiguously documented as being secondary to the need to have multiple secondary targets for each mission. If weather conditions did not allow bombing the primary target we would have multiple backup targets. We almost literally stuck a wet thumb up in the air on the mornings of the bombings to feel the wind decide who we were going to unleash atomic bombs on.

[Balta1701]

Both cities were specifically chosen because of their high importance in war weapon production for the Japanese.

However...also noteable is that those cities had been deliberately spared from the B-29 firebombing campaign that killed even more people in a 1 night raid on Tokyo than the atomic bomb did.

[Jenksismyhero]

They'd proposed multiple times that they'd be willing to surrender and accept occupation if the U.S. were willing to accept some level of retention of the emperor.

 

After the bombs were dropped, the U.S. accepted some level of retention of the emperor.

 

Wasn't the issue that the Emperor was willing to accept defeat, but the Japanese military was not? I think at that point the military leaders held the power to end the war.

[Balta1701]

Wasn't the issue that the Emperor was willing to accept defeat, but the Japanese military was not? I think at that point the military leaders held the power to end the war.

The Japanese military was holding out hope that through discussions with the Russians, Japan could come to a deal with the other Allies that would allow them to end the war with the single condition of retention of the Emperor. That hope ended when the Russians entered the war...but they still managed to extract the concession of Imperial retention from the Allies.

[Jenksismyhero]

There is no proof of that, of course, because history played out one way and not another. Historic evaluations benefiting greatly from hindsight invariably conclude that Japan was literally incapable of continuing any meaningful war effort. The war in the Pacific had already been won before the first bomb was dropped, though I'll concede that couldn't possibly ave been known at the time.

 

What remains thoroughly striking to me is how detached America was to the reality of what we were unleashing on fellow human beings. Much is made about the fliers dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki prior to the bombings warning the citizenry about what was to come. Far less is made of the fact that we dropped the same fliers over several other cities that didn't get bombed — because we didn't know what the wind and weather conditions would be over any of the potential targets on the days the bombs were to be dropped.

 

We were also amazingle meticulous in selecting target cities that had largely been spared from the routine conventional bombing raids that many other Japanese cities were subject to. This was not because Truman had some relative living in Hiroshima or Nagasaki as the Japanese rumors of the day would have suggested. It was, however, the best way to get a cold and calculated before/after picture of what Fat Man and Little Boy were really capable of.

 

We can demonize the Pearl Harbor attack, but at the very least we can accept that it was a legitimate military target. That cannot be even remotely said about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

Not to be crass, but what's the difference really? A bomb is a bomb. A regular bombing raid could inflict as much damage, if not more. The a-bomb just made it easier to do.

 

[lostfan]

The Japanese military was holding out hope that through discussions with the Russians, Japan could come to a deal with the other Allies that would allow them to end the war with the single condition of retention of the Emperor. That hope ended when the Russians entered the war...but they still managed to extract the concession of Imperial retention from the Allies.

The Japanese got an invitation by the Russians in 1945 to try to negotiate the conditions, and when the Japanese ambassador showed up the Soviet foreign minister handed him a formal declaration of war instead. I imagine the Japanese ambassador had better days than that.

Edited August 9, 2010 by lostfan

[Milkman delivers]

The Japanese got an invitation by the Russians in 1945 to try to negotiate the conditions, and when the Japanese ambassador showed up the Soviet foreign minister handed him a formal declaration of war instead. I imagine the Japanese ambassador had better days than that.

 

Haha, awesome.

[Kid Gleason]

Would you believe I actually got an A on a speech I gave in college years ago that argued that the bombs were not such a bad thing? My argument was that the dropping of the bombs solidified there being Godzilla in the world, so all was good, actually.

Edited August 12, 2010 by Kid Gleason

[shipps]

Would you believe I actually got an A on a speech I gave in college years ago that argued that the bombs were not such a bad thing? My argument was that the dropping of the bombs solidified there being Godzilla in the world, so all was good, actually.

 

LOL

 

Well you have me convinced right with that statement. So I can only imagine it as a speech.

[G&T]

You know until the US dropped the bomb, the Japanese Emperor was considered to be a literal god. Infallible and undefeatable.

I don't think that surrender would have happened without the proof that the emperor was fallible by not being able to stop the bombs; and thus, not a god.

 

Part of the condition of surrendor was for the emporer to go on the radio and tell the nation that he was not a god and not infallibel.

[Milkman delivers]

Part of the condition of surrendor was for the emporer to go on the radio and tell the nation that he was not a god and not infallibel.

 

Haha, that's awesome.