Did we really have to nuke Japan?

[The2ndAmendment]

I don't buy it.

They no longer had a navy or air force to project their armies.

A simple food and trade embargo would have sufficed (enforced by our unchallenged navy).

There was no reason to even attack the Japanese mainland.

I think it was a bunch of sick and demented fucks that wanted to demonstrate the power of their new toy to the communist USSR.

Admiral William Leahy – the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and who was at the center of all major American military decisions in World War II – wrote (pg. 441):

It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon 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.

This country is being run by murderous sociopaths.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They might have been secretly working on their own atomic weapon. What if they had needed maybe 2 months, or 4, or 6, to get their own operational?

 

[konradv]

An embargo wouldn't have done it. They could feed their people and probably would have developed alternate forms of energy. I think one was definitely necessary, but two, maybe not. Three days doesn't seem like enough time to have let the gravity of the situation sink in. I'd have waited at least a week.

 

[martybegan]

I don't buy it.

They no longer had a navy or air force to project their armies.

A simple food and trade embargo would have sufficed (enforced by our unchallenged navy).

There was no reason to even attack the Japanese mainland.

I think it was a bunch of sick and demented fucks that wanted to demonstrate the power of their new toy to the communist USSR.

Admiral William Leahy – the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and who was at the center of all major American military decisions in World War II – wrote (pg. 441):

It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon 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.

This country is being run by murderous sociopaths.

It was a weapon, the US spent billions developing it, it was going to get used no matter what. No one really knew enough about it to think it was anything else than just a big regular bomb, because one had never been detonated in anger before.

Plus, if we didn't use it, we probably would have needed or not been able to refuse soviet assistance in the invasion. Want to imagine the cold war with a North ans South Japan?

 

[Theowl32]

I don't buy it.

They no longer had a navy or air force to project their armies.

A simple food and trade embargo would have sufficed (enforced by our unchallenged navy).

There was no reason to even attack the Japanese mainland.

I think it was a bunch of sick and demented fucks that wanted to demonstrate the power of their new toy to the communist USSR.

Admiral William Leahy – the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and who was at the center of all major American military decisions in World War II – wrote (pg. 441):

It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon 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.

This country is being run by murderous sociopaths.

Japan was threatening behind closed doors to surrender to the USSR. That way the emperor had a chance to save face with his people. Stalin was also very interested in those trade routes, and Stalin already made it clear he was no friend to the US or England.

The cold war began almost immediately following WWII and the dividing of the land. USSR pretty much flat out held out a big giant finger to both the US and England. Yes, it was predictable and Patton was trying to get a war with them.

The fact is behind closed doors the USSR and Japan had worked SOMETHING out. There was no way this country was just going to allow the USSR to take Japan after America pretty much alone defeated them with so many American lives lost.

However, the American people could not possibly stomach another war, and Stalin counted on that. There was only one solution that the US had to ensure that Japan would surrender to the US and not the USSR. Dropping the bombs.

Why else do you think the USSR declared war on Japan shortly after they agreed to surrender to us? Yes, it was pretty much from that point that the cold war became a 40 year problem.

Here is the fact. If the bombs would not have been dropped, would it have been wise to get into a hot war with the USSR? Would the American people been able to accept that? 100s of thousands of American lives lost to what was supposedly our allies for the entire WWII?

Or, would America have accepted the fact that Japan surrender to Russia?

Now, you are in position to make the decision. What would you have done?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

[
Now, you are in position to make the decision. What would you have done?

This is proper and truthful version that they should ... teach in school.

But anyway, it seems you only learn meaningful history and the reasons behind it on the internet from other enlightened people. Thank you.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Japan had been offered unconditional surrender and refused twice I believe. It would have been nicer to smoke a hundred thousand German Nazis in Berlin square than 100 plus thousand innocent Japanese.

 

[JoeMoma]

The thing about history is that we can never really know what was down the road not taken.

 

[Theowl32]

[
Now, you are in position to make the decision. What would you have done?

This is proper and truthful version that they should ... teach in school.

But anyway, it seems you only learn meaningful history and the reasons behind it on the internet from other enlightened people. Thank you.

Aug 8, 1945:
Soviets declare war on Japan; invade Manchuria

Soviets declare war on Japan invade Manchuria mdash History.com This Day in History mdash 8 8 1945

--------------------

Aug 6th 1945, the Hiroshima bomb was dropped.

Aug 8th USSR declared war on Japan.

Aug 9th Bomb dropped on Nagasaki

Essentially, they did tell the truth in regards to saving American lives. Once they put the narrative out, that is what needed to be sold.

Of course we can thank the Rosenbergs for the USSR getting the bomb. They probably would have gotten it at some point, but they were at a real disadvantage when they did not have it.

Yes, the Rosenbergs along with many Jews that emigrated here from Russia certainly sympathize with the USSR. Yes, it was Emma Goldman that greatly influenced the mind of Roger Baldwin, who founded the ACLU.

Want to know where the Barbara Boxers or Dianne Feinsteins or Charles Schumers come from? There is your hint.

 

[Unkotare]

They might have been secretly working on their own atomic weapon. ..

No "might" about it, but they had no means of delivery at that point.

 

[Steven_R]

The US was looking at nearly a million casualties (killed and wounded) to pacify Japan. We're still giving out Purple Hearts ordered for the troops slated to invade Japan, even after Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War, the Gulf War 1 & 2, and Afghanistan. Are Purple Hearts from 1945 still being awarded - The Rumor Doctor - Stripes

The Japanese weren't going to go quietly into that good night. They were arming and training civilians to attack allied troops. Even after firebombing Tokyo and killing 100,000 in one night, the Japanese still fought.The only way to have conquered Japan would to have simply killed everyone in Japan. Dropping the bombs and shocking them into submission saved US lives and Japanese lives.

 

[The Irish Ram]

We could have kissed them on the forehead and asked them to pretty please stop killing us.......
or we could stop them from killing us. Remember they declared war on us, attacked us and refused to stop even after they were bombed. Stop trying to make us the bad guys. We ended the war. Our men came home.
The question you should be asking is, "Did Japan really need to fly to Pearl Harbor to kill as many Americans as they could?"

 

[Unkotare]

An embargo wouldn't have done it. They could feed their people....

No, they couldn't.

 

[Unkotare]

The Japanese weren't going to go quietly into that good night. They were arming and training civilians to attack allied troops. Even after firebombing Tokyo and killing 100,000 in one night, the Japanese still fought.The only way to have conquered Japan would to have simply killed everyone in Japan.....

That is utter nonsense.

 

[kaz]

I don't buy it.

They no longer had a navy or air force to project their armies.

A simple food and trade embargo would have sufficed (enforced by our unchallenged navy).

There was no reason to even attack the Japanese mainland.

Read a book, that's just stupid.

Your poll is missing an option. The question asked the answer is no, we did not have to invade. But the implication of that in your poll is your fairy land belief the Japanese would have folded to economic sanctions. The poll options should be.

1) Should we have dropped the bomb and killed a quarter million Japanese?

2) Should we have invaded and killed 10 million Japanese and a million allied forces?

3) Should we believe the fairy tale the Japanese would have caved to economic sanctions?

 

[SAYIT]

Japan had been offered unconditional surrender and refused twice I believe. It would have been nicer to smoke a hundred thousand German Nazis in Berlin square than 100 plus thousand innocent Japanese.

Does 25,000 in Dresden assuage your sense of lost opportunity a bit?

 

[Anathema]

Yes, because the loss of even another American soldier, sailor, airman or marine was unacceptable. Even if we'd had to wipe out the entire Japanese country it would have been acceptable as a means to end the war, punish the Japanese Government and people, and hopefully ensure other countries learned the lesson not to fuck with us.

Unfortunately that didn't work out as it should have due to Soviet spies, American traitors, and a US Government that failed to understand that FEAR is a much more useful tool in international relations than respect is.

 

[Steven_R]

The Japanese weren't going to go quietly into that good night. They were arming and training civilians to attack allied troops. Even after firebombing Tokyo and killing 100,000 in one night, the Japanese still fought.The only way to have conquered Japan would to have simply killed everyone in Japan.....

That is utter nonsense.

Volunteer Fighting Corps - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

You might also want to look at the battles of Iwo Jima (200 survivors out of a garrison of 20,000 and over 6000 dead US Marines) and Okinawa where civilians (including women) blended with the military troops to fight the Americans. We lost over 8000 taking that island.

 

[SAYIT]

[
Now, you are in position to make the decision. What would you have done?

This is proper and truthful version that they should ... teach in school.

But anyway, it seems you only learn meaningful history and the reasons behind it on the internet from other enlightened people. Thank you.

The truth, 69 years later, is that despite your claim we had good reasons to smoke Japan and those who made the decisions were not "sick and demented fucks" as you also claim,.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Everything we did in WWII was for the benefit of Stalin and Mao