Nagasaki anniversary

[Baruch Menachem]

Today is the day the last atom bomb was used (Until the Iranians get theirs done anyway). As a right wing freak in good standing everything Truman did is suspect however I think the use of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the right decision.


I think the Japanese are cool, I watch lots of their TV. It is an interesting culture with lots we can learn from, but in the war years, they were crazy. And given the way they waged war, I think the Atom bombs saved lots of lives, Japanese as well as American. Given the way the Japanese waged war, not using them would have been a greater tragedy than their use.

Truman was looking at the record of Japan's military in Iwo, Saipan, Okinowa and all the other battlefields. Saipan suffered a civilian casualty rate of 70%, Okinawa about 60%. There were about 5 survivors from Iwo. conquering and subjugating and policing the home islands would probably have had the same results as what happened elsewhere. The japanese kept fighting with sticks after the officers and ammunition were all gone.

Of course the US casualties would have been something amazing too. My father was in the army back then. He might have been one of those left on the beach.

Some folks might even be willing to argue that the atom bombs brought the world a bit of Karmic balance. After the way the Japanese behaved in Korea, Manchuria, the Philippines etc etc still leaves a lot of resentment in those places. If you read Michelle Malkin, you get a taste of the anger the Japanese occupation left behind three generations on. I don't want to go there, but the Japanese are not in the position to whine about war crime.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Source documents for those dumb enough to claim the Japanese were about to surrender.

The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II: A Collection of Primary Sources

 

[Centrism'sVoice]

I've always said that those who think the US shouldn't have dropped its bombs really don't understand the nature of war.

 

[mightypeon]

Given the relativly low losses (and high rates of captured Japanese) the Russians had both during Calchin Gol (1939) and during their August Storm operation in Manchuria (which saw 1 Million Japanese out of the war over a course of some weeks, with Soviet Deaths beeing below 20.000, jup, thats roughly 1:50), I believe that the "Japanese fight to the death" myth may be a fairly gross exaggeration.

On the other hand, if the US military was indeed unable to defeat Japan conventionally, it was a very smart decision to no attempt any overt agression against the Soviet Union after WW2.

 

[Centrism'sVoice]

Given the relativly low losses (and high rates of captured Japanese) the Russians had both during Calchin Gol (1939) and during their August Storm operation in Manchuria (which saw 1 Million Japanese out of the war over a course of some weeks, with Soviet Deaths beeing below 20.000, jup, thats roughly 1:50), I believe that the "Japanese fight to the death" myth may be a fairly gross exaggeration.

However, if the bombing could reasonably save even a few American lives over an invasion, it was tactically the correct decision.

 

[mightypeon]

From what I get, a main rationale was that the American gouverment wished to prevent the USSR from having a say in the matter of Japan.
If you look at it this way, Russia payed about 80-90% (in terms of losses and of casulties inflicted on the Wehrmacht)of the price needed to defeat Germany, but only got around 50% of the spoils (East Germany and Prussias possesions, the US got way more bang for the buck, although France did not prove to be a very reliable vasall), the US wished to avoid that Russia gained significant things out of Japan. Strategically and Tactically, Nuking was a good thing to do for the US, but I hotly object to any claims of it beeing "moral". It was exactly as moral as Dschingis Khan annihilating a chinese city to get 5 other cities to surrender. And mind you, that kind of stuff worked well for the Mongols too.