The truth about Truman’s bombing Japan

[Mushroom]

" From the perspective of an overwhelming number of key contemporary leaders in the US military"

And tell me, exactly how much authority did they have with the Big Six?

 

[Mushroom]

Or a naval blockade.

Great, starve tens of millions of people to death. Real humane there.

 

[Mushroom]

let us see your sources, tell us how you have, "original sources". I am not challenging your comments, simply asking to see these sources.

Well, one of the main ones I have quoted in here many times.

Nuclear Files: Library: Correspondence: Telegrams: Togo-Sato

Japanese Peace feelers in the Soviet Union

www.nuclearfiles.org

Those are the Togo-Sato Telegrams. Those were the messages sent back and forth between Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo and Ambassador Naotake Sato. Ambassador Sato was the point man in attempting to get the Soviet Union to intercede with Japan to end the war. And this was at least the third time they had tried to get a neutral country to act as a middleman between them and the allies.

First was the Swiss, but they outright rejected them and refused to even meet with their diplomats. Finland gave them the same response, refused to talk to their diplomats.

The Togo-Sato cables are very important, as Togo was one of the Big Six who were the real leaders of Japan.

Another one I have referenced frequently is the Potsdam Declaration.

Potsdam Declaration | Birth of the Constitution of Japan

www.ndl.go.jp

I especially use that whenever some idiot tries to insist that the Allies demanded the "Unconditional Surrender of Japan". I find that particularly funny, as the declaration never says that.

Those are examples of "source documents". And there are many more, like the declaration of War by Japan on 8 December 1941.

https://tmcdaniel.palmerseminary.edu/Rescript-English.pdf

These kinds of things are far more accurate than just pointing at literally a random 50 year old newspaper article with absolutely no verification of anything printed in a 2 paragraph back page story. Especially as many of the claims laid out in them have absolutely no proof they ever actually happened.

 

[Mushroom]

I know that, i have it in books. I am curious how one can say they have those documents.

The originals were in the archives of the Foreign Ministry when the war ended. And the US had them also from intercepting and decrypting the messages.

In fact, the Americans were likely reading them before the Japanese were. We were already using computers to decrypt MAGIC intercepts, the Japanese were still doing the decoding manually.

 

[Mushroom]

magic intercepts from the war and the captured documents showing the intercepts were spot on

And notice who the source actually is that is making the archive available.

NuclearFiles.Org, which is run by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. This is actually an anti-nuclear group who's mission is to eliminate all nukes. So if it was biased, one would think that they would actually be presenting documents that show that the bombs were not needed. But I have spent many hours going through their online archives, and have never heard a single report from anywhere that they have been doctored or manipulated in any way.

 

[Mushroom]

Maybe FDR should have been thinking about that when he threw the letter from General MacArthur in the trash and completely dismissed any idea of ending the war earlier.

Maybe MacArthur should have reported who it was that met him, where, how they got in to see him in the first place, and who actually gave them the authority to negotiate a surrender?

Especially as their own Ambassador to the Soviet Union and a Crown Prince only had authority to discuss an Armistice and return to 1941 borders.

Well, I have challenged you several times on these issues Poop Head, and you have yet to ever answer. You simply ignore any questions and drive on.

 

[gipper]

retard they bombed both of the Nuked cities before ever dropping the nukes on them

Liar. Both cities were largely untouched by aerial bombing. They purposely withheld bombing Hiroshima so they could see the effects of the a-bomb.

 

[gipper]

retard they bombed both of the Nuked cities before ever dropping the nukes on them

Dumb ass…why lie?

The US bomber command had spared Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Kokura from the conventional bombing that had burned to the ground 60+ other major Japanese cities during the first half of 1945. One of the reasons for targeting relatively undamaged cities with these new weapons of mass destruction was scientific: to see what would happen to intact buildings – and their living inhabitants – when atomic weapons were exploded overhead.
The Atomic Murder of Nagasaki - LewRockwell

 

[elektra]

The originals were in the archives of the Foreign Ministry when the war ended. And the US had them also from intercepting and decrypting the messages.

In fact, the Americans were likely reading them before the Japanese were. We were already using computers to decrypt MAGIC intercepts, the Japanese were still doing the decoding manually.

Not what I asked, thank you for...

 

[elektra]

These kinds of things are far more accurate than just pointing at literally a random 50 year old newspaper article with absolutely no verification of anything printed in a 2 paragraph back page story. Especially as many of the claims laid out in them have absolutely no proof they ever actually happened.

What a bizarre comment. I could say the same, a random note or comment in an archive is irrrelevant.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What a bizarre comment. I could say the same, a random note or comment in an archive is irrrelevant.

he isnt talking random notes the claim that Japan tried to surrender is NOT evident in ANY of the documents magic intercepts or recovered documents. All that poop boy has is a random article with absolutely no documentation to support a single claim made in the article.

 

[Unkotare]

And what is the correct translation?

Your ignorance is your problem.

 

[Unkotare]

Maybe MacArthur should have reported who it was that met him, where, how they got in to see him in the first place, and who actually gave them the authority to negotiate a surrender?

Might have found out (while influencing the answer) if fdr gave any fraction of a shit about human life on any side.

 

[Mushroom]

What a bizarre comment. I could say the same, a random note or comment in an archive is irrrelevant.

When the discussion is about the attempts at reaching an end to the fighting, and it is between the Foreign Minister himself and the lead diplomat on that mission?

This is not just some rando diplomat and a lowly peon in the Foreign Minister's Office. Togo was one of the six men that actually led the country, and Sato was the person talking directly with Stalin and Molotov to try and get the Soviets to help them end the war on their terms. The messages both give Togo's orders over and over that they get the Soviets to get involved, and Sato telling him over and over that his goals were completely unrealistic and that the Soviets would never do it unless Togo and the rest of the leadership started to face the reality that they had lost the war.

And this can really be seen on the 12 July cable from Sato. This one message has probably had more written about it and the decision for the Americans to use the bombs than any others.

Although the Empire and its commanders have said, "We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying," what kind of reaction can we expect when in fact we have already lost or about to lose Burma, the Philippines, and even a portion of our mainland in the form of Okinawa?

As you already know, the thinking of the Soviet authorities is realistic. It is difficult to move them with abstractions, to say nothing about the futility of trying to get them to consent to persuasion with phrases beautiful but somewhat remote from the facts and empty in content. In fact, with reference to your proposal in telegram No. 853, Molotov does not show the least interest. And again, in his refusal he gave a very similar answer. If indeed our country is pressed by the necessity of terminating the war, we ourselves must first of all firmly to terminate the war. Without this resolution, an attempt to sound out the intentions of the Soviet Union will result in no benefit. In these days, with the enemy air raids accelerated and intensified, is there any meaning in showing that our country has reserve strength for a war of resistance, or in sacrificing the lives of hundreds of thousands of conscripts and millions of other innocent residents of cities and metropolitan areas?

Now another interpretation for the part I bolded is "pretty little phrases devoid of all connection with reality". And it is interesting that FM Togo completely ignored the rebuke, and his only response was in telling Sato that they were sending former Prime Minister Prince Fumimaro Konoe to lead the negotiations. And do not think Prince Konoe was a moderate, he was one of the chief architects of the formation of the Taisei Yokusankai (Imperial Rule Assistance Association - Japanese Fascist Party). He did try to get the Emperor and Big Six to seek an end to the war back in 1944, but that was rejected. And in Moscow his job was to try and force the Soviets into offering the peace deal for Japan on their terms.

However, if you want another look at this process, here is a good article that covers it with more analysis and less raw data.

"Pretty Little Phrases": Japanese Diplomacy in 1945 | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans

Misguided Japanese diplomacy in 1945 helped to ensure that the war would not have a peaceful end.

www.nationalww2museum.org

 

[Mushroom]

Your ignorance is your problem.

And once again you say I am wrong and absolutely refuse to answer.

So what is the correct translation of Unkotare, other than "poop head"?

 

[Mushroom]

he isnt talking random notes the claim that Japan tried to surrender is NOT evident in ANY of the documents magic intercepts or recovered documents.

The intercepts actually say the exact opposite. That surrender was absolutely never on the table from Japan, and they would only accept "peace" on their terms and nobody else's.

And Ambassador Sato dressing down his superior more or less telling him to "wake up and smell the coffee, we lost". And better to surrender on their own terms than have the surrender forced upon them at the barrel of a gun. And Foreign Minister Togo basically responding with nothing but "If we are completely destroyed so be it, we will never surrender."

This was the series of meetings that Japan had pinned all of their hopes on in ending the war on their terms. Of course, they did not know that it was doomed to failure as the Soviets themselves planned to soon attack them. But the cables are a quite candid look inside the Japanese leadership. The Ambassador doing all he could to get his superior to understand that his orders were never going to be accomplished as they were unreasonable, and the Foreign Minister just doubling down yet again and acting like the Soviets had to do what Japan told them to do.

This showed the US leadership how delusional the Japanese leadership had become, and that they themselves were willing to see their entire nation turned into ash before they would surrender. And even though the US tried multiple times to contact Tokyo, they refused to ever respond.

And one must never forget the Mokusatsu speech.

I believe the Joint Proclamation by the three countries is nothing but a rehash of the Cairo Declaration. As for the Government, it does not find any important value in it, and there is no other recourse but to ignore it entirely (mokusatsu) and resolutely fight for the successful conclusion of this war.

That was all that was said by the Japanese government in response to the Potsdam Declaration. If they really wanted to surrender, they actually had an offer by the Swiss in helping to come to terms with the Allies. But Japan refused that offer just as they had all others before. It was "peace" on their terms or fight to the end.

 

[elektra]

When the discussion is about the attempts at reaching an end to the fighting, and it is between the Foreign Minister himself and the lead diplomat on that mission?

This is not just some rando diplomat and a lowly peon in the Foreign Minister's Office. Togo was one of the six men that actually led the country, and Sato was the person talking directly with Stalin and Molotov to try and get the Soviets to help them end the war on their terms. The messages both give Togo's orders over and over that they get the Soviets to get involved, and Sato telling him over and over that his goals were completely unrealistic and that the Soviets would never do it unless Togo and the rest of the leadership started to face the reality that they had lost the war.

And this can really be seen on the 12 July cable from Sato. This one message has probably had more written about it and the decision for the Americans to use the bombs than any others.



Now another interpretation for the part I bolded is "pretty little phrases devoid of all connection with reality". And it is interesting that FM Togo completely ignored the rebuke, and his only response was in telling Sato that they were sending former Prime Minister Prince Fumimaro Konoe to lead the negotiations. And do not think Prince Konoe was a moderate, he was one of the chief architects of the formation of the Taisei Yokusankai (Imperial Rule Assistance Association - Japanese Fascist Party). He did try to get the Emperor and Big Six to seek an end to the war back in 1944, but that was rejected. And in Moscow his job was to try and force the Soviets into offering the peace deal for Japan on their terms.

However, if you want another look at this process, here is a good article that covers it with more analysis and less raw data.

"Pretty Little Phrases": Japanese Diplomacy in 1945 | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans

Misguided Japanese diplomacy in 1945 helped to ensure that the war would not have a peaceful end.

www.nationalww2museum.org

So? I never brought any of this up. I never discussed it all. I have never disagreed with any of this.

You can quote history, bravo, and now I can see you want to lecture everyone, wuth what you know, by quoting me with replies to stuff I never brought up.

Clever, you can quote, but you show stupidity offering these comnents in reply to my post which had nothing to do with this, or any of your other replies.

I challenge gipper and you butt in and reply? Let gipper answer my comments, directed at gipper.

You really are that stupid, that you percieve my comments in reply to gipper, as an oppurtunity for you to narrate the Pacific War with Japan

Idiots, you especially

 

[Unkotare]

And once again you say I am wrong and absolutely refuse to answer.

So what is the correct translation of Unkotare, other than "poop head"?

And once again you say I am wrong and absolutely refuse to answer.

So what is the correct translation of Unkotare, other than "poop head"?

Your ignorance is your problem.

 

[Mushroom]

Your ignorance is your problem.

Then correct me, what is the correct translation Poop Head?

 

[Zincwarrior]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writesfor the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousandscannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Russobot #5.