Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The point is that the Japanese were willing to negotiate surrender terms. Vice President Harry Truman was a rube senator from Missouri and didn't have a freaking clue when he woke up one morning in April 1945 and found out that he was president. The generals were running the war and Truman was in it for the ride. FDR might not have been in his right mind when he decreed that the U.S. would accept nothing but unconditional surrender and that's what Truman accepted.There is a difference between "negotiating a surrender" and "dictating a cease fire".
And it can be seen quite clearly in that they outright rejected Potsdam, and refuse to consider or discuss it.
If they had honestly been willing to surrender, then at that time they would have opened a dialogue with the Allies. Either directly, or indirectly through a third party. But they did none of that, they openly and publicly dismissed it, even using the word "Mokusatsu", which normally translates to "kill with silence" (but also "treat with silent contempt").
That is because they felt they still had the upper hand in the war. That they were the stronger nation, and had the right and power to dictate terms. And not for a surrender, but an armistice to stop the fighting.
And remember, even Ambassador Soto was urging them constantly to "get serious" about ending the war, before it was too late. We actually have three records of all of their dispatches back and forth. Both those translated via Magic, those from Venona, then again from the Japanese archives themselves.
Nuclear Files: Library: Correspondence: Telegrams: Togo-Sato
Japanese Peace feelers in the Soviet Unionwww.nuclearfiles.org
I suggest anybody that wants to know how the final two months of the war were from the Japanese perspective read those dispatches.
Dispatch from Ambassador Soto to Foreign Minister Togo, 12 July 1945
No, the Big Six still had it in their minds that they could and would win the war, and had no intention of ending the war unless it was in their favor. And the Allied Powers would never have accepted that.
I find it fascinating that even today, people constantly try to "Monday morning quarterback" the negotiations, and say that Japan thought the Soviets were going to help them negotiate a peace. Here we have their own Ambassador telling them that would not happen, way back on 12 July. He knew the reality of it, and over and over tried to tell Tokyo that it would never happen unless Japan was ready to give major concessions. That only a surrender and not an armistice would end the war.
There is a reason why I constantly encourage people to go to the source documents, and not simply rely upon what others say. Those original documents give a direct peek into exactly was going on, unshaded and without spin. Japan had absolutely no idea we were "reading their mail", and what we see in the Soto-Togo messages was a lot of frustration, and demands to make the Soviets see things the way Japan wanted them to, and to do what they asked.
The point is that the Japanese were willing to negotiate surrender terms.
That Japan is proposing unconditional surrender or a peace approximating unconditional surrender would be surprising. But if Japan is thinking of a so-called negotiated peace, there would be apprehension that she is hoping for the good offices of the Soviets for mediation. In that case it would be difficult for the Soviet Union to accept.
Judging from these circumstances, a peace treaty by negotiation is something which cannot win the support of the Soviet Union. In the final analysis, if our country truly desires to terminate the war, we have no alternative but to accept unconditional surrender or something very close to it.
Not only our High Command but also our Government firmly believes that even now our war potential is still sufficient to deal the enemy a severe blow, but against an enemy who can make repeated attacks we cannot always be completely free from anxiety. In such times, we continue to maintain our war strength; if only the United States and Great Britain would recognize Japan's honor and existence we would terminate the war and would like to save mankind from the ravages of war, but if the enemy insists on unconditional surrender to the very end, then our country and His Majesty would unanimously resolve to fight a war of resistance to the bitter end. Therefore, inviting the Soviet Union to mediate fairly does not include unconditional surrender; please understand this point in particular.
If the matter of the preservation of our form of government were already taken care of, whether you call it unconditional surrender or whether you call it something close to this condition, in the final analysis is a matter of degree. As for us I think it should not be made an absolute condition.
continuing the war after our fighting strength has been destroyed should be considered impossible. It goes without saying that the Imperial Army and the populace as a whole will not surrender to the enemy as long as there is no Imperial command to do so
We cannot accept unconditional surrender (understood fully your telegram No. 1416) in any situation. Although it is apparent that there will be more casualties on both sides in case the war is prolonged, we will stand united as one nation against the enemy if the enemy forcibly demands our unconditional surrender. It is, however, our intention to achieve, with Soviet assistance, a peace which is not of unconditional nature, in order to avoid such a situation as mentioned above in accordance with His Majesty's desire.
According to item No. 3 of your telegram a United States spokesman has hinted that unconditional surrender still stands; however, should Japan accept surrender immediately, in reality the terms may be mollified.
How long were you willing to let the Japanese rape camps and torturing of our POWs to continue while you play stupid games with evil?The point is that the Japanese were willing to negotiate surrender terms. Vice President Harry Truman was a rube senator from Missouri and didn't have a freaking clue when he woke up one morning in April 1945 and found out that he was president. The generals were running the war and Truman was in it for the ride. FDR might not have been in his right mind when he decreed that the U.S. would accept nothing but unconditional surrender and that's what Truman accepted.
GRANT offered Lee terms. Grant was the victorious general, Lee led a starving, unclothed and nearly disarmed rump of the once powerful Army of Northern Virginia. LEE didn’t offer Grant terms.It's not true that Japan thought they had a "right" to demand anything. Negotiating terms of surrender goes back to the American Revolution. Grant offered Lee terms of surrender when the North defeated the South. The Japanese holdouts were trying to save face and protect the emperor. Unfortunately Stalin was a poor choice when Truman refused to even listen to them. The eggheads were dying to use their device on humans and Germans were not an option. They got what they wanted in a horrific display and then they pretended that they weren't involved.
GRANT offered Lee terms.
How can you be so stubborn. The Japanese were never willing to negotiate SURRENDER terms. They were only willing to negotiate for an armistice under THEIR terms. Their only acceptable terms were a return to status quo ante, no war crimes trials under allied supervision, no loss of territory, no change in government. In children’s terms, Japan was only willing to accept a do-over with no penalties.The point is that the Japanese were willing to negotiate surrender terms. Vice President Harry Truman was a rube senator from Missouri and didn't have a freaking clue when he woke up one morning in April 1945 and found out that he was president. The generals were running the war and Truman was in it for the ride. FDR might not have been in his right mind when he decreed that the U.S. would accept nothing but unconditional surrender and that's what Truman accepted.
Crazy talk.But only after Lee showed up to offer his surrender. As the Battle of Appomattox Courthouse was still going on, General Grant sent a message to General Lee asking for his surrender. And after a few more messages they agreed to a cease fire so they two of them could meet.
And during that meeting, the terms that General Grant offered were actually standard for a surrender of the era. That Officers give their parole to not take up arms again against the US, and sign a similar parole for those enlisted serving under them. And that all arms and weapons be turned over, with the exception of Officer pistols which they were to retain.
And a key fact, is that General Lee only surrendered the "Army of Northern Virginia". He actually did not surrender the "Confederate Army", or the country. He only surrendered the army he was in command of. However, with that surrender there were no other forces between the Union forces and Richmond, so like Germany at the end of WWI the government collapsed.
But it must be realized, the terms were only given after the surrender had been offered. The only "term" that Grant offered in their messages prior was that neither he nor his men would be subjected to imprisonment but be given parole.
If Japan had tried to negotiate with the Allied Forces, then the same terms that were met at the end would likely have been arranged. But once again, they refused to even talk to or meet with the Allied Forces, so the point is moot.
Lee met with Grant because he had a choice- surrender or face total destruction.
Yes, a choice. Accept our terms or the nukes keep dropping.There is always a choice.
And remember, we are talking about Japan. That culturally believed that total destruction was preferable to surrender.
Why do you think that only 17 soldiers were captured alive out of almost 3,000 on Tarawa? And of the over 21,000 Japanese fighting on Iwo Jima, only 215 were taken prisoner.
And of the over 32,000 soldiers on Saipan, only around 1,200 surrendered (the vast majority were actually captured badly wounded, there were still Japanese forces fighting on the island until December 1945). Around 8,000 civilians killed themselves rather than surrender.
The problem with that statement, is that we are not talking about Confederate Forces, we are talking about Japan. I have great respect for their fighting ability and resistance to ever surrender. But I also recognize that was the trap their culture had laid for themselves which did not allow them to ever consider it.
If General Lee had been a Japanese General, he would have ordered his remaining forces to line up and make a suicide charge at General Grant's lines. And to continue fighting even hand to hand until they were all dead.
August 14, 1945. We attempt contact with Japan to see if they are willing to discuss surrender. A lot was happening in Japan at this time. Even after two nuclear bombs being used, the Japanese military was attempting a coup to keep the Emperor from surrendering.
View attachment 681970
"To Bear the Unbearable": Japan's Surrender, Part II | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans
Although a decision to continue the war would mean national suicide, members of the Japanese military came close to refusing Emperor Hirohito’s surrender order.www.nationalww2museum.org
en.wikipedia.org
That was not the first attempt either. This one was in 1936.
