Was atomic bomb on Japan meant to save lives or to scare Stalin?

[GLASNOST]

Was atomic bomb on Japan meant to save lives​

Yeah, I go into town with my 45 every week-end shooting up people to save lives.

 

[Mack The Finger]

I check all of the above.

 

[1srelluc]

Who gives a shit?

It ended the war and gave us Godzilla movies no end!

 

[martybegan]

AI Overview

The debate surrounding President Truman's decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan to end World War II involves multiple perspectives, with the prominent considerations being:

1. Saving Lives and Avoiding an Invasion:

• Argument: The primary justification presented for the bombings was to avoid a costly ground invasion of Japan, which was anticipated to result in immense casualties on both sides.
• Support: Supporters argued that a quick end to the war, achieved by using the atomic bombs, would prevent prolonged conflict and save more lives overall, despite the casualties incurred at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
• Counterarguments: Some historians challenge the necessity of the bombings, suggesting Japan was already nearing surrender due to other factors like conventional bombings or the imminent Soviet invasion, and that the casualty estimates for an invasion were exaggerated.

2. Intimidating the Soviet Union:

• Argument: A significant thread of historical analysis suggests that the bombings were also motivated by a desire to gain a strategic advantage in post-war diplomacy with the Soviet Union, demonstrating American military power and hindering Soviet expansion in Asia.
• Support: President Truman mentioned the existence of a powerful new weapon to Stalin at the Potsdam Conference, and some policymakers hoped that the U.S. nuclear monopoly could influence Soviet concessions.
• Counterarguments: Others argue that the primary focus remained on ending the war with Japan, and while the atomic bombs may have incidentally served as a message to the Soviets, this was a secondary consideration.

In Conclusion:
It's likely that the decision to use the atomic bombs was influenced by a combination of factors, including the desire to end the war swiftly, save lives by avoiding a costly invasion, and establish a strong diplomatic position vis-à-vis the Soviet Union.
Important Considerations:

• Revisionist Debate: The extent to which one factor outweighed the other remains a subject of ongoing historical debate and interpretation.
• Impact on the Cold War: Regardless of the primary intention, the atomic bombings undeniably played a role in shaping the early Cold War, with the Soviet Union intensifying its efforts to develop its own nuclear weapons.

Debate over the Bomb - Nuclear Museum

One of the greatest controversies to come out of World War II was whether the atomic bomb was necessary to bring about its end.

ahf.nuclearmuseum.org

View attachment 1130840

It was meant to end the war. With the war in Europe over, the US population was suffering from war fatigue. The guys who fought in Europe really didn't want to be shipped around the world to be part of a massive invasion, some of them for the 2nd or even 3rd time.

The weapons were made, they were available, and they worked. Having them and not using them to end the war would have been unthinkable, even if we debate it now 80 years later.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Yeah, I go into town with my 45 every week-end shooting up people to save lives.

Very weak on logic

If you shoot a mass murderer bnefore they kill a biunch of people you save lives

 

[mikegriffith1]

It is often overlooked that many senior American military officers opposed nuking Japan because they felt it was unnecessary and/or inhumane, including Eisenhower, MacArthur, Leahy, Halsey, and Clarke.

Did We Really Need to Use the Atomic Bomb Against Japan?

The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Unnecessary and Wrong
This is a subpage of my The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb website.

 

[Failzero]

An Invasion of Japan would have cost more American Lives than were lost in the entire European Theater of the War

This FTMFW

 

[whitehall]

First of all you have to examine Truman. In spite of the media's determination to polish Truman's legacy as a feisty politician he was in fact a timid rube Missouri haberdasher before democrats picked him to replace the sitting V.P. when they knew FDR was dying. Truman was one of the few if the only president who lacked a college education. He was afraid of MacArthur who intentionally disrespected him on at least one occasion. Most likely he had no idea of the implications of using a nuclear device on humans and he was goaded by the generals who were out for revenge and the eggheads who were dying to see their infernal device actually used. Japan was relatively defenseless having it's navy and air force obliterated while nonstop daylight raids pounded the country to bits. Indications are that the Japanese holdouts were so desperate for surrender terms that they were negotiating with Stalin when Truman refused to even talk to them. Apparently the big holdup was the preservation of the emperor but that happened anyway after two Bombs were dropped.

 

[Deadstick]

Problem with the Japs they didn't know when they were beaten, i knew a vet who served in Burma he said they tended not to take prisoners many times because of incidents that cost the lives of our guys, probably both reasons given are right, to try and intimidate the Soviets and to finish the war.