WW II ~ Atom Bomb or Russia = Japan's Surrender in WWII ???

[Mushroom]

Evidence indicates that Japan was trying to broker surrender terms with Stalin when Harry Truman refused to negotiate.

Evidence states they were trying to broker an armistice.

Not a surrender, a cease fire.

 

[Mushroom]

I think, they suddenly changed their mind and accepted the allies' ultimatum, threatening utter destruction after the two bombs dropped during those three days, killing between 129,000 and 226,000 on the Japanese homeland.

Ultimately, it was both, for two very different reasons.

It must be realized that the Big Six were living in a complete state of denial. Even on the day of Hiroshima, they voted 6-0 to continue to fight the war no matter what the cost. They honestly believed that like in the past, something would happen to protect their home islands. They honestly believed that the Gods were over them, and they were undefeatable.

Case in point was their multiple failed efforts to get a nation to intercede on their behalf with the Allied powers to broker an armistice.

And this is what many fail to realize, what Japan was trying to arrange was an Armistice, not a Surrender. All forces return to mid-1941 territory, but on their conditions. All Allies would leave pre-1942 Japanese territory, but any territory they had occupied would be demilitarized and they would maintain a presence there to ensure it was not seized.

In other words, that would have meant a permanent Japanese garrison on say the Philippines.

No occupation, no war crime trials, simply pretending the war never happened where it went against Japan, and they still got to keep nominal control over areas it had occupied.

They tried to go through the Swiss, Swedes, Dutch, and finally the Soviets to present this to the Allied Powers. And each and other nation they proposed this to outright refused. They knew that this Armistice was such crap that they would not even present it for Japan. Because doing so would have lowered the opinion of the Allies in them as a country.

However, Japan had Naotake Sato, their Ambassador to the Soviet Union try to get them to present the proposal. However, even Sato knew that the terms were garbage, and urged his own government to get serious about ending the war before it was too late. And the Soviets strung them along for months, promising to present the terms to the Allies for Japan. And that was actually covered in many meetings of the Big Six. That they were sure that the Soviets would make the other Allied Powers "see the light" and end the war.

When Togo presented a pledge not to retain Japan’s conquests as “concessions” to secure Soviet mediation, Sato’s scathing reply was “How much effect do you expect our statements regarding the non-annexation and non-possession of territories which we have already lost or are about to lose will have on the Soviet authorities?” He added that mere “abstract statements” on concessions, which he slammed as “pretty little phrases devoid of all connection with reality,” would have no impact on “extremely realistic” Soviet authorities.
And he then inserted the knife thrust: “If the Japanese empire is really faced with the necessity of terminating the war, we must first of all make up our minds to terminate the war.” Sato thus charged that Japan’s leaders still lacked a real intent to end the war.

"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

Here is the thing, we knew what the Japanese were sending to their Ambassador, and we knew the Ambassador's responses. Because we had broken their diplomatic code years earlier. By that time the MAGIC program was so advanced that we were often reading the responses from Togo to Ambassador Sato even before he was. We knew all about those negotiation attempts, and that it was doomed to fail. Because Japan had zero interest in surrender, only in a return to antebellum lines.

In other words, Japan was still trying to dictate terms as if it was the victor nation, not as it was. The loser that was about to lose it all. That was how delusional they were at the end. Just as Hitler was sure that Germany would ultimately defeat the Allies even as they were inside Berlin. Even as Mussolini when he was taken from prison and returned to power. Even as Napoleon when he returned to France.

However, we know now that Stalin never intended to honor his promise to Japan. He was already planning to attack them, and all he was doing was wasting their time. Japan was already (with the blessings of Stalin) to evacuate parts of Asia and bring their forces back to Japan for the defense of the Home Islands. Some even left through Soviet land, given safe conduct to do so by the Soviets themselves.

That they finally realized that Stalin had duped them and was not going to intercede on their h=behalf but actually attacked them was the final straw. Because at that moment they lost what they had believed was their final ally. That they really were alone against the world, there would be no Armistice, and the attacks would continue no matter what.

However, even after that, the Big Six were deadlocked at 3-3 to continue the war.

What the bombs did was give them an easy way out. That they were so powerful and could level a city when dropped by a single aircraft, it was then used as a way to make accepting Potsdam acceptable. The entry of the Soviets was the straw that broke the camel's back, but the bombs gave them a way to save face, as in the wake of those bombs ending the war was acceptable.

 

[Mushroom]

And if any thing me or the article is exaggerating the interactions between Togo and Sato, the cables are available for all to read.

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

Japanese Peace feelers in the Soviet Union

www.nuclearfiles.org

This is an amazing look inside the interactions between the ones actually in charge, and the one who had to present those "peace terms" to the Soviets for mediation. And multiple times, Ambassador Sato would lash out at Togo, saying that he was delusional and the proposal had no chance of acceptance.

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?​

Ambassador Sato telegram to Foreign Minister Togo, 12 July 1945

Even if we are overawed by the fact that the dispatch of a special envoy is the Imperial wish, if the Japanese Government's proposal brought by him is limited to an enumeration of previous abstractions, lacking in concreteness, you would not only be disappointing the authorities of this country and causing a feeling of great dissatisfaction with the insincere attitude of Japan but would also be provoking trouble for the Imperial Household. I have great apprehensions on this point.

Ambassador Sato telegram to Foreign Minister Togo, 13 July 1945

Some reasons which may be thought of for the Soviets' hesitation:

(1) Although they understand the Imperial wish concerning the termination of the war, they lack clarification with regard to the actual mission of the special envoy or with regard to whether or not concrete proposals for the termination of the war are to be presented.

(2) 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.

(3) To avoid disturbing the relations between the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union for the sake of Japan at a delicate time when harmony between the three countries is so strongly required.

(4) The need to ascertain the attitudes of England and America before giving Japan a definite reply concerning the matter of the special envoy, as Far Eastern problems are inevitably going to come up in the talks either inside or outside the meetings at the coming Big Three Conference. Or Stalin is ascertaining the intentions of the American and British leaders first, by informing them of Japan's recent request, before replying. If this is so, the attitude of the Soviets will be difficult to determine.

The foregoing are some possible conjectures. Of these, No. 2, with regard to negotiated peace --to conclude a treaty terminating the war by peace negotiations, including the Greater East Asia War --is something which has been strongly rejected from the very beginning by America and Britain and particularly by the former. The soviet Union was also hesitant regarding such a peace earlier in connection with the unconditional surrender of Germany and even urged Britain and the United States to open a second front, and with this cooperation knocked out Germany. 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.​

Ambassador Sato telegram to Foreign Minister Togo, 15 July 1945

So any that are under the false belief that Japan was "trying to surrender", even their own directives to their Ambassador say that was not so. They wanted a cease fire and peace treaty, that was completely in favor of them and would even return territory they had lost to them (while removing all occupation and liberation forces from territory they had been kicked out of).

 

[Ringo]

The Bomb Didn’t Beat Japan. Stalin Did.

Have 70 years of nuclear policy been based on a lie?

foreignpolicy.com

 

[elektra]

The Bomb Didn’t Beat Japan. Stalin Did.

Have 70 years of nuclear policy been based on a lie?

foreignpolicy.com

Stalin and Japan fought well into September, weeks after the atomic bomb ended the Pacific war with the USA.

It sad ignorance that people believe whatever they find on the internet.

Stalin declares war and begins the Russian attack on Japan, Japan fights back, does not surrender, for over 3 weeks.

The 2nd atomic bomb is dropped after Stalin attacks Japan, Japan then surrenders to the USA.

Stalin entering the war only kept the fighting going longer

 

[Ringo]

Stalin entering the war only kept the fighting going longer

 

[elektra]

You did not know, that Stalin fought Japan into September.

Very true, the Japanese were unwilling to surrender to the Soviet Union

 

[eagle1462010]

I had uncles waiting invade Main Land Japan on Okinawa...........The cost of lives had Japan fought to the last man would have been enormous but the BOSHIDO CODE was still intact.

The Bombs broke the Boshido code...........and they surrendered. I was stationed in Japan..........When busing around you see the caves that were built for WWII. They were preparing a welcome from Hell to our Troops.

Russia only entered late in the game to try and get a piece of the prize..........Take land.........They didn't decide the surrender.

 

[DudleySmith]

This psychotic compulsion to disgrace FDR and TRuman on the part of far rightwingers even to the extent of sniveling over the poor Japanese and Nazis is just becoming another sick joke, and a major reason why they can't beat left wing psychos in elections by more than trifling percentages. They're as dishonest and loony as AOC and Bernie.

 

[eagle1462010]

This psychotic compulsion to disgrace FDR and TRuman on the part of far rightwingers is just becoming another sick joke, and a major reason why they can't beat left wing psychos in elections by more than trifling percentages. They're as dishonest and loony as AOC and Bernie.

My Father ditched FDR and fought in WWII. Guess I'll stick with his opinion as he lived it.

 

[DudleySmith]

My Father ditched FDR and fought in WWII. Guess I'll stick with his opinion as he lived it.

And we won under FDR and Truman, with almost no thanks to the Republicans, so obviously he just had to suck it up and live with it.

 

[eagle1462010]

And we won under FDR and Truman, with almost no thanks to the Republicans, so obviously he just had to suck it up and live with it.

We won because the greatest generation fought and won it.............FDR was in a wheel chair............and he helped cause the Cold War........Church hill understood better but didn't have the troops to do it...........Why Germany was half a nation after and Poland was swallowed by the USSR...........the very reason Britain went to War was lost.

And now we have had a Cold War forever as a result.

 

[DudleySmith]

And we won the Cold War because of Democrats, too, so it still sucks for fr rightwing nutjobs, most of whom are now fawning over Putin now, like they suddenly all turned into Abbie Hoffman and 1960s peaceniks, same as they did when the Kaiser and Hitler kicked off WW I and WW II an they hid under their beds and cried, leaving the Democrats to win both of those. They also cried and whined about the GI Bills and anything else that turned out great.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And we won the Cold War because of Democrats, too, so it still sucks for fr rightwing nutjobs, most of whom are now fawning over Putin now, like they suddenly all turned into Abbie Hoffman and 1960s peaceniks, same as they did when the Kaiser and Hitler kicked off WW I and WW II an they hid under their beds and cried, leaving the Democrats to win both of those. They also cried and whined about the GI Bills and anything else that turned out great.

LOL Reagan won the cold war against the wishes of the democrats.

 

[DudleySmith]

LOL Reagan won the cold war against the wishes of the democrats.

Rubbish. They went bankrupt in 1973 because of LBJ's escalation in Viet Nam, and his defeat of the Viet Cong in 1968, and his taking on Israel in 1967 costing their Arab allies that year's war and the 1973 war, along with his support for numerous African states, all derived out our containment policy and strategy, thank you President Truman.

Reagan didn't do squat, he was just sitting there with his thumbs up his ass trying to look awake. He did run guns to the Iranians and cocaine to American ghettos, though.

 

[DudleySmith]

We won because the greatest generation fought and won it...

They elected FDR President four times, and then elected Truman.

 

[Mushroom]

The 2nd atomic bomb is dropped after Stalin attacks Japan, Japan then surrenders to the USA.

Actually, they surrendered to the "Allied Powers". The US was simply the leading nation in that theater as England and the rest of the Allied Powers had little in the area at the time.''

Unlike in Europe where the UK had a major presence, the Pacific Theater from the start was almost entirely the US. They were going to play a major part in the Invasion of Japan, but the US was still going to be much more involved.

And the Soviets were there also.

 

[Mushroom]

Rubbish. They went bankrupt in 1973 because of LBJ's escalation in Viet Nam, and his defeat of the Viet Cong in 1968, and his taking on Israel in 1967 costing their Arab allies that year's war and the 1973 war, along with his support for numerous African states, all derived out our containment policy and strategy, thank you President Truman.

Reagan didn't do squat, he was just sitting there with his thumbs up his ass trying to look awake. He did run guns to the Iranians and cocaine to American ghettos, though.

Wow, completely ignoring decades of history in a single statement. I am impressed.

Are you even aware that during the "Truman Containment" era, his actual allies for that were Republicans? And those he fought most with were the Democrats? The Democrats were against it, the Republicans supported him. One of his fiercest opponents was former Vice President Henry Wallace (D), the man he replaced as Vice President. And some of his greatest supporters were former President Herbert Hoover (R) and candidate Robert Taft (son of former President William Taft (R)).

In your attempt to attack one party, it is laughable as you apparently know nothing of the dynamics of the era. And we were only involved in Vietnam because President Eisenhower put us there.

 

[DudleySmith]

Wow, completely ignoring decades of history in a single statement. I am impressed.

Are you even aware that during the "Truman Containment" era, his actual allies for that were Republicans? And those he fought most with were the Democrats? The Democrats were against it, the Republicans supported him. One of his fiercest opponents was former Vice President Henry Wallace (D), the man he replaced as Vice President. And some of his greatest supporters were former President Herbert Hoover (R) and candidate Robert Taft (son of former President William Taft (R)).

In your attempt to attack one party, it is laughable as you apparently know nothing of the dynamics of the era. And we were only involved in Vietnam because President Eisenhower put us there.

Actually I was responding to that attacks on FDR and DEmocrats here by certain Jap lovers, but you go ahead and pound away in some rant or other. As for Republicans suddenly being all about 'Defense N Stuff' they only really got on board when those defense contracts and their profits all went 'cost plus' and they got tax breaks on their dividends and other fun stuff.

As for Viet Nam we were there because of Korea and Keenan's global containment policies along with a need to prop up allies in SE Asia, abd yes I'm aware of the anti-Roosevelt Democrats, mostly rich guys who did the same thing as their GOP establishment buddies did during the Depression they caused, hide out on their estates behind private armies screaming for the Feds to shoot the uppity proles down for not peaceably starving to death, but it remains a fact most of his support came his own Party and the voters, not Republicans, especially re building up the military early on. Speaking of laughable, you don't know much about the era. so you must laughing in a mirror.

FDR was elected four times, Wallace wasn't elected at all, and neither was Wilkie.. You will just have to wimper and drink some more over that.

 

[elektra]

Actually, they surrendered to the "Allied Powers". The US was simply the leading nation in that theater as England and the rest of the Allied Powers had little in the area at the time.''

Unlike in Europe where the UK had a major presence, the Pacific Theater from the start was almost entirely the US. They were going to play a major part in the Invasion of Japan, but the US was still going to be much more involved.

And the Soviets were there also.

Then how did the fighting with the Soviet Union continue for another 3 to 4 weeks