3 ms·

Most historians disagree with you. There is significant historical evidence that Japans ruling class was close to surrender (IIRC they actually had offered to s

Most historians disagree with you. There is significant historical evidence that Japans ruling class was close to surrender (IIRC they actually had offered to surrender already, but not unconditionally). In particular the second bomb on Nagasaki was probably more about a sign to other nations (the USSR) than ending the war.

ipaddr 5y ago
The people making the decisions at the time did. "Truman stated that his decision to drop the bomb was purely military. A Normandy-type amphibious landing would have cost an estimated million casualties. Truman believed that the bombs saved Japanese lives as well. Prolonging the war was not an option for the President. Over 3,500 Japanese kamikaze raids had already wrought great destruction and loss of American lives."
- cycomanic 5y ago
  Honest question, assuming he was aware of the full picture, do you believe Truman would have come out and said "we really just dropped the bombs to send a message to the Soviets"? Here is one source which details some of the questions being raised https://nationalpost.com/news/did-the-atomic-bombings-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-really-end-the-war https://nationalpost.com/news/did-the-atomic-bombings-of-hir... However I was probably wrong in saying most historians disagree, it seems there is still significant debate https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/atomic-bomb-hiroshima-nagasaki-justified-us-debate-bombs-death-toll-japan-how-many-died-nuclear/ https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/atomic-...
  - ipaddr 5y ago
    Truman was a spokesmen who would say anything. The manhattan project involved The US, Canada, The UK and it was headed by a captured German scientist. When the project started the goal was to try to beat Hilter. Near the end of the war the US tanks never went into Berlin. The peace deal signed after the war gave up too much and the Russians never lived up to it creating the conditions for the cold war. The US was hopeful at the time. An extended war with Japan would cost millions of lives. Japan was never going to give up as they were run by a crazy group at the time. Remember after they dropped the first bomb they refused to quit. The H-Bomb was the only thing that forced them to give up.
jollybean 5y ago
This is a misrepresentation of the situation on the ground facing allied forces. Though with full 20/20 hindsight, we can dig up historical facts and adjust our historical conclusions, Allied forces were obviously not privy to the immediate situation with respect to Soviet forces. Moreover, to suggest that the instantaneous destruction of major bases and cities the likes of which history has never seen shouldn't bee seen as a primary impetus in Japanese decision making is irrational. Japanese Imperialism was effectively a mass murdering machine let loose on the entirety of E/SE Asia and America, and the Americans did the necessary fighting leading to the weakening of the Japanese regime which put them in a state where the threat of some Soviet antagonism would even be a real problem. If the US had not entered the war against Japan, the Soviets wouldn't be much of a real threat. The dropping of the bombs was easily justified, and thankfully, since that moment, there have been fewer and fewer major wars. The odd logic trying to paint the US as somehow antagonists in that situation is anti rational on it's face, it's just petty.

ipaddr 5y ago

The people making the decisions at the time did. "Truman stated that his decision to drop the bomb was purely military. A Normandy-type amphibious landing would have cost an estimated million casualties. Truman believed that the bombs saved Japanese lives as well. Prolonging the war was not an option for the President. Over 3,500 Japanese kamikaze raids had already wrought great destruction and loss of American lives."

cycomanic 5y ago
Honest question, assuming he was aware of the full picture, do you believe Truman would have come out and said "we really just dropped the bombs to send a message to the Soviets"? Here is one source which details some of the questions being raised https://nationalpost.com/news/did-the-atomic-bombings-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-really-end-the-war https://nationalpost.com/news/did-the-atomic-bombings-of-hir... However I was probably wrong in saying most historians disagree, it seems there is still significant debate https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/atomic-bomb-hiroshima-nagasaki-justified-us-debate-bombs-death-toll-japan-how-many-died-nuclear/ https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/atomic-...
- ipaddr 5y ago
  Truman was a spokesmen who would say anything. The manhattan project involved The US, Canada, The UK and it was headed by a captured German scientist. When the project started the goal was to try to beat Hilter. Near the end of the war the US tanks never went into Berlin. The peace deal signed after the war gave up too much and the Russians never lived up to it creating the conditions for the cold war. The US was hopeful at the time. An extended war with Japan would cost millions of lives. Japan was never going to give up as they were run by a crazy group at the time. Remember after they dropped the first bomb they refused to quit. The H-Bomb was the only thing that forced them to give up.

jollybean 5y ago

This is a misrepresentation of the situation on the ground facing allied forces. Though with full 20/20 hindsight, we can dig up historical facts and adjust our historical conclusions, Allied forces were obviously not privy to the immediate situation with respect to Soviet forces. Moreover, to suggest that the instantaneous destruction of major bases and cities the likes of which history has never seen shouldn't bee seen as a primary impetus in Japanese decision making is irrational. Japanese Imperialism was effectively a mass murdering machine let loose on the entirety of E/SE Asia and America, and the Americans did the necessary fighting leading to the weakening of the Japanese regime which put them in a state where the threat of some Soviet antagonism would even be a real problem. If the US had not entered the war against Japan, the Soviets wouldn't be much of a real threat. The dropping of the bombs was easily justified, and thankfully, since that moment, there have been fewer and fewer major wars. The odd logic trying to paint the US as somehow antagonists in that situation is anti rational on it's face, it's just petty.