> after the second bomb [...] a coup d'état that, if it had succeeded, would've meant no surrender at all I'm glad to see this brought up. This is almost alw

> after the second bomb [...] a coup d'état that, if it had succeeded, would've meant no surrender at all I'm glad to see this brought up. This is almost always left out of these discussions, lead or influenced by people who are sympathetic to Japan or critical of America, including most American public school teachers. Awareness of this coup is almost nonexistent in America among those who profess to know something about Japanese willingness to surrender. After the SECOND atomic bomb was dropped, there were still many in the leadership of the IJA that didn't want to surrender and made a real attempt to prevent it, even managing to place the Emperor under house arrest. The only reason they failed is because the surrender message was smuggled out of the building and they didn't have a critical mass of men willing to go along with the coup, but that was after two cities were subjected to atomic bombing. Those saying things like "oh America was so mean, they should have just demonstrated the bombs on the ocean or something" are naive and mislead. Even after personally witnessing the severe and prolonged fire bombing of Tokyo, IJA officers in Tokyo weren't ready to surrender. In fact 'strategic bombing' has never ended a war, with the exception of those two atomic bombs. You can firebomb a city to charred rubble and it will only strengthen their resolve to fight. Only the psychological shock of single bombs gutting cities was able to have this effect.