3 ms·

> the US didn't have the resources for more They were correct that the US didn't have the resources for a second uranium bomb.

• JKCalhoun 2y ago
  You're arguing semantics but aren't really making a counter point.
• throw0101d 2y ago
  >> the US didn't have the resources for more > They were correct that the US didn't have the resources for a second uranium bomb. Because the difference between a uranium bomb and a plutonium bomb is meaningful when you're the target…
  • kps 2y ago
    Japan didn't know until August 9 that the US was able to build plutonium bombs. Edit since I can't reply: The difference is meaningful when you're deciding whether to surrender. If you know that the US doesn't have enough refined uranium for another uranium bomb, and you have no evidence that the US can build plutonium bombs, then you have grounds to believe the bombing of Hiroshima was not repeatable.
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    • throw0101d 2y ago
      > If you know that the US doesn't have enough refined uranium for another uranium bomb […] There was no way for the Japanese to know what the US was capable of. It was wishful thinking with zero evidence on the part of the Japanese leadership.
      • WalterBright 2y ago
        > There was no way for the Japanese to know what the US was capable of. The Japanese had their own bomb program underway.
        • littlestymaar 2y ago
          So did the Germans, but it's not because the biggest industrial power on earth (in both demography and industrial output), with its capacities fully intact because the war never took place there, that smaller countries diminished after years of blockade and critical infrastructure bombing can do it too… If the Japanese projected their own capacity on the US, they were ripe for a bad surprise.