Seventy years ago today...

[Dudeofteenage]

the firebombing campaign was much more horrific and deadly,still no one talks about it today

This is what always gets to me, people denounce the bombing of Hiroshima, but they never denounce the bombings of Dresden or Tokyo because they're not so high profile. It would be charitable to assume that people have some moral objection to the means of bombing - e.g, killing 60,000 people with a nuke is worse than killing 300,000 with regular bombs - but I think it's just ignorance.

Having said that, a lot of the arguments re: the necessity of the nuking of Hiroshima rest on a frankly ridiculous conviction that the invasion of Japan would have been some animu-style bloodbath where Japanese schoolchildren kamikaed GIs because of their robot-like devotion to the Emperor. Japanese WW2 propagandists would be flattered to know their imaginary nation-in-flawless-lockstep-behind-the-Imperial-will was so widely accepted, although probably baffled that it was accepted by their enemies, not their "own" people.

 

[Vitriol]

This is what always gets to me, people denounce the bombing of Hiroshima, but they never denounce the bombings of Dresden or Tokyo because they're not so high profile. It would be charitable to assume that people have some moral objection to the means of bombing - e.g, killing 60,000 people with a nuke is worse than killing 300,000 with regular bombs - but I think it's just ignorance.

Having said that, a lot of the arguments re: the necessity of the nuking of Hiroshima rest on a frankly ridiculous conviction that the invasion of Japan would have been some animu-style bloodbath where Japanese schoolchildren kamikaed GIs because of their robot-like devotion to the Emperor. Japanese WW2 propagandists would be flattered to know their imaginary nation-in-flawless-lockstep-behind-the-Imperial-will was so widely accepted, although probably baffled that it was accepted by their enemies, not their "own" people.

are we sure those two bombs were dropped to intimidate the Japs and not the soviets?

 

[Dudeofteenage]

are we sure those two bombs were dropped to intimidate the Japs and not the soviets?

Nope. Honestly I'm speaking less about the actual intent and more about the modern arguments used to justify them.

 

[Zorceror44]

The nukes killed thousands of innocent civilians. Although it did end the war, the decision does not deserve to be praised. I've read about the effects of nuclear bombs, and it is horrifying and I think no one deserves that.

 

[Holdek]

One of the reasons to end the war quickly was the concern about Stalin's territorial ambitions. He already overran Eastern Europe, and was able to take a few islands, Manchuria, and Korea from the Japanese Empire. So dropping the bomb may have helped to stave off any further action and territorial takeover on their part, by bringing the war to a faster end.

Well, the US was pushing Stalin to attack Japan but he kept deferring. He only did so after it was clear it was going to be over soon because we started dropping nukes.

are we sure those two bombs were dropped to intimidate the Japs and not the soviets?

Well at that point in time the US-Soviet relationship was good. Churchill distrusted Stalin though and actually got annoyed with the US for not taking a more antagonistic tone toward them during the conferences.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Well, the US was pushing Stalin to attack Japan but he kept deferring. He only did so after it was clear it was going to be over soon because we started dropping nukes.


Well at that point in time the US-Soviet relationship was good. Churchill distrusted Stalin though and actually got annoyed with the US for not taking a more antagonistic tone toward them during the conferences.

If you want a real treat, look up Operation Unthinkable.

It was Winston Churchill's plan for a war that never happened.

 

[AnOminous]

Well at that point in time the US-Soviet relationship was good. Churchill distrusted Stalin though and actually got annoyed with the US for not taking a more antagonistic tone toward them during the conferences.

In the period in question, Franklin D. Roosevelt had just suffered a stroke and was in failing health, which probably impacted his decision-making abilities. Then he was replaced by Harry S Truman after his death, who actually did the negotiating in Yalta. (Of course, Churchill himself got the boot in the same period of time.)

 

[Bugaboo]

If the US didn't do it somebody else would have nuked someone else eventually.
The people who worked on the nukes intitially proposed dropping it in the ocean near Japan to show the power and scare them into surrendering without killing anyone. I wonder if they had done that how would history panned out?

 

[Holdek]

The people who worked on the nukes intitially proposed dropping it in the ocean near Japan to show the power and scare them into surrendering without killing anyone. I wonder if they had done that how would history panned out?

About the same thing I think. They knew what an atomic bomb could do. After Hiroshima they still didn't surrender.

 

[AnOminous]

About the same thing I think. They knew what an atomic bomb could do. After Hiroshima they still didn't surrender.

They were only three days apart. August 6 and August 9.

That is shorter than the period between the second bombing and Japan's surrender, on August 15.

There was still a faction lobbying against surrender at that time.

 

[Drawets Rednaxela]

Neva 4 Get

 

[Holdek]

They were only three days apart. August 6 and August 9.

That is shorter than the period between the second bombing and Japan's surrender, on August 15.

There was still a faction lobbying against surrender at that time.

And, there was still a faction against surrender even after the decision to surrender, as evidenced by the attempted coup.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Happy V-J Day!

70 years ago today...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_over_Japan_Day

 

[Jace E. Denton]

Blame rests solely on the Emperor, Hirohito was sent a letter stating his immediate surrender would avert the use of atomic weapons, he either didn't care or tried to call an American bluff. The US gave Japan a chance to end the war before dropping the bombs, Japan knew what the atomic bombs were capable of, that is all that really matters.

After the US made relatively short work of one the most powerful and well commanded naval forces in the entire world, Japan should have known to surrender. Writing was on the wall, your navy was considered one of the best to ever fight in human history, the US navy respected the fuck out of your fleet and commanders and the entire war in the Pacific was very brutal, after seeing your navy slowly picked apart and reduced to pretty much nothing, you should have had the sense to give it up and accept defeat. All of this while the US also fought in Europe and moved into Germany, not only making it clear that Japan was fucking with a country able to fight successfully on two fronts in such a huge war, but also seeing that your only ally had already been defeated, making it obvious absolutely nobody could help you at that point.

Let's just face it, Japan made a strategic failure of a decision to not surrender before the atom bombs were dropped. What is worse is that, if you are going to commit to war and take A-bombs on the chin, the least you could do is cowboy up and fight until the complete end, not backpedal and then want to surrender after the big guns came out.

 

[AnOminous]

Let's just face it, Japan made a strategic failure of a decision to not surrender before the atom bombs were dropped. What is worse is that, if you are going to commit to war and take A-bombs on the chin, the least you could do is cowboy up and fight until the complete end, not backpedal and then want to surrender after the big guns came out.

Their primary strategic failure was attacking us in the first place.

 

[Holdek]

Their primary strategic failure was attacking us in the first place.

I still don't know what they were thinking...that taking out the US at Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor would pressure the US to end its oil embargo, and that would be the end of it?

 

[AnOminous]

I still don't know what they were thinking...that taking out the US at Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor would pressure the US to end its oil embargo, and that would be the end of it?

I think the leadership may have been delusional enough to believe that. Yamamoto didn't, though.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

Blame rests solely on the Emperor, Hirohito was sent a letter stating his immediate surrender would avert the use of atomic weapons, he either didn't care or tried to call an American bluff.

This theory assumes that Hirohito was an absolute ruler whose personal decisions dictated Japanese policy.

I think the leadership may have been delusional enough to believe that. Yamamoto didn't, though.

Their model was the Russo-Japanese war, where the Russians gave up (although they lost very little in the peace thanks to some good diplomacy) after a decisive naval battle.

It's important to remember that Japan wasn't seeking a US surrender, much less an unconditional surrender - they just wanted the US not to interfere with their seizure of other European colonies in the Pacific. They underestimated the USA's ability to rebuild its losses very quickly. But it's not quite as ridiculous as it seems if you assume that Japan was looking to defeat the USA as comprehensively as the USA defeated Japan in '45.

Edit: I should say, that the Japanese conceived the war as strategically defensive, even though they obviously cast the first stone. They believed that the USA would have declared war on them if they'd seized British Malaysia and the Dutch East Indies. Is that correct? It's hard to imagine the USA simply turning a blind eye to such a massive land grab against friendly (if not formally allied) powers, but at the same time, it is similarly hard to underestimate the power of pre-Pearl Harbour US isolationism.

 

[AN/ALR56]

I doubt Japanese intelligence in 45 knew about the bomb.
Also Japanese were doomed to defeat because of the incredibly retarded army vs navy mentality that split budgets and projects.
Also Yamamoto was a badass,among my favorite military leaders.

 

[Mrs Paul]

IIRC, didn't they also consider bombing Germany, at least when they started the project?

About the same thing I think. They knew what an atomic bomb could do. After Hiroshima they still didn't surrender.

Yep. That's one of the things that a lot of people who say we were wrong to use the a-bombs don't understand. Japan (as in, a lot of the military and the government, not the Japanese people period) were seriously prepared to drag out the war to the bitter end. It took TWO bombs to get them to surrender unconditionally. And the allies learned the hard way after WWI that unconditional surrender was pretty much the only solution.

I also think a lot of people are ignorant of just how cruel the Imperial Japanese regime was. They really weren't any different than the Nazis. Unit 731, the Nanjing Massacre, comfort women, the Bataan Death March, etc. We learn all about the Nazis in high school, but not much about Japan during the War.