Hiroshima marks 75 years since atomic bombing in scaled-back ceremony

[Saraburi121]

Would be nice to hear the perspective from individual Allied Forces who fought the war in the Pacific contribute to this discussion vice those looking at history in hind sight but they are all mostly passed. Probably a very different opinion than folks today.  Was it terrible, yes, and hopefully never repeated. Who will every know the truths about it that are written different in each countries history lessons.  I have been to the Hiroshima site several times and it is very sobering.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Saraburi121

[DoctorG]

7 hours ago, Saraburi121 said:

Would be nice to hear the perspective from individual Allied Forces who fought the war in the Pacific contribute to this discussion vice those looking at history in hind sight but they are all mostly passed. Probably a very different opinion than folks today.  Was it terrible, yes, and hopefully never repeated. Who will every know the truths about it that are written different in each countries history lessons.  I have been to the Hiroshima site several times and it is very sobering.

First person narrative is always preferable, but I doubt we have any 100 year olds on this site.

[rvaviator]

8 hours ago, Logosone said:

Total lie, anyone who claims that should read some history.

 

The Japanese were already suing for peace.

 

The dropping of the atomic bomb which burned alive women and children was a horrible war crime.

 

Despicable.

My understanding is that Japan would have surrendered - and the sticking point was over the word 'unconditional surrender' (pre- dropping the bomb) ...  They were scared that the emperor would be tried for war crimes and executed - For them it would have been for the Catholics to have the Pope executed ...   They knew that they could not fend of the Russians.  I suppose one could  say that dropping the A bomb was a bit like cracking a nut with a sledge hammer.  It also served it purpose one could say in showing the world have crazy talking about dropping A bombs is .. nobody wins in the end. considering how much more powerful the technology is today.  It also served as a 'great experiment' to gain better understating of the effect of radiation - Which was not understood at the time. Even today the descendants and the few people who are still around today are tracked for radiation related issues ....  The world can be a very sad place at times ????

[trucking]

9 hours ago, Logosone said:

Total lie, anyone who claims that should read some history.

 

The Japanese were already suing for peace.

 

The dropping of the atomic bomb which burned alive women and children was a horrible war crime.

 

Despicable.

 

I refer you to the last sentence of my post.

 

You need to read history not dabble in it.

 

Whatever the feelings of the ordinary Japanese their government was no more inclined to surrender than were the Nazis. They understood they had blood on their hands and would be called to account for it so they would have fought on fanatically.

 

Read up on what happened in Manila. Even when ordered to evacuate the city the local commander refused to do so. He and the troops under him fought on until cornered. Then seeing that they were about to die they went on an orgy of rape and murder of the Filipino civilians still under their control.

 

War is an awful crime. Murder on an individual or massive scale is an awful crime. Those who instigate it must be stopped at the earliest opportunity , whatever it takes.

 

To say that the dropping of the bombs saved lives is a lie is the same as saying the holocaust is a fabrication.

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, trucking said:

 

I refer you to the last sentence of my post.

 

You need to read history not dabble in it.

 

Whatever the feelings of the ordinary Japanese their government was no more inclined to surrender than were the Nazis. They understood they had blood on their hands and would be called to account for it so they would have fought on fanatically.

 

Read up on what happened in Manila. Even when ordered to evacuate the city the local commander refused to do so. He and the troops under him fought on until cornered. Then seeing that they were about to die they went on an orgy of rape and murder of the Filipino civilians still under their control.

 

War is an awful crime. Murder on an individual or massive scale is an awful crime. Those who instigate it must be stopped at the earliest opportunity , whatever it takes.

 

To say that the dropping of the bombs saved lives is a lie is the same as saying the holocaust is a fabrication.

With the topic of 'did dropping the bombs save lives' a girly discussed topic amongst historians, your last sentence is way over the top and not done.

[trucking]

14 hours ago, stevenl said:

With the topic of 'did dropping the bombs save lives' a girly discussed topic amongst historians, your last sentence is way over the top and not done.

 

Not at all. Despite mountains of evidence there are still people out there that state and try to prove that this is the case. Exactly the same as denying that had the war continued another month, countless more lives would have been lost. 

 

Here is a telling extract from Emperor Hirohitos  Jewel Voice Broadcast.

 

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

Such being the case, how are we to save the millions of our subjects, or to atone ourselves before the hallowed spirits of our imperial ancestors? This is the reason why we have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the joint declaration of the powers.

 

When the innocent lives at stake were Japanese it gave them pause for thought. 

 

A pity they had not felt the same high regard for the innocent Chinese civilians at Nanking and other places under their thumb.

 

And that extract is from the horses mouth. Nothing about the Russian threat or the imminent starvation the Japanese would have faced on account of the American submarines stranglehold on the country where nothing bigger than a fishing boat went unnoticed.

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, trucking said:

 

Not at all. Despite mountains of evidence there are still people out there that state and try to prove that this is the case. Exactly the same as denying that had the war continued another month, countless more lives would have been lost. 

 

Here is a telling extract from Emperor Hirohitos  Jewel Voice Broadcast.

 

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

Such being the case, how are we to save the millions of our subjects, or to atone ourselves before the hallowed spirits of our imperial ancestors? This is the reason why we have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the joint declaration of the powers.

 

When the innocent lives at stake were Japanese it gave them pause for thought. 

 

A pity they had not felt the same high regard for the innocent Chinese civilians at Nanking and other places under their thumb.

 

And that extract is from the horses mouth. Nothing about the Russian threat or the imminent starvation the Japanese would have faced on account of the American submarines stranglehold on the country where nothing bigger than a fishing boat went unnoticed.

Seems you're only listening to one side of the story.

 

You're wrong, it is hotly discussed, and comparing this discussion to Holocaust denial is also wrong.

[Oliver Holzerfilled]

46 minutes ago, trucking said:

 

I refer you to the last sentence of my post.

 

You need to read history not dabble in it.

 

Whatever the feelings of the ordinary Japanese their government was no more inclined to surrender than were the Nazis. They understood they had blood on their hands and would be called to account for it so they would have fought on fanatically.

 

Read up on what happened in Manila. Even when ordered to evacuate the city the local commander refused to do so. He and the troops under him fought on until cornered. Then seeing that they were about to die they went on an orgy of rape and murder of the Filipino civilians still under their control.

 

War is an awful crime. Murder on an individual or massive scale is an awful crime. Those who instigate it must be stopped at the earliest opportunity , whatever it takes.

 

To say that the dropping of the bombs saved lives is a lie is the same as saying the holocaust is a fabrication.

More civilians died in the battle of Manila than died in Nagasaki.  

[Grumpy one]

The deed was done 75 years ago, was it really needed?

Well it put a stop to the war pretty damn quickly.

If you could ask my late uncle who died building the Burma Railway, he would probably have said give them a few more.

As far as I am concerned its history.

Lets look forward to what could be, not back at what was.

 

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Oliver Holzerfilled said:

More civilians died in the battle of Manila than died in Nagasaki.  

75 years on and still learning of new atrocities.

 

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

 

The month-long battle, which resulted in the death of over 100,000 civilians and the complete devastation of the city, was the scene of the worst urban fighting in the Pacific theater. Japanese forces committed mass murder against Filipino civilians during the battle. Along with massive loss of life, the battle also destroyed architectural and cultural heritage dating back to the city's founding, and Manila became one of the most devastated capital cities during the entire war,

 

What did the Filipinos ever do the the Japanese?

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by rabas

[trucking]

15 hours ago, Oliver Holzerfilled said:

More civilians died in the battle of Manila than died in Nagasaki.  

 Absolutely. And Manila is just a single example of Japanese atrocity.

 

And yet if you read the entire text of the Jewel Voice broadcast the Emperor comes across as feeling pretty hard done by by the course of events that they themselves instigated.

[trucking]

14 hours ago, rabas said:

75 years on and still learning of new atrocities.

 

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

 

The month-long battle, which resulted in the death of over 100,000 civilians and the complete devastation of the city, was the scene of the worst urban fighting in the Pacific theater. Japanese forces committed mass murder against Filipino civilians during the battle. Along with massive loss of life, the battle also destroyed architectural and cultural heritage dating back to the city's founding, and Manila became one of the most devastated capital cities during the entire war,

 

What did the Filipinos ever do the the Japanese?

 

 

Ah....but Stevenl say we are only listening to one side of the story ?  

 

How so ? The Jewel Voice Broadcast gives the other.

 

https://www.atomicheritage.org/key-documents/jewel-voice-broadcast

 

That is the other side of the story coming from the very top.

[spiekerjozef]

Will Trump be there to apologize ?

[tifino]

16 hours ago, oldhippy said:

You are probably right on all those points.

 

But:

QUOTE: Truman had no time to take any risk.

 

Why not bombing a palace or military targets?

So it was a horrible war crime after all.

 

 

because someone Very High up in Authority had to be left Alive - so that the Japanese peasantry/military would actually Believe and Honour' the Surrender Orders passed down the line...

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, trucking said:

 

Ah....but Stevenl say we are only listening to one side of the story ?  

 

How so ? The Jewel Voice Broadcast gives the other.

 

https://www.atomicheritage.org/key-documents/jewel-voice-broadcast

 

That is the other side of the story coming from the very top.

Please refer from making claims about what I said, especially if it is incorrect.

 

See the discussion by historians, I already gave a link earlier.

[Logosone]

9 hours ago, rvaviator said:

My understanding is that Japan would have surrendered - and the sticking point was over the word 'unconditional surrender' (pre- dropping the bomb) ...  They were scared that the emperor would be tried for war crimes and executed - For them it would have been for the Catholics to have the Pope executed ...   They knew that they could not fend of the Russians.  I suppose one could  say that dropping the A bomb was a bit like cracking a nut with a sledge hammer.  It also served it purpose one could say in showing the world have crazy talking about dropping A bombs is .. nobody wins in the end. considering how much more powerful the technology is today.  It also served as a 'great experiment' to gain better understating of the effect of radiation - Which was not understood at the time. Even today the descendants and the few people who are still around today are tracked for radiation related issues ....  The world can be a very sad place at times ????

What the Americans inflicted on Japanese women and children was horrific, one of the worst deaths imaginable.

 

And the point is that it was completely unnecessary. The supposed sticking point of the emperor was a non-point. After the Americans got their petulant "unconditional surrender" they accepted the position of the emperor anyway, after the fact. So they accepted Japan's condition anyway. Had they done so earlier 120,000 civilians would not have been burned alive.

 

And you are absolutely right, the entry of the Soviets was the reason for Japan's surrender as Japanese historians have made clear after examining the records, the atomic bomb was not the main factor at all. 

[Logosone]

8 hours ago, trucking said:

 

I refer you to the last sentence of my post.

 

You need to read history not dabble in it.

 

Whatever the feelings of the ordinary Japanese their government was no more inclined to surrender than were the Nazis. They understood they had blood on their hands and would be called to account for it so they would have fought on fanatically.

 

Read up on what happened in Manila. Even when ordered to evacuate the city the local commander refused to do so. He and the troops under him fought on until cornered. Then seeing that they were about to die they went on an orgy of rape and murder of the Filipino civilians still under their control.

 

War is an awful crime. Murder on an individual or massive scale is an awful crime. Those who instigate it must be stopped at the earliest opportunity , whatever it takes.

 

To say that the dropping of the bombs saved lives is a lie is the same as saying the holocaust is a fabrication.

You are talking rubbish of course. Dropping the nuclear bombs on innocent civilians in no way stopped "an awful crime", on the contrary, it was itself an awful war crime.

 

And the only one who is denying a holocaust is of course you, in that you cheer lead the horrific burning alive of 120,000 Japanese women and children.

[4reaL]

35 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You are talking rubbish of course. Dropping the nuclear bombs on innocent civilians in no way stopped "an awful crime", on the contrary, it was itself an awful war crime.

 

And the only one who is denying a holocaust is of course you, in that you cheer lead the horrific burning alive of 120,000 Japanese women and children.

 

Stopped them dead in their tracks tho.....

 

Japanese soldiers were regarded as the most brutal occupiers and the FatBoy worked to make them surrender.

 

 

[trucking]

15 hours ago, Logosone said:

You are talking rubbish of course. Dropping the nuclear bombs on innocent civilians in no way stopped "an awful crime", on the contrary, it was itself an awful war crime.

 

And the only one who is denying a holocaust is of course you, in that you cheer lead the horrific burning alive of 120,000 Japanese women and children.

 

Of course, you are talking total garbage.. Read some history books and get off your PC horse. 

 

You are outraged at the death of Japanese civilians but don't take into consideration the hundreds and thousands that died at the hands of their Japanese tormentors, and the many that would have died had the war not been brought to a swift end.

 

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

 

Even after the triple shock of the Soviet intervention and two atomic bombs, the Japanese cabinet was still deadlocked, incapable of deciding upon a course of action due to the power of the Army and Navy factions in cabinet, and of their unwillingness to even consider surrender. Following the personal intervention of the emperor to break the deadlock in favour of surrender, there were no less than three separate coup attempts by senior Japanese officers to try to prevent the surrender and take the Emperor into 'protective custody'. Once these coup attempts had failed, senior leaders of the air force and Navy ordered bombing and kamikaze raids on the U.S. fleet (in which some Japanese generals personally participated) to try to derail any possibility of peace. It is clear from these accounts that while many in the civilian government knew the war could not be won, the power of the military in the Japanese government kept surrender from even being considered as a real option prior to the two atomic bombs.

 

Again.....from the Japanese themselves :

 

The "one condition" faction, led by Togo, seized on the bombing as decisive justification of surrender. Kōichi Kido, one of Emperor Hirohito's closest advisers, stated, "We of the peace party were assisted by the atomic bomb in our endeavor to end the war." Hisatsune Sakomizu, the chief Cabinet secretary in 1945, called the bombing "a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war".

 

 

You seem to have the erroneous opinion that the weapon was used to punish the Japanese people and that people were rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of yet more innocent people being killed.  How on earth you have arrived at this opinion is a mystery.

It does not seem to bother you that more innocent people would have died without the use of the bombs , than by using them. You don't seem to be bothered by the 100,000 Japanese killed in Tokyo by ' conventional ' firebombing and the 1,000,000 made homeless.  You don't of course know anything about that. You just have this politically correct and trendy notion that it was wrong to use the bombs and to hell with all the victims there would have been had they not been used.

 

Study history....a lot....stop having tunnel vision and look at the big picture.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

You are talking rubbish of course. Dropping the nuclear bombs on innocent civilians in no way stopped "an awful crime", on the contrary, it was itself an awful war crime.

 

And the only one who is denying a holocaust is of course you, in that you cheer lead the horrific burning alive of 120,000 Japanese women and children.

 

2 minutes ago, trucking said:

 

Of course, you are talking total garbage.. Read some history books and get off your PC horse. 

 

You are outraged at the death of Japanese civilians but don't take into consideration the hundreds and thousands that died at the hands of their Japanese tormentors, and the many that would have died had the war not been brought to a swift end.

 

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

 

Even after the triple shock of the Soviet intervention and two atomic bombs, the Japanese cabinet was still deadlocked, incapable of deciding upon a course of action due to the power of the Army and Navy factions in cabinet, and of their unwillingness to even consider surrender. Following the personal intervention of the emperor to break the deadlock in favour of surrender, there were no less than three separate coup attempts by senior Japanese officers to try to prevent the surrender and take the Emperor into 'protective custody'. Once these coup attempts had failed, senior leaders of the air force and Navy ordered bombing and kamikaze raids on the U.S. fleet (in which some Japanese generals personally participated) to try to derail any possibility of peace. It is clear from these accounts that while many in the civilian government knew the war could not be won, the power of the military in the Japanese government kept surrender from even being considered as a real option prior to the two atomic bombs.

 

Again.....from the Japanese themselves :

 

The "one condition" faction, led by Togo, seized on the bombing as decisive justification of surrender. Kōichi Kido, one of Emperor Hirohito's closest advisers, stated, "We of the peace party were assisted by the atomic bomb in our endeavor to end the war." Hisatsune Sakomizu, the chief Cabinet secretary in 1945, called the bombing "a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war".

 

 

You seem to have the erroneous opinion that the weapon was used to punish the Japanese people and that people were rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of yet more innocent people being killed.  How on earth you have arrived at this opinion is a mystery.

It does not seem to bother you that more innocent people would have died without the use of the bombs , than by using them. You don't seem to be bothered by the 100,000 Japanese killed in Tokyo by ' conventional ' firebombing and the 1,000,000 made homeless.  You don't of course know anything about that. You just have this politically correct and trendy notion that it was wrong to use the bombs and to hell with all the victims there would have been had they not been used.

 

Study history....a lot....stop having tunnel vision and look at the big picture.

Glad to see we have 2 eminent historians on board here, who will settle this hotly discussed topic once and for all 

[trucking]

14 hours ago, stevenl said:

 

Glad to see we have 2 eminent historians on board here, who will settle this hotly discussed topic once and for all 

 

It will never be settled because that is the way humans are. If it hasn't been settled by now it never will be.

 

The use of atomic bombs is of course horrific and terrifying ( like war in general ). But in this singular instance their use can be justified. After 5 years of horrific war and millions of dead no end could come quick enough. Every day that passed people were dying. 

 

Of course, everyone knows that Japan would eventually have surrendered without the use of the bombs. No historian is denying that. It was inevitable. But every delay was costing thousands of lives and if you read the above links about what was happening in the Japanese cabinet it is quiet clear, coming directly from their own mouths , that the bombs were the clincher that finally broke the power of the military faction who would never have surrendered and the horror that would have followed .

 

Believe it or not, I am and always have been a pacifist. I hate war and all things military. But I can overcome my prejudices in this particular instance because of the countless books I have read on the war in the far east and how it was brought to its conclusion. In my teens i held the views being put forth by logosone but after many years , much travel and a lot of reading  I learnt that sometimes idealism and reality don't dovetail.

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, 4reaL said:

 

Stopped them dead in their tracks tho.....

 

Japanese soldiers were regarded as the most brutal occupiers and the FatBoy worked to make them surrender.

 

 

Not at all. The bombs were totally irrelevant in terms of surrender:

 

The 1946 United States Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan, whose members included Paul Nitze, concluded the atomic bombs had been unnecessary to win the war. They said:

 

Bаsеd on а dеtаilеd invеstigаtion of аll thе fаcts, аnd supportеd by thе tеstimony of thе surviving Jаpаnеsе lеаdеrs involvеd, it is thе Survеy's opinion thаt cеrtаinly prior to 31 Dеcеmbеr 1945, аnd in аll probаbility prior to 1 Novеmbеr 1945, Jаpаn would hаvе surrеndеrеd еvеn if thе аtomic bombs hаd not bееn droppеd, еvеn if Russiа hаd not еntеrеd thе wаr, аnd еvеn if no invаsion hаd bееn plаnnеd or contеmplаtеd.

 

Also, see:

 

The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.

 

— Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet

 

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

 

This is supported by Japanese sources who say Japan surrendered because of the Soviets' entry into the war.

[Logosone]

30 minutes ago, trucking said:

 

You are outraged at the death of Japanese civilians but don't take into consideration the hundreds and thousands that died at the hands of their Japanese tormentors, and the many that would have died had the war not been brought to a swift end.

 

It does not seem to bother you that more innocent people would have died without the use of the bombs , than by using them. You don't seem to be bothered by the 100,000 Japanese killed in Tokyo by ' conventional ' firebombing and the 1,000,000 made homeless.  You don't of course know anything about that. You just have this politically correct and trendy notion that it was wrong to use the bombs and to hell with all the victims there would have been had they not been used.

 

Study history....a lot....stop having tunnel vision and look at the big picture.

You are as shockingly ignorant of history as you are of morality.

 

In fact, killing women and children in the most horrific way, who were NOT the perpetrators of any war crimes served no purpose at all, apart from perpetuating yet another war crime.

 

I am well aware of the fact that the Americans, like the British, engaged in carpet bombing civilians with conventional bombs. However that was completely unnecessary. Japan had already sued for peace when the bombs were used.

 

And yes, it was extremely wrong to use the bombs, it was a horrific and abhorrent war crime. And if there is any justice in the world Truman will be burning in eternal damnation in hell as we speak.

[Logosone]

17 minutes ago, trucking said:

 

But in this singular instance their use can be justified.

To see anyone justify the burning alive of women and children, in public, is absolutely repulsive.

 

And the Americans who fought the Japanese at the time knew it.

 

The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.

 

— Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman, 1950

 

People who defend the atomic bombs are not just completely ignorant of history, they have no moral compass whatsoever. I can't imagine anything more repulsive, any greater single crime, than what the Americans did at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[trucking]

30 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace.

 

Ok. And who were they discussing this with and what were the Japanese proposals.

[Scott]

A post violating Fair Use Policy has been removed.   You may only quote 3 sentences from a source and a link to the remainder of the article.  

 

[trucking]

15 hours ago, Logosone said:

On July 30, Ambassador Satō wrote that Stalin was probably talking to Roosevelt and Churchill about his dealings with Japan, and he wrote: "There is no alternative but immediate unconditional surrender if we are to prevent Russia's participation in the war." 

 

The Japanese indeed wanted to surrender , but on negotiated terms. The terms laid out by the Potsdam Declaration were totally unacceptable to the Japanese cabinet . The final sentence of the Potsdam declaration :

 

"We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction."^[

 

^{The Russians had already agreed with the other allies to open another front agains Japan by invading Manchuria.}

 

 

Attempts to deal with the Soviet Union

 

Naotake Satō

On June 30, Tōgō told Naotake Satō, Japan's ambassador in Moscow, to try to establish "firm and lasting relations of friendship." Satō was to discuss the status of Manchuria and "any matter the Russians would like to bring up."^[45] Well aware of the overall situation and cognizant of their promises to the Allies, the Soviets responded with delaying tactics to encourage the Japanese without promising anything. Satō finally met with Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov on July 11, but without result. On July 12, Tōgō directed Satō to tell the Soviets that:

His Majesty the Emperor, mindful of the fact that the present war daily brings greater evil and sacrifice upon the peoples of all the belligerent powers, desires from his heart that it may be quickly terminated. But so long as England and the United States insist upon unconditional surrender, the Japanese Empire has no alternative but to fight on with all its strength for the honor and existence of the Motherland.

 

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

 

Soviet intentions

Main article: Soviet–Japanese War

 

To this end, Stalin and Molotov strung out the negotiations with the Japanese, giving them false hope of a Soviet-mediated peace.^[56] At the same time, in their dealings with the United States and Britain, the Soviets insisted on strict adherence to the Cairo Declaration, re-affirmed at the Yalta Conference, that the Allies would not accept separate or conditional peace with Japan. The Japanese would have to surrender unconditionally to all the Allies. To prolong the war, the Soviets opposed any attempt to weaken this requirement.^[56] 

 

From the above it is clear that although the Japanese wanted to surrender on terms , the so called peace negotiations were doomed by both sides intransigence on the issue of ' unconditional surrender. The Soviets knew this but were just playing the Japanese along to buy time for their troop deployments. In any event, the negotiations came to nothing as Japan would not agree to the terms.

 

So the Russians invaded and the bombs were dropped. What happened after this three hammer blows to Japan :

 

even after the triple shock of the Soviet intervention and two atomic bombs, the Japanese cabinet was still deadlocked, incapable of deciding upon a course of action due to the power of the Army and Navy factions in cabinet, and of their unwillingness to even consider surrender. Following the personal intervention of the emperor to break the deadlock in favour of surrender, there were no less than three separate coup attempts by senior Japanese officers to try to prevent the surrender and take the Emperor into 'protective custody'. Once these coup attempts had failed, senior leaders of the air force and Navy ordered bombing and kamikaze raids on the U.S. fleet (in which some Japanese generals personally participated) to try to derail any possibility of peace. It is clear from these accounts that while many in the civilian government knew the war could not be won, the power of the military in the Japanese government kept surrender from even being considered as a real option prior to the two atomic bombs.

 

 

So ...................... history is quite clear on this. The dropping of the two bombs were the straws that broke the camels back. Had they not been dropped , the Japanese cabinet , in the stranglehold of the military hardliners would have forced through the continuation of the war with catastrophic results for all sides.

 

The victims themselves have this to say about the dropping of the bomb :

 

On 30 June 2007, Japan's defense minister Fumio Kyūma said the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan by the United States during World War II was an inevitable way to end the war. Kyūma said: "I now have come to accept in my mind that in order to end the war, it could not be helped (shikata ga nai) that an atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and that countless numbers of people suffered great tragedy."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

 

In 1959, Mitsuo Fuchida, the pilot who led the first wave in the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, met with General Paul Tibbets, who piloted the Enola Gay that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and told him that:

You did the right thing. You know the Japanese attitude at that time, how fanatic they were, they'd die for the Emperor ... Every man, woman, and child would have resisted that invasion with sticks and stones if necessary ... Can you imagine what a slaughter it would be to invade Japan? It would have been terrible. The Japanese people know more about that than the American public will ever know.^[59]

 

Logosone , I agree with you that the dropping of the bombs was a horrific thing to have happened to the Japanese victims. But there can be no doubt that this tragic event saved more innocent lives than it took.

 

Speedy end of war saved livesEdit

Supporters of the bombings argue waiting for the Japanese to surrender would also have cost lives. "For China alone, depending upon what number one chooses for overall Chinese casualties, in each of the ninety-seven months between July 1937 and August 1945, somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 persons perished, the vast majority of them noncombatants. For the other Asian states alone, the average probably ranged in the tens of thousands per month, but the actual numbers were almost certainly greater in 1945, notably due to the mass death in a famine in Vietnam. Westerners.'"^[30]

The end of the war limited the expansion of the Japanese controlled Vietnamese famine of 1945, stopping it at 1–2 million deaths and also liberated millions of Allied prisoners of war and civilian laborers working in harsh conditions under a forced mobilization. In the Dutch East Indies, there was a "forced mobilization of some 4 million—although some estimates are as high as 10 million—romusha (manual labourers) ... About 270,000 romusha were sent to the Outer Islands and Japanese-held territories in Southeast Asia, where they joined other Asians in performing wartime construction projects. At the end of the war, only 52,000 were repatriated to Java."

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

 

In life, hard , unpleasant things sometimes have to be faced up to. Not dropping the bombs would have saved the bomb victims from an awful death. 

 

But had the bombs not been dropped, the Japanese cabinet would have fought on and even more innocent lives would have been lost.

 

This is history , warts and all. War is mankinds ultimate folly an ever will remain so, unfortunately for humanity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by trucking

[SpaceKadet]

And today, Nagasaki marks 75 years since "Fat Man" was dropped. Unfortunately, there is no landmark, like Hiroshima's Atomic Dome, to mark the epicenter.  Despite the 40% higher yield of "Fat Man" over Hiroshima's "Little Boy", there were far less casualties, mainly due to the surrounding geography, and the fact that many of the inhabitants were evacuated some weeks prior due to extended conventional bombing raids.

 

In fact, Nagasaki was the secondary target. The primary, Kokura Arsenal, just to the north of Nagasaki was obscured by clouds when the B-52 carrying the "Fat Man" arrived there. Decision was made to proceed to the secondary, Nagasaki, which was also found to be under cloud cover. The mission was almost aborted when, by sheer luck, the bombardier spotted the city's stadium through the clouds, and dropped the bomb.

[Saraburi121]

On 8/7/2020 at 6:27 AM, DoctorG said:

First person narrative is always preferable, but I doubt we have any 100 year olds on this site.

Maybe not on this site but there are a few left....put it out that most have past on but...