Should the Atomic Bomb have been dropped on Japan?

The only U.S. Officer on both A-Missions

http://www.analyst-network.com/article.php?art_id=1150

 

The lack of sympathy for the Japanese at that time, is epitomised by the first hand knowledge of people like Jacob Beser who knew only too well of the savagery that the Japanese forces were capable of.

The generals et al who later voiced their disagreement, along with Eisenhower (was president), MacArthur (I could be president) were prepared to obliterate the Japanese people with incendiary bombing and then invade with more of our son's, and still to be agreed forecast death rate on both sides.

Casualties of one Million or 5 Million, less or more?

There were over 10,000,000 Japanese men and women reservists, over and above the army numbers, who also trained in the art of warfare with Bamboo shafts and Knives crafted from ceramic due to the steel shortage. These would have been unleashed on any invasion force.

Then, let us not forget the Russians who were on the doorstep. They knew how to kill, rape pillage as well as the Japanese. What would the result of that episode of inhumanity have been?

 

That reminds me. I'm waiting for Nemesis by Hastings from Amazon. But I had a flick through in the bookshop and noted one statement. I shall come back and quote properly when I get the book, but it went along the lines that MacArthur thought he was commander of all forces against the Japanese in the Chinese theatre too. When the Soviets invaded, and around the time of the surrender, he ordered them to stop where they were and not to progress any further. The Soviet basically laughed in his face and said that only Stalin gave them orders.

Would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the bombs hadn't been dropped. Rather than Europe being the focal point (wth the Berlin Airlift being a possible cause of war with Russia) could it have occurred because of actions in the East? Knowing MacArthur, quite possible, if not probable.

 

Another good article on Downfall:

Unconditional surrender, demobilization and the atomic bomb

 

correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, the stubborn Japanese military in Japan were conspiring against Hirohito in a coup to stop surrender even after the second bomb was dropped on Nagazaki. Another factor that we rarely hear about is that Japan had their own nuclear weapon and were in the process of finding a meams with which to deliver it on the US and allies.

 

The Japanese military would have been happy to see 10,000.000 of their own people die rather than surrender.

They slaughtered millions under the guise of their co prosperity sphere, so the atomic bombs actually gave them a reprieve from total devastation which would have been the outcome from continual firebombing and starvation.

 

Major Kenji Hatanaka and a small group did lead a rebellion by occupying the Imperial Palace. However, it failed completely because most of the Imperial Army stayed loyal to the wishes of the Emperor.

And though Japan did carry out some development work on atomic weapons, they were nowhere near perfecting a bomb:

Japanese atomic program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Not surprising as they considered him to be a God.

I know Wikipedia is never to be used as an authoritative source, but that article on the Japanese nuke program was quite well-researched I thought.

If the Germans were unable to develop nukes in time, there is no way the Japanese could have. Also, in my opinion, if their home guard forces were training with ceramic blades instead of steel, that is a good indication of the scarcity of all strategic materials, let alone the radioactive materials and precision tooling required to successfully churn out a nuke or two.

Morally I have never agreed with the idea of "nuking 'em till they glow", but in this case it shortened the war by up to two years, saving millions of Allied AND Japanese lives.

 

Hello there -

To answer the question, in my opinion yes it needed to be dropped. Japan had no intentions of surrendering. I have seen and read where the military were training women and children to defend the homeland if and when an invasion took place.

Has anyone seen the Ken Burns series "The War"? It shows footage of Japanese soilders in the Pacific running out of the dugouts with their rifles, only to be shot point blank by the Allies as they did so. No intention of surrendering there.

Their atrocites are unspeakable in most cases. Goggle Unit 731 and see what they were doing. If not here's one I found. An American Allied Air Corp crewman walked into an operating room thinking that he was going to have his wound worked on by the Japanese doctors, they ended up disecting him alive. One of the assistants came forward many years later and stated that the doctor doing the disecting actually reached into his chest cavity and stopped his heart from beating by hand.

There's one pretty good reason to drop the bomb, in my opinion.

How about all of the be-headings? Live burials? And they say they have honor. Not in my book!

Even though we dropped two bombs on them, I have read that the US hoped that the second one would be enough to convince them to surrender, because the US did not have a third bomb built at the time. But the Japanese did not know that. Good thing they did surrender, or millions more would have died.

Just my opinion based on things I have researched about the "honorable" Japanese.

Regards,

Andy

 

www.guarian.co.uk [2]

Response: The alternatives to bombing Hiroshima were not morally superior | World news | The Guardian

 

I keep hearing sicker and sicker stories about the Japs.

The atomic bomb needed to be dropped. People say we killed innocent civilians, I say we killed people who we would have been fighting anyway. The Japenese were some sick people. " Has anyone seen the Ken Burns series the War?" I watch the show called war when it"s on.

 

Some old newspapers in Australia re Atom Bomb

Search results - NLA Newspapers beta

 

I read it " some old newspapers" . And the Japs had told everyone to fight to the death, I read that they even were training children to fight us to the death. I mean the Jap kamikaze pilots went to there own funeral!!! before going on a suicidal mission to kill humans like themselves. They were just unreal. I not only read this I heard it on a show called the War.

 

It's interesting to note that the Japanese are vilified for either fighting to the death, or planning to do so, and including their civilian population. How is it that we do not vilify, to the same degree the Russians or the Germans who did the same in many cases?

And who was it that said we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender?

How is it also that we mock and/or vilify the German Volkssturm for doing exactly what the British Home Guard had been trained to do. People recoil in horror at the stories that old men and young boys were sent out to battle - and yet those were exactly the same constituents as the Home Guard.

Propaganda is a strong weapon - used against the enemy, against ones own civilians or future generations learning about the war. One needs to be able to read it dispassionately if one really wants to understand the war.

 

Nobody can deny their fighting capabilities or that their populace would defend their homeland by any means at their disposal.

Their history of atrocities towards all and sundry and particularly POW's worked against them. Why would a country with the bomb not drop it and save the lives of all those who would have died during the invasion of the homeland.

Firebombing would have eventually destroyed Japan: the bomb's and subsequent surrender allowed Japan to emerge into the post war era in better condition than most would have thought possible.

 

Good point I cannot disagree.

 

Good point, cannot disagree.

 

The problem with the A bomb was it was a very sticky situation. At the end of the day does the person who says 'drop the bomb' be vilified as a murderer of thousands, or will history judge him kindly for hindsight does tell us that a more traditional battle to take japan would probably have made the Somme look like a kindergarten.

Japan was willing to fight to the death, remember they were still living by the samurai code, a twisted version of it true, but a strong ethical code to them. Very little difference to uropean gentlemen standing ten paces apart and takign potshots at each other. something that still happens in certain german universities now.

So put yourself in the position. A traditional invasion of japan in 1945 would cost thousands of military lives and tens, if not hundreds of thousands of civilian lives as they fought to protect their homeland from what they saw as an agressive invader. Or what if a scientist told you we have a bomb, it can wipe out a city with just one bomber, 5 crewmen, no more. just 5 men to be put into the firing line as opposed to 100,000 men. Just one bomber sir.

What do you do?

 

I say good point but I have a reply. No I don"t think the person is vilified as a murderer. He was ordered to do so, so I"d say it should go to the commander, if your going to say that the bombadier does he deserve to be vilified. So if any one is a villain, (I don"t think anyone should be vilified), but does it not go to Pres. Harry Truman for ordering it?:noidea:.:headhurt:

 

I don't disagree with your sentiments Kyt but would we really have fought to the death? Surely it is encumbent upon a leader (in whatever field) to know when to call it a day for the greater good. I'm not at all sure that at some stage the civilian population isn't simply worn down by all that a war entails to such an extent that a negotiated peace seems a better alternative. Thank heavens that this didn't happen.

I assume that the acceptance that the Bushido Code as an explanation of the atrocities committed, not by a minority of the Japanese, is actually more palatable than any alternative.