The Nuking of Nagasaki: Even More Immoral and Unnecessary than Hiroshima

[Open Bolt]

"General Dwight Eisenhower, in his memoirs, recalled a visit from Secretary of War Henry Stimson in late July 1945: “I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of ‘face.’” Eisenhower reiterated the point years later in a Newsweek interview in 1963, saying that “the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”1

More tedious whining. Japan was free to surrender any time they wanted to.

It was their choice and their fault that they chose not to do so.

That the Japanese were on the verge of defeat was made clear to the president in a top-secret memorandum from Secretary of War Henry Stimson on July 2, 1945. Stimson noted that Japan “has no allies,” its “navy is nearly destroyed,” she is vulnerable to an economic blockade depriving her “of sufficient food and supplies for her population,” she is “terribly vulnerable to our concentrated air attack upon her crowded cities, industrial, and food resources,” she “has against her not only the Anglo-American forces but the rising forces of China and the ominous threat of Russia,” and the United States has “inexhaustible and untouched industrial resources to bring to bear against her diminishing potential."

And yet Japan chose to not surrender.

Turned out to be a bad choice. Dumb move on their part.

"This was not why Hiroshima was chosen. Rather, the city was selected because it was “the largest untouched target not on the 21st Bomber Command priority list,” according to the administration’s Target Committee.20 Hiroshima, in other words, did not have enough military production to justify an earlier conventional attack (as compared to other cities on the priority list), and the effects of the bomb had to be uncontaminated from previous bombings in order to properly assess their damage."

Are you quoting Gar Alperovitz there?

Whoever you are quoting is pretty disingenuous, because Hiroshima was selected as an atomic target early in the bombing campaign when only a handful of Japanese cities had been destroyed.

"Indeed, Japan had put out peace feelers. As reported in the New York Times on July 26, 1945, “The Tokyo Radio, in an English-language broadcast to North America, has urged that the United States adopt a more lenient attitude toward Japan with regard to peace.” The broadcast quoted an ancient Aesop Fable in which a powerful wind could not force a man to give up his coat, but a gentle warming sun succeeded in doing so.25
Japan’s appeal fell on deaf ears in Washington."

They are the ones who waited until August 10 before deciding to surrender.

http://wyso.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/9/0/22903824/trohan_article.pdf

Fake news. Never happened.

"Two days before the late President Roosevelt left the last week in January for the Yalta conference with Prime Minister Churchill and Marshal Stalin he received a Japanese offer identical with the terms subsequently concluded by his successor, Harry S. Truman."

Fake news. Never happened.

The Bomb Was Not Necessary

With the sixty-fifth anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb almost upon us, there is undoubtedly going to be a flood of commentary on the wisdom of its use by the United States during World War II. The justified scolding of Charles Pellegrino and his The Last Train From Hiroshima...

historynewsnetwork.org

More tedious whining. Japan was still refusing to surrender so we had every right to continue attacking them.

 

[Unkotare]

"the city was selected because it was “the largest untouched target not on the 21st Bomber Command priority list,” according to the administration’s Target Committee.20 Hiroshima, in other words, did not have enough military production to justify an earlier conventional attack"

 

[Unkotare]

...



Fake news. Never happened.



Fake news. Never happened.
...

Many people react badly when a comfortable narrative is shattered. A real historian isn't so defensive and weak-minded.

 

[Open Bolt]

"the city was selected because it was “the largest untouched target not on the 21st Bomber Command priority list,” according to the administration’s Target Committee.20 Hiroshima, in other words, did not have enough military production to justify an earlier conventional attack"

Another quote from Gar Alperovitz?? Whoever it is sure is disingenuous.

Again, Hiroshima was selected as an atomic target early in the bombing campaign when only a handful of cities had been destroyed.

Many people react badly when a comfortable narrative is shattered.

It's not like these falsehoods that you keep posting are shattering anything.

Or were you referring to your own reaction when I pointed out that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets and Japan was refusing to surrender?

A real historian isn't so defensive and weak-minded.

There is nothing weak minded about denouncing lies.

A real historian will always challenge lies.

Real historians care about the truth.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You have not once linked to any proposal for surrender by the Japanese Government.

 

[Rigby5]

Here's the thing. At the time, it was just another weapon in a war that saw all sorts of weapons used by all sides... Horror on a level most of us couldn't understand today.

Later on, when Nukes became an existential threat to the species, people asked why we used them, but at the time, there was no question. We were at war, they started it.

It's a wonderful case of applying modern values to people in the past who would have looked at you funny.

When at war, you do not experiment on civilian populations with devices we did know would slowly poison people with radiation.
Everyone in the US chain of command understood how radiation killed because many died making these bombs.

And no, "they" did not start it.
The US forced the Japanese into the war, with a constant series of restrictions, starting with the Treaty of 5-5-3, and included cutting off Japan from the oil, coal, steel, and food they needed from the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

When at war, you do not experiment on civilian populations with devices we did know would slowly poison people with radiation.
Everyone in the US chain of command understood how radiation killed because many died making these bombs.

And no, "they" did not start it.
The US forced the Japanese into the war, with a constant series of restrictions, starting with the Treaty of 5-5-3, and included cutting off Japan from the oil, coal, steel, and food they needed from the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.

SO we should have continued to supply Japan while they murdered millions of Chinese?

 

[Open Bolt]

When at war, you do not experiment on civilian populations with devices we did know would slowly poison people with radiation.

It's a good thing that we never did anything like that.

Japan conducted horrific experiments on innocent civilians though.

Everyone in the US chain of command understood how radiation killed

Well, the scientists certainly knew. Truman probably didn't.

because many died making these bombs.

Cite?

And no, "they" did not start it.

Yes they did. They attacked us, and we were defending ourselves.

The US forced the Japanese into the war, with a constant series of restrictions, starting with the Treaty of 5-5-3, and included cutting off Japan from the oil, coal, steel, and food they needed from the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.

Japan forced the US into dropping atomic bombs on them, what with their unforgivable atrocities and their refusal to surrender.

 

[Rigby5]

Or were you referring to your own reaction when I pointed out that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets and Japan was refusing to surrender?

Totally untrue.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, like ALL urban, civilian cities, were NOT legal military targets for a weapon they KNEW from testing, would destroy whole cities.

And anyone claiming Japan was refusing to surrender, would have to be a liar.
Clearly the US was well aware Japan had been trying to negotiate a surrender for over half a year, and only wanted some response about retaining the emperor.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Hiroshima was not a military target. Ground zero was 60' above Hiroshima city hall, "The T bridge." Pearl Harbor was a military base. However, Pearl Harbor WAS a peace time sneak attack and was reprehensible. Bombing a civilian population center with an atomic bomb was also reprehensible--War is hell.

Hiroshima was a major army and navy base.

 

[Unkotare]

People really should learn at least a basic level of information about the topics they get worked up about here. Just being insecure about long-held narratives that they have found comfortable since childhood is not serious discussion.

 

[Rigby5]

You have not once linked to any proposal for surrender by the Japanese Government.

{...
In Japan, the government was fractured into parties on either side of the war-peace divide. Those supporting a continuation of the war were determined to defend the Japanese homeland to the last man, in the hopes of bleeding the will to fight out of the Americans and their allies and eventually gain favorable terms for their eventual surrender. The peace party thought that national suicide was a bad idea, and that continuing the fight would only further anger the allies and reduce the likelihood that the imperial system would survive.

Under instructions from the Emperor, Japanese diplomats in Moscow approached the Soviet regime to begin discussing potential terms for a surrender. This contact was opened shortly before Potsdam. The Japanese understood the American demand for an “unconditional surrender” as the end of their imperial system; the goal was to work through Stalin to try preserve the emperor after the surrender.

The Americans intercepted these instructions and were well aware of the ongoing diplomacy in Moscow, but did not overtly tip their hand to the Soviets. Furthermore, it remains unknown if Stalin knew that Truman knew of the negotiations.

At Potsdam, Stalin was expecting to receive an invitation to sign the declaration insisting on Japanese capitulation. Once invited, Stalin would have the pretext for over-riding the neutrality pact with the Japanese. However, no invitation was forthcoming. Once the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Truman was well aware that the Allies did not need the Soviets to enter the war in the Pacific. Truman, in fact, seemed determined to keep Stalin out of the war. Moreover, there are interesting details from behind the scenes at (and before) Potsdam that Dr. Hasegawa has interpreted as having much greater significance than previously recognized.

First, it was known before Potsdam that Japanese hesitation over surrender was motivated primarily by the desire to retain the imperial system. Were the Allies to ensure the continuation of the monarchy, Japan might have agreed to terms on a surrender sooner. In spite of this knowledge, Truman insisted on including the term “unconditional surrender” in the Potsdam Declaration, knowing that the Japanese would reject it. Coupled with military communications indicating the preparations for dropping the A-bomb on Japan had begun before Truman departed for Potsdam, Hasegawa believes it is not unreasonable to conclude that Truman intended for, and expected, the rejection of the Potsdam Declaration, to justify the use of the atomic bomb.
...}

Classic Articles ~ A Different Theory of Japan’s Surrender in WW2

Did the Soviet Union’s actions influence Truman’s decision-making? ~ Brant Guillory, 8 August 2020 On #TBT, we bring you the occasional classic article – an older review or analys…

www.armchairdragoons.com

Truman was well aware the Japanese were desperate to surrender, as we had cut off their food from China, and the population was starving to death.

 

[Rigby5]

Hiroshima was a major army and navy base.

We did not attack the army or navy bases, but instead targeted the population center.
The military objectives were not even touched.

 

[Rigby5]

SO we should have continued to supply Japan while they murdered millions of Chinese?

The Japanese were NOT murdering anyone by then, and were more than willing to surrender.
In fact, in many places like Burma, after the Japanese did surrender, we ASKED them to continue ruling and keeping order for over a year, before they could finally be relieved of command.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

{...
In Japan, the government was fractured into parties on either side of the war-peace divide. Those supporting a continuation of the war were determined to defend the Japanese homeland to the last man, in the hopes of bleeding the will to fight out of the Americans and their allies and eventually gain favorable terms for their eventual surrender. The peace party thought that national suicide was a bad idea, and that continuing the fight would only further anger the allies and reduce the likelihood that the imperial system would survive.

Under instructions from the Emperor, Japanese diplomats in Moscow approached the Soviet regime to begin discussing potential terms for a surrender. This contact was opened shortly before Potsdam. The Japanese understood the American demand for an “unconditional surrender” as the end of their imperial system; the goal was to work through Stalin to try preserve the emperor after the surrender.

The Americans intercepted these instructions and were well aware of the ongoing diplomacy in Moscow, but did not overtly tip their hand to the Soviets. Furthermore, it remains unknown if Stalin knew that Truman knew of the negotiations.

At Potsdam, Stalin was expecting to receive an invitation to sign the declaration insisting on Japanese capitulation. Once invited, Stalin would have the pretext for over-riding the neutrality pact with the Japanese. However, no invitation was forthcoming. Once the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Truman was well aware that the Allies did not need the Soviets to enter the war in the Pacific. Truman, in fact, seemed determined to keep Stalin out of the war. Moreover, there are interesting details from behind the scenes at (and before) Potsdam that Dr. Hasegawa has interpreted as having much greater significance than previously recognized.

First, it was known before Potsdam that Japanese hesitation over surrender was motivated primarily by the desire to retain the imperial system. Were the Allies to ensure the continuation of the monarchy, Japan might have agreed to terms on a surrender sooner. In spite of this knowledge, Truman insisted on including the term “unconditional surrender” in the Potsdam Declaration, knowing that the Japanese would reject it. Coupled with military communications indicating the preparations for dropping the A-bomb on Japan had begun before Truman departed for Potsdam, Hasegawa believes it is not unreasonable to conclude that Truman intended for, and expected, the rejection of the Potsdam Declaration, to justify the use of the atomic bomb.
...}

Classic Articles ~ A Different Theory of Japan’s Surrender in WW2

Did the Soviet Union’s actions influence Truman’s decision-making? ~ Brant Guillory, 8 August 2020 On #TBT, we bring you the occasional classic article – an older review or analys…

www.armchairdragoons.com

Truman was well aware the Japanese were desperate to surrender, as we had cut off their food from China, and the population was starving to death.

I asked for a proposal for surrender by the Japanese Government you have not provided one, as for the Soviet overture we have the intercepts what Japan offered was a ceasefire, return to 41 start lines and no concessions in China.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Japanese were NOT murdering anyone by then, and were more than willing to surrender.
In fact, in many places like Burma, after the Japanese did surrender, we ASKED them to continue ruling and keeping order for over a year, before they could finally be relieved of command.

In 41 the Japanese were most definately waging war on China.

 

[Esdraelon]

While Hiroshima could be justified (did we need to demonstrate on such a populated target?)

It was a legitimate military target and had been spared the firebombing raids that so many other cities had suffered. BTW, all the whining about bad old America and its atomic bombs is sickening. In the grand scheme, those nukes were more merciful than what LeMay had ALREADY done to 67 Japanese cities.

The Tokyo Firebombing Was Deadlier Than Hiroshima — So Why Haven't You Heard Of It?

The Americans planned the firebombing of Tokyo — which was then largely made up of wooden structures — for a dry and windy night to ensure maximum destruction.

allthatsinteresting.com

I guess we should be ashamed of those raids as well? They killed FAR MORE people and destroyed more property. War, especially the TOTAL war that was waged in WWII, leads to horrific outcomes and it wasn't the U.S. that started it.
A curious thing though, even after Tokyo was incinerated, Tojo, Suzuki, and friends still refused to surrender. If it makes you lot feel any better, don't worry, at the present pace of our government, America will almost certainly be struck by a nuke or nukes in the not too distant future.

 

[Esdraelon]

Drop one in a low populated or strictly military area and let the Japanese evaluate the results. Then tell them we have dozens just like it and would target Tokyo next

67 Japanese cities had already been mostly turned to ashes. As for Tokyo, it was mostly incinerated in March of that same year with over 100,000 dead and a million homeless and they STILL refused to surrender:

The Tokyo Firebombing Was Deadlier Than Hiroshima — So Why Haven't You Heard Of It?

The Americans planned the firebombing of Tokyo — which was then largely made up of wooden structures — for a dry and windy night to ensure maximum destruction.

allthatsinteresting.com

 

[Esdraelon]

Actually Truman's own cabinet publicly stated the bomb would put us on par with the German genocide at the time, and the dept of defense stifled all Truman's top generals , insisting all comments be vetted first

Further, the 'it would have saved millions' canard started out far less in #'s, grew due to historic revisionists who supported Truman , as opposed to all his generals

~S~

My dad fought in that war and he and his peers were DAMNED GLAD they didn't have to experience the hell that waited on those islands.

 

[Rigby5]

It's a good thing that we never did anything like that.

Japan conducted horrific experiments on innocent civilians though.



Well, the scientists certainly knew. Truman probably didn't.



Cite?



Yes they did. They attacked us, and we were defending ourselves.



Japan forced the US into dropping atomic bombs on them, what with their unforgivable atrocities and their refusal to surrender.

Yes the nuclear weapons were entire used on Japan in order to experiment with them.
We did one uranium bomb and one plutonium bomb, and were determined to drop them both, no matter what the Japanese did, so we could compare the results.
We did NOT target anything remotely military, but instead the very center of the population.
Even the Germans never did anything so crude, and during the London Blitz, NEVER attacked the civilian population centers.

Madam Currie had died of radiation poisoning in 1934, so scientist and Truman were well aware of radiation dangers, In fact, that is the main value of nuclear weapons, as the explosion is not that significant.

{...
The Demon Core was a spherical 6.2-kilogram (14 lb) subcritical mass of plutonium 89 millimetres (3.5 in) in diameter, manufactured during World War II by the United States nuclear weapon development effort, the Manhattan Project, as a fissile core for an early atomic bomb.
...
The device briefly went supercritical when it was accidentally placed in supercritical configurations during two separate experiments intended to guarantee the core was close to the critical point. The incidents happened at the Los Alamos Laboratory, resulting in the acute radiation poisoning and subsequent deaths of scientists Harry Daghlian and Louis Slotin. After these incidents the spherical plutonium core was referred to as the "Demon Core".
...}

What we did to Japan before WWII amounted to a declaration of war, so we started it, not Japan.
Atrocities like Nanking were not justification for anything.
First of all Japan took Nanking in 1937 and we did nothing then, and second is that it is illegal to reply to an atrocity with another atrocity against innocent civilians.