Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
All I have are facts. LOLJapanese Navy Admiral: The US has destroyed our navy.
Emperor: No problem
Japanese Air Force General: The US has destroyed our air force.
Emperor: No problem
Japanese Navy Admiral: The US has control of the seas surrounding Japan.
Emperor: No problem
Japanese Air Force General: The US has control of the air over Japan.
Emperor: No problem
Japanese Army General: The US has just unleashed a new technology - a nuclear bomb - that completely wiped out Hiroshima
Emperor: No problem
Japanese Army General: The US just dropped another nuclear bomb on Nagasaki which wiped Nagasaki off of the face of the earth.
Emperor: No problem
Japanese Army General: The Russians just announced they are sending their navy which is just a dinghy to invade Japan.
Emperor: The Russians are coming! Holy shit balls! Really! The Russians! Holy Fuck we better surrender.
There is little point in attempting precisely to impute Japan's unconditional surrender to any one of the numerous causes which jointly and cumulatively were responsible for Japan's disaster. The time lapse between military impotence and political acceptance of the inevitable might have been shorter had the political structure of Japan permitted a more rapid and decisive determination of national policies. Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.
Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.[90][91]
You would have thought that the US kicking Japan's ass in a 4 year war, destroying their navy, owning the air over Japan and nuking two cities would have made more of an impression than the Russians announcing they were at war.All I have are facts. LOL
The 1946 United States Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan, whose members included Paul Nitze,[89] concluded the atomic bombs had been unnecessary to win the war. They said:
yep. All that was true BEFORE the bombs were dropped. LOLYou would have thought that the US kicking Japan's ass in a 4 year war, destroying their navy, owning the air over Japan and nuking two cities would have made more of an impression than the Russians announcing they were at war.
I mean I would have thought that the US kicking Japan's ass in a 4 year war, destroying their navy, owning the air over Japan and nuking two cities would have made more of an impression than the Russians announcing they were at war. It was in all the newspapers for like four years.yep. All that was true BEFORE the bombs were dropped. LOL
Huh?I mean I would have thought that the US kicking Japan's ass in a 4 year war, destroying their navy, owning the air over Japan and nuking two cities would have made more of an impression than the Russians announcing they were at war. It was in all the newspapers for like four years.
There is little point in attempting precisely to impute Japan's unconditional surrender to any one of the numerous causes which jointly and cumulatively were responsible for Japan's disaster. The time lapse between military impotence and political acceptance of the inevitable might have been shorter had the political structure of Japan permitted a more rapid and decisive determination of national policies. Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.
Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.[90][91]
Come to think of it I know who would have thought that the US kicking Japan's ass in a 4 year war, destroying their navy, owning the air over Japan and nuking two cities wouldn't have made more of an impression than the Russians announcing they were at war.... the Russians.Huh?
The 1946 United States Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan, whose members included Paul Nitze,[89] concluded the atomic bombs had been unnecessary to win the war. They said:
Come to think of it I know who would have thought that the US kicking Japan's ass in a 4 year war, destroying their navy, owning the air over Japan and nuking two cities wouldn't have made more of an impression than the Russians announcing they were at war.... the Russians.
In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so 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.[98]
Path not taken. Truman made the right call. It was the time to end it. Glad he did.Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote in his memoir The White House Years:
Other U.S. military officers who disagreed with the necessity of the bombings include General of the Army Douglas MacArthur,[99][100] Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the President), Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials), Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz (Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet), Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr. (Commander of the US Third Fleet), and even the man in charge of all strategic air operations against the Japanese home islands, then-Major General Curtis LeMay:Path not taken. Truman made the right call. It was the time to end it. Glad he did.
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, [91]
Good thing it wasn't their call. But aren't you the dude that believed that after 4 years of war with US and the US destroying the Japanese navy, controlling the seas around Japan with their navy and controlling the air over Japan with their carriers and dropping not one nuke but two nukes which completely destroyed two cities, Japan surrendered unconditionally because Russia joined the war?Other U.S. military officers who disagreed with the necessity of the bombings include General of the Army Douglas MacArthur,[99][100] Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the President), Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials), Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz (Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet), Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr. (Commander of the US Third Fleet), and even the man in charge of all strategic air operations against the Japanese home islands, then-Major General Curtis LeMay:
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.Good thing it wasn't their call. But aren't you the dude that believed that after 4 years of war with US and the US destroying the Japanese navy, controlling the seas around Japan with their navy and controlling the air over Japan with their carriers and dropping not one nuke but two nukes which completely destroyed two cities, Japan surrendered unconditionally because Russia joined the war?
History says otherwise.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, [101]
The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.History says otherwise.
History says otherwise. It brought Japan to her knees. That is unquestionable.The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.
— Major General Curtis LeMay, XXI Bomber Command, September 1945, [102]
The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment ... It was a mistake to ever drop it ... [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it.History says otherwise. It brought Japan to her knees. That is unquestionable.
We know it was the nukes that was the straw that broke the camel's back because Japan surrender to the United States of America and not Russia.The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment ... It was a mistake to ever drop it ... [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it.
— Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr., 1946, [103]
Hasegawa's view is, when the Soviet Union declared war on 8 August,[109] it crushed all hope in Japan's leading circles that the Soviets could be kept out of the war and also that reinforcements from Asia to the Japanese islands would be possible for the expected invasion.[110] Hasegawa wrote:We know it was the nukes that was the straw that broke the camel's back because Japan surrender to the United States of America and not Russia.
On the basis of available evidence, however, it is clear that the two atomic bombs ... alone were not decisive in inducing Japan to surrender. Despite their destructive power, the atomic bombs were not sufficient to change the direction of Japanese diplomacy. The Soviet invasion was. Without the Soviet entry in the war, the Japanese would have continued to fight until numerous atomic bombs, a successful allied invasion of the home islands, or continued aerial bombardments, combined with a naval blockade, rendered them incapable of doing so.[105]
Soviet invasion or no, the US had already defeated Japan. Pretty sure we had been telling those fuckers to get into the game much earlier and they waited until we did all the heavy lifting and you want to give them the credit?
Ward Wilson wrote that "after Nagasaki was bombed only four major cities remained which could readily have been hit with atomic weapons", and that the Japanese Supreme Council did not bother to convene after the atomic bombings because they were barely more destructive than previous bombings. He wrote that instead, the Soviet declaration of war and invasion of Manchuria and South Sakhalin removed Japan's last diplomatic and military options for negotiating a conditional surrender, and this is what prompted Japan's surrender. He wrote that attributing Japan's surrender to a "miracle weapon", instead of the start of the Soviet invasion, saved face for Japan and enhanced the United States' world standing.[111]Soviet invasion or no, the US had already defeated Japan. Pretty sure we had been telling those fuckers to get into the game much earlier and they waited until we did all the heavy lifting and you want to give them the credit?
Good thing they surrendered after two.Ward Wilson wrote that "after Nagasaki was bombed only four major cities remained which could readily have been hit with atomic weapons", and that the Japanese Supreme Council did not bother to convene after the atomic bombings because they were barely more destructive than previous bombings. He wrote that instead, the Soviet declaration of war and invasion of Manchuria and South Sakhalin removed Japan's last diplomatic and military options for negotiating a conditional surrender, and this is what prompted Japan's surrender. He wrote that attributing Japan's surrender to a "miracle weapon", instead of the start of the Soviet invasion, saved face for Japan and enhanced the United States' world standing.[111]
