Knowing Japanese history and culture, they would never surrender if it wasn't for the emperor. Why you think when they firebombed tokyo the US made sure the palace wasn't a target?Dilbert_X wrote:
The Japanese surrendered after a long period of aerial bombing, simple enough.
Tony Benn, British MP at the time.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
source.Dilbert_X wrote:
People make a big deal about it because it was a totally unnecessary slaughter when the war was essentially as good as over.
American Generals and Japanese Prime Minister.On his journey through 20th century history, Benn next talked about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “The interesting thing about the Cold War is that it began before the end of the last war. The atomic bombs dropped in Japan were the first blow in the Cold War. I went to Hiroshima and they took me around. They pointed out a mark on the curb. I asked why they pointed it out, and they said a child had been sitting there when the bomb literally vaporized them, there was a metal lunchbox next to it; it vaporized the child, but couldn’t destroy the lunchbox.
“When I went to Japan, I came to understand that the Japanese had offered to surrender before the bombs were dropped.”
American Admirals too.Even before the Hiroshima attack, American air force General Curtis LeMay boasted that American bombers were "driving them [Japanese] back to the stone age." Henry H. ("Hap") Arnold, commanding General of the Army air forces, declared in his 1949 memoirs: "It always appeared to us, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse." This was confirmed by former Japanese prime minister Fumimaro Konoye, who said: "Fundamentally, the thing that brought about the determination to make peace was the prolonged bombing by the B-29s."
Is that enough sources?Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, reflected this reality when he wrote, "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." Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman, said the same thing: "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."
That's the quote from Hirohito, a quote from before the bomb was dropped on Nagasaki.As surprising as the move was, Hirohito seemed prepared to make it. He reportedly had already decided to surrender before the dropping of the Nagasaki bomb and said the terms of the Potsdam Declaration should be accepted, saying “that continuing the war means destruction of the nation and a prolongation of bloodshed and cruelty in the world. The time has come when we must bear the unbearable. I swallow my tears and give my sanction to the proposal to accept the Allied proclamation."
Need more sources?On the contrary, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey reported, "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." The November 1 date is important because that was the date of the earliest possible planned U.S. invasion of the Japanese main islands.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-12-06 06:24:16)
No ground was needed to have Japan surrender. 2 bombs were.JohnG@lt wrote:
Can the air force take and hold ground? The Gulf War proved that it takes more than a dominant display of air power to force an enemy to capitulate. Hap Arnold, Billy Mitchell and Curtis LeMay all thought that with the advent of aviation, all other military branches were obsolete. They also felt that the true role that the air force should play was in long range high altitude bombing. Close air support and interdiction was beneath them. They pushed their doctrine after the war quite hard which is why we ended up with such a gigantic strategic bombing force (B-52s and the like) which proved to be almost useless in the conventional war of Vietnam.lowing wrote:
Gotta tell ya, I believe air power did win the war. Air Power alone saved England, and air power alone stopped the invasion of Japan.JohnG@lt wrote:
He quoted the same people that believed that air power alone won the war, military politicians, and the commanding general in Europe who hadn't fought the Japanese himself
Air power alone, stopped the German war machine from producing oil and equipment. Air power allowed ground forces to advance and hold. Japan and Germany lost air supremacy then the war.
Those three are among the most arrogant that have ever walked the face of the earth, with egos to match. Of course they thought that Japan would surrender to air power alone!
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-12-06 10:12:52)
Yeah, because between the two of you there still aren't any quotes from the person making the decision.Bertster7 wrote:
Need more sources?
What are you talking about?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Yeah, because between the two of you there still aren't any quotes from the person making the decision.Bertster7 wrote:
Need more sources?
He's talking about Truman.Bertster7 wrote:
What are you talking about?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Yeah, because between the two of you there still aren't any quotes from the person making the decision.Bertster7 wrote:
Need more sources?
Hirohito was the one making the decision - I gave a quote from him. Maybe you should try reading the quotes instead of living in a bubble?
Truman wasn't the one making the decision to surrender. His decision is not the relevant one.JohnG@lt wrote:
He's talking about Truman.Bertster7 wrote:
What are you talking about?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Yeah, because between the two of you there still aren't any quotes from the person making the decision.
Hirohito was the one making the decision - I gave a quote from him. Maybe you should try reading the quotes instead of living in a bubble?
Responding to this - the Japanese had made the decision to surrender after the first bomb (as shown by that quote from Hirohito) and the quotes from all the US generals and admirals show the US was aware of it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Hey Dil, could you dig up something explaining to me how close the Japanese were to surrender and/or how the U.S. was aware of it?
Bertster7 wrote:
Truman wasn't the one making the decision to surrender. His decision is not the relevant one.
Hirohito had stated on the record that the Japanese were going to surrender after the first bomb - therefore the second was not needed.
Truman has nothing to do with whether the decision was the right one.
That is all Truman.OP wrote:
Should the US have dropped the bombs on Japan?
I would be shocked if the man didn't have anything to say about it. Not that those quotes would be on any of the sites you're looking at.Berster7 wrote:
Responding to this - the Japanese had made the decision to surrender after the first bomb (as shown by that quote from Hirohito) and the quotes from all the US generals and admirals show the US was aware of it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Hey Dil, could you dig up something explaining to me how close the Japanese were to surrender and/or how the U.S. was aware of it?
You expect a quote from Truman, essentially incriminating himself? Are you mad?
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Truman wasn't the one making the decision to surrender. His decision is not the relevant one.
Hirohito had stated on the record that the Japanese were going to surrender after the first bomb - therefore the second was not needed.
Truman has nothing to do with whether the decision was the right one.That is all Truman.OP wrote:
Should the US have dropped the bombs on Japan?
If Truman didn't know that the Japanese were going to surrender because of all their cultural bullshit about giving up then what they were going to do or not is irrelevant. You can only act on the information you have. Saying you are kind of maybe going to surrender with x terms to your advisers is not the same thing as raising the white flag.I would be shocked if the man didn't have anything to say about it. Not that those quotes would be on any of the sites you're looking at.Berster7 wrote:
Responding to this - the Japanese had made the decision to surrender after the first bomb (as shown by that quote from Hirohito) and the quotes from all the US generals and admirals show the US was aware of it.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Hey Dil, could you dig up something explaining to me how close the Japanese were to surrender and/or how the U.S. was aware of it?
You expect a quote from Truman, essentially incriminating himself? Are you mad?
Just ignoring the facts seems to come quite naturally to you, doesn't it?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We gave them an opportunity to surrender, and they didn't. Then we dropped a bomb. Then we gave them another opportunity, and we intercepted a message saying they might surrender. That is bullshit.
I know, suggesting that someone is using military power humanely is absurd to you.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-12-06 13:52:04)
Nuking someone during surrender negotiations is criminal TBH.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If Truman didn't know that the Japanese were going to surrender because of all their cultural bullshit about giving up then what they were going to do or not is irrelevant. You can only act on the information you have. Saying you are kind of maybe going to surrender with x terms to your advisers is not the same thing as raising the white flag.
The information available at the time is what matters.Yeah, because between the two of you there still aren't any quotes from the person making the decision.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-12-06 16:43:15)
Govt moves slowly, they were already in negotiation, the US govt had already concluded the Japanese were ready to surrender on terms acceptable to the US, what else do you want?narupug wrote:
Dilbert, the Japanese government could have come to the US and said "We are willing to surrender just give use time to do it, dont drop another bomb" Never did they do that.
Rubbish the effects were well known, just not the detail - many people think it was an experiment to study exactly that.Also the full effects of radiation were not fully understood yet, the Americans had no clue that people would be so greatly affected years down the road by the doses of radiation recieved from the fallout.
The US govt concluded they would have surrendered anyway, its not just the Japanese saying it.May I also point out that of course the Japanese are gonna say they would have surrendered anyway after it's already happened.
But they totally just stood in the area where the bomb went off like 10 minutes before. Like absolute ground zero.Dilbert_X wrote:
Except they didn't drink water from puddles there or eat food grown in the bombed area.
Which is fine.Macbeth wrote:
But they totally just stood in the area where the bomb went off like 10 minutes before. Like absolute ground zero.Dilbert_X wrote:
Except they didn't drink water from puddles there or eat food grown in the bombed area.
facepalm...Dilbert_X wrote:
Which is fine.Macbeth wrote:
But they totally just stood in the area where the bomb went off like 10 minutes before. Like absolute ground zero.Dilbert_X wrote:
Except they didn't drink water from puddles there or eat food grown in the bombed area.
They didn't eat any food or drink any water, and were sufficiently far away from the actual blast not to be affected by the radiation from the bomb itself - they knew enough about the bomb, radiation and fallout to do this
Source please.Yes, the Japanese were sending peace feelers, but they were more along the lines of "we might want to talk" rather than "Let's get together to discuss our surrender."
UNCONDITIONAL surrender was our demand. They were not acting toward our stated goal.
You have a very messed up sense of burden of proof. You need to show us the source where they were openly looking to talk about unconditional surrender.Dilbert_X wrote:
Source please.Yes, the Japanese were sending peace feelers, but they were more along the lines of "we might want to talk" rather than "Let's get together to discuss our surrender."
UNCONDITIONAL surrender was our demand. They were not acting toward our stated goal.
Right in the first page of the one you linked the general compares the situation to Normandy.Dilbert_X wrote:
Nuking someone during surrender negotiations is criminal TBH.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If Truman didn't know that the Japanese were going to surrender because of all their cultural bullshit about giving up then what they were going to do or not is irrelevant. You can only act on the information you have. Saying you are kind of maybe going to surrender with x terms to your advisers is not the same thing as raising the white flag.The information available at the time is what matters.Yeah, because between the two of you there still aren't any quotes from the person making the decision.
Still, its all here.
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlesto … /index.php
Picking one at random
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlesto … f#zoom=100
Seems obvious:
Within months the Japanese industry and military would be totally destroyed.
They knew the Japanese were ready to surrender, they just weren't prepared to do so unconditionally.
Laying siege to Japan for a year or more was on the table.
Invading Japan would be more straightforward than many of the Pacific islands.
At that time Truman was in favour of invading Japan.
Last edited by Karbin (2009-12-06 19:40:48)
