Hiroshima & Nagasaki - On the 65th Anniversary of Nagasaki

[bush_cheney2004]

....You also fail to mention the political situation facing Truman: you had these VERY expensive bombs that could have saved my son's life?? Not using them would have been total political death. As we know...it was his decision...not MacArthur's...not Hoover's...not yours.

Agreed...events had unfolded to that point leaving invasion options that had been in development from as early as Quebec in 1943, when a Commonwealth Force was planned as part of the invasion, as well as the Manhattan Project which was actually driven by the potential threat from Germany, not Japan. Neither could spend the $2 billion to develop redundant paths to enrichment of fissile material.

So after Trinity, Truman had a proven, repeatable plutonium ace up his sleeve, but it wasn't very valuable as a newsreel film or demonstration that did nothing but light up the New Mexico desert. And he was right....there was no immediate surrender after Hiroshima (with the previously untested Little Boy gun design).

[DogOnPorch]

Agreed...events had unfolded to that point leaving invasion options that had been in development from as early as Quebec in 1943, when a Commonwealth Force was planned as part of the invasion, as well as the Manhattan Project which was actually driven by the potential threat from Germany, not Japan. Neither could spend the $2 billion to develop redundant paths to enrichment of fissile material.

So after Trinity, Truman had a proven, repeatable plutonium ace up his sleeve, but it wasn't very valuable as a newsreel film or demonstration that did nothing but light up the New Mexico desert. And he was right....there was no immediate surrender after Hiroshima (with the previously untested Little Boy gun design).

A-Bomb demonstration supporters often fail to bring-up that actually dropping one on Japan didn't do it...not even two when it came to the real fanatics. As I've mentioned, elements of the Japanese military fought on even after Nagasaki. Heck...Japanese soldiers left behind on jungle islands often wouldn't surrender until told to stand down by their former IJN/IJA officers...and even then soldiers were being found still resisting the Allies well into the 1970s.

[bush_cheney2004]

..... As I've mentioned, elements of the Japanese military fought on even after Nagasaki. Heck...Japanese soldiers left behind on jungle islands often wouldn't surrender until told to stand down by their former IJN/IJA officers...and even then soldiers were being found still resisting the Allies well into the 1970s.

Yep....just like this guy...29 years in the jungle:

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/a-japanese-soldier-who-continued-fighting-wwii-29-years-after-the-japanese-surrendered-because-he-didnt-know/

[August1991]

A-Bomb demonstration supporters often fail to bring-up that actually dropping one on Japan didn't do it...

The first one in Hiroshima did the job. A day later, everyone in Japan knew something had happened.

So, why Nagasaki?

Why did Truman approve Nagasaki? I can understand why Truman would pre-approve both bombings since no one knew if the bombs would work. But when the Hiroshima bomb was an obvious success and had killed in an instant a hundred thousand civilian people or so, why did Truman approve the A-bomb on Nagasaki? Truman could have stopped the second A-Bomb.

Stalin said that one death is a tragedy, 10,000 deaths is a statistic.

By bombing Nagasaki, Truman showed that America is even tougher.

Edited August 11, 2010 by August1991

[DogOnPorch]

Saburo Sakai participated in the IJNAF's last wartime mission, attacking two reconnaissance B-32 Dominators, Hobo Queen II s/n 42-108532, and unnamed 42-108578, on 18 August 1945, which were conducting photo-reconnaissance and testing Japanese compliance with the cease-fire. He initially misidentified the planes as a B-29 Superfortresses. Both aircraft returned to their base at Yontan Airfield, Okinawa.

http://www.newspapercutting.com/

The IJA has similar tales.

So why Nagasaki?

Edited August 11, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[DogOnPorch]

...why did Truman approve the A-bomb on Nagasaki? Truman could have stopped the second A-Bomb.

Fat Man was a Plutonium bomb...different from Little Boy (Uranium shot-plug). Plus they Allies wanted BDA for the type of terrain Nagasaki (initially another similar target) was situated on.

[bloodyminded]

Thats all from my armchair, as if you are pronouncing from somewhere on high!

Too true!

"Those who disagree with me are 'armchair generals.' Me...I'm just an objective reporter of incontestable facts."

[DogOnPorch]

Peter F.: The Allies were quite willing to carry out some of the most disgusting atrocities of the war over and over and over again. And somehow this is considered Humane. A lesser Evil.

Bunk.

Says Peter from the deck of his landing craft as it is about to hit the beach.

[bloodyminded]

Oddly missing from your choice of quotes is anything in support of the American choice re the A-Bombs.

Oh Sweet Godzilla on His Throne!

DoP, where are your posted quotes about opposition to the American choice re the A-bombs?

Because that's exactly what you're demanding of others: far higher, and totally different, standards than you demand of yourself.

[August1991]

As a Canadian, walking around the Gettysburg monument in Pennsylvania, and reciting in my mind Lincoln's address, I understood that Americans are full and free individuals. Europeans have too many Killing Fields, but no one like Lincoln or Washington or Jefferson, and nothing like the Gettysburg address.

Abroad, I have walked through too many war zones, usually after the fact. Gettysburg started a 19th century tradition to commemorate the exact place of a battle. Europe's World War I placed the dead where they died.

Thank God for civilized Americans who honour their citizen soldiers.

Europeans are a violent, uncivilized people. In a single century, they methodically killed millions in Polish death camps or slaughtered millions in battles near Belgian towns.

Based on history - America is civilized peace; Europe is uncivilized war.

-----

I simply do not understand Leftists who view Europe as progressive. I don't.

Edited August 11, 2010 by August1991

[DogOnPorch]

As a Canadian, walking around the Gettysburg monument in Pennsylvania, and reciting in my mind Lincoln's address, I understood that Americans are full and free individuals. Europeans have too many Killing Fields, but no one like Lincoln or Washington or Jefferson, and nothing like the Gettysburg address.

Abroad, I have walked through too many war zones, usually after the fact. Gettysburg started a 19th century tradition to commemorate the exact place of a battle. Europe's World War I placed the dead where they died.

Thank God for civilized Americans who honour their citzen soldiers.

We're in agreement. The US Civil War was both a high point and a low point in US history. Face it, August. We'd both be tipping our wine glasses at the news that Japan had finally surendered. One bomb...two bomb...three bomb...four.

[DogOnPorch]

Oh Sweet Godzilla on His Throne!

DoP, where are your posted quotes about opposition to the American choice re the A-bombs?

Because that's exactly what you're demanding of others: far higher, and totally different, standards than you demand of yourself.

As mentioned to another obtuse poster, we're talking about the events of WW2...not one of your pet modern conflicts.

[bloodyminded]

As mentioned to another obtuse poster, we're talking about the events of WW2...not one of your pet modern conflicts.

You didn't comprehend the basic English in my post, so I'll give you another try. Re-read my post.

[DogOnPorch]

DoP, where are your posted quotes about opposition to the American choice re the A-bombs?

One of my favorites.

[DogOnPorch]

You didn't comprehend the basic English in my post, so I'll give you another try. Re-read my post.

Don't worry. I give you all the attention you deserve.

[bloodyminded]

Don't worry. I give you all the attention you deserve.

Even though you never quite understand any arguments that don't conform to your austere, reactionary view, you often respond to me. So evidently you believe I deserve quite a lot of attention.

[DogOnPorch]

Even though you never quite understand any arguments that don't conform to your austere, reactionary view, you often respond to me. So evidently you believe I deserve quite a lot of attention.

More like you're a steamy lump of something that one should step over.

[ToadBrother]

After Hiroshima, why did Truman allow the second bomb drop on Nagasaki? It happened three days later - enough time for Truman to cancel the run. Yet, Truman approved the second bomb.

The record, I think, is pretty clear, the Japanese government did not capitulate after Hiroshima. The Allies demanded unconditional surrender, and even after Hiroshima Hirohito's ministers still seemed to be believe there was license to negotiate.

[ToadBrother]

Based on history - America is civilized peace; Europe is uncivilized war.

I think the Mexicans and Spanish might have differing opinions. The Mexican-American War and the Spanish-American War were pretty clearly wars of conquest. While the ultimate territorial gains from the latter were pretty small, the Mexican-American War proved quite advantageous and gave the US a huge amount of territory.

Of course, the Mexicans seem to be taking it all over again, one of the more amusing ironies of North American history.

[dre]

The record, I think, is pretty clear, the Japanese government did not capitulate after Hiroshima. The Allies demanded unconditional surrender, and even after Hiroshima Hirohito's ministers still seemed to be believe there was license to negotiate.

The allies never GOT an unconditional surrender. Imperial Reign was allowed to stay in place. And imperial reign was the key Japanese demand.

So why not at least TRY putting that on the table before murdering hundreds of thousands of women and children? Since they gave it to them in the end ANYWAY?

Also... some historians believe that because of extensive damage to communications and transportation infrastructure the Japanese leadership still didnt have a clear picture of what the first bomb had done when the second one was dropped.

[DogOnPorch]

The allies never GOT an unconditional surrender. Imperial Reign was allowed to stay in place. And imperial reign was the key Japanese demand.

That was MacArthur's idea, I believe...to actually keep the Emperor. It would make occupation much easier...and he was the fellow that would end up with the job.

So why not at least TRY putting that on the table before murdering hundreds of thousands of women and children? Since they gave it to them in the end ANYWAY?

Because MacArthur didn't call the shots from the top...just in his area of the war. In the end, though, it made sense.

Also... some historians believe that because of extensive damage to communications and transportation infrastructure the Japanese leadership still didnt have a clear picture of what the first bomb had done when the second one was dropped.

How could anyone know much about atomic weapons in August 1945? They only had Trinity to go by. Even radiation effects were more of a mystery than something that was completely understood.

[DogOnPorch]

Excellent documentary on the Manhattan Project.

[bush_cheney2004]

The allies never GOT an unconditional surrender. Imperial Reign was allowed to stay in place. And imperial reign was the key Japanese demand.

The allies got exactly what was demanded....acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration.

So why not at least TRY putting that on the table before murdering hundreds of thousands of women and children? Since they gave it to them in the end ANYWAY?

Because they were not buying a used car. Many POWs were executed murdered after and because the surrender was announced.

Also... some historians believe that because of extensive damage to communications and transportation infrastructure the Japanese leadership still didnt have a clear picture of what the first bomb had done when the second one was dropped.

Some people have no facts to back this up.

[DogOnPorch]

The allies got exactly what was demanded....acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration.

At Potsdam, it was made clear in no uncertain terms what would happen if the Japanese did not surrender immediately. It involved bombs and airplanes 'of the likes never seen before'. Total destruction was promised...and delivered.

Because they were not buying a used car. Many POWs were executed murdered after and because the surrender was announced.

Ba Ba Black Sheep has an excellent account of the Japanese POW camps on the Main Islands. No doubt nasty Allied propaganda in dre's eyes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pappy_Boyington

Some people have no facts to back this up.

Well he can't even find a post in this thread where we all got History 101 wrong. But apparently we are...totally wrong.

Edited August 11, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[bush_cheney2004]

Ba Ba Black Sheep has an excellent account of the Japanese POW camps on the Main Islands. No doubt nasty Allied propaganda in dre's eyes.

This aspect of the war often gets ignored, but my first "mild" exposure to it was as a child in the dramatization Bridge Over the River Kwai. Some uncles who had served in the Pacific still had a deep hatred for anything Japanese, much more so than anything associated with Germany or Nazis. It was beyond "racial"...it was deep "biblical" hate.

There were terms still being used in the US Navy when I got there in the early 1970's that reflected this animosity. Marines would get glossy eyed.