Dropping atomic bomb was a right choice

June 21st, 2006  

Topic: Dropping atomic bomb was a right choice

During World war Two, On August 6 and 9, 1945, the US dropped two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. People were surprised about the injuries of the two cities but the decision was right.

If atomic bombs were not dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, victims of the Japanese army would have been increased. During the war Japan had a powerful army and captured Asia. The army tortured other countries’ armies, made cruel tests to “Maruta” who were Korean, Chinese or other countries’ victims, raped, pillaged, massacred an infinite number of other Asian peoples and committed lots of war crimes. For example, the Rape of Nanjing where the capital of China was during Sino-Japanese war, the Japanese army occupied the capital and in 6 weeks killed around 250,000 to 400,000 Chinese. The victims were more than two atomic bombs’ dead people.

The Japan government was not capitulating to the Allies even after Hiroshima was attacked by an atomic bomb. If they still wanted to fight and had not dropped atomic bombs, there would have been more dead or injured peoples and damages because the Soviet Union also wanted to participate in the battle. Japan would be socialist, poor and Korea also would not have independence.

A result of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world knew the danger of nuclear bombs. 140,000 people in Hiroshima directly died and after five years, another 60,000 people would die of effect of the bomb, in Nagasaki a total of 140,000 died within five years.

“The population of Hiroshima had reached a peak of over 380,000 earlier in the war but prior to the atomic bombing the population had steadily decreased because of a systematic evacuation ordered by the Japanese government. At the time of the attack the population was approximately 255,000. This figure is based on the registered population, used by the Japanese in computing ration quantities, and the estimates of additional workers and troops who were brought into the city may be highly accurate.”

After the attack in Hiroshima’s trace:
Hiroshima was burnt to Ashes; the building was the former Hiroshima prefecture Industrial promotion Hall, Where special products of Hiroshima were exhibited and various gatherings were held until the A-bomb was dropped. Since it was located just under the center, blast pressure was vertically exerted on the building and only the dome-shaped framework and part of the outer wall remained. It has come to be called “the A-bomb dome””

The population of Nagasaki:
“Another report issues a different residential number, speaking of Nagasaki’s population which dropped in one split-second from 422,000 to 383,000 thus 39,000 were killed and over 25,000 were injured.”

After the attack on Nagasaki’s trace:
“‘A Japanese report on the bombing characterized Nagasaki as “like a graveyard with not tombstone standing.””

Now some Japanese have not admitted their fault and have taught students like they were victims of World War Two, But they started the war, killed around 5,000,000 Korean and Chinese, did merciless war crimes and they closed their eyes to the real situation and wanted to fight. The US, dropped the atomic bombs on Japanese cities, it was the right decision for Japanese citizens and other nations.

1. http://www.answers.com/topic/atomic-bombings-of Hiroshima-and-nagasaki?methoud=22
2. http://www.gensuikins.org/english/photo.html
3. http://www.world-war-2.info/atomic-bomb/
June 21st, 2006  
i honestly belive we did the right thing instead of invading as they originally planned and if they didnt surrender tokyo should have been next
June 21st, 2006  
its impossible to get a real answer to this kind of "what if" speculations...
June 22nd, 2006  
Chief Bones

Originally Posted by Ace
its impossible to get a real answer to this kind of "what if" speculations...
Ace - you AGAIN seem to ignore historical sources and documents of the time. The 'best' estimates put the possible number of allied troops that would be killed during an invasion of mainland Japan at in excess of one million troops ... the number could have risen as high as 1.5 million. The usage of the bomb curtailed plans for an invasion and Japan capitulated.

What has been posted is NOT "what if" speculation, even Japanese sources tell a story of the entire population of Japan standing ready to meet our troops at the shoreline and fight to the death. Men, women and children were given training with spears and other weapons in preparation for an invasion. From the youngest to the oldest, the entire population was prepared to die for their 'God' Emporer.
June 23rd, 2006  
the what if would have been WHAT would have happened to all of those soldiers IF we sent them into japan

i cant say exactly but like senior chief im thinking up and possibly over 2 million, which by the way was almost the entire army back then
June 23rd, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
Why didn't the US use the nukes on large Japanese military installations instead of cities with no military value?
June 23rd, 2006  
Chief Bones

Originally Posted by Mohmar Deathstrike
Why didn't the US use the nukes on large Japanese military installations instead of cities with no military value?
The decision was to hit a small/medium city ... it they had hit a major industrialized city, the death toll would have been much much higher. A large death toll was NOT the main point that was being made ... the point that was being made was that one single bomb could completely destroy a city. That was the message that was being sent.
June 23rd, 2006  

There has been some speculation on how the Japanese would have defended the home Island.

I read Saburo Sakai's Book BANZAI! (The Japanese Zero ace, 63 kills). At the end of the war he was a test pilot for the IJN and was thus stationed on the Japanese homeland. In it he says that he didnt think the Japanese would have been able to mount a serious home defense. They were all starving, there was a critical shortage of military supplies (except aircraft, but no munitions or pilots) of every type and most of those left in Japan were either too young or too old. The cream of the Japanese military was gone and the entire Japanese infrastucture was rubble due to the B-29 raids.

Of course, I doubt Truman, or MacArthur knew this, and even if they did I am not sure they would have changed their minds...
June 23rd, 2006  
Chief Bones
Every piece of literature and every historical program dealing with the Japanese mindset prior to the dropping of the bomb all agree ... every Japanese citizen on the mainland was preparing to defend Japan BY ANY MEANS AVAILABLE... the military authorities were training the civilian population in the use of spears, knives, hand cycles, hand-to-hand and even pitchforks ... the plan was to meet any invader at the Japanese shoreline and die to the last person to deny them a foot hold. THEY WERE PREPARED TO DIE FOR THE EMPORER TO THE LAST PERSON.

They had organized to the point that every man, woman and child was organized into company sized groups and they drilled and trained as a company. The fact that supplies were in short supply had nothing to do with the will to fight any invader.

Without the use of the bomb (which broke their will), the butcher's bill that would have been the result of a conventional assault against mainland Japan would have been staggering. The estimates for allied losses was estimated between 1 and 1 1/2 million for the allied military and the loss estimates for Japanese civilians/military didn't even bear thinking about.

I realize that some of you don't like to dabble in what if scenarios ... however ... even those whose imaginations have trouble envisioning alternate historical endings can imagine what the result from an amphibious assault would have been. (1.5 allied casualties & a death toll for Japanese civilian/military that would rival the holocaust).

Even the worst sceptics have to agree, any alternative to an amphibious assault would have been welcomed by the combat planners at that time ... the dropping of one or two bombs was welcomed with open arms .
June 25th, 2006  
IMO there are 2 things to consider here:

1) That nuclear weapons at the time were not seen in the same light as they are today. Their potential was not fully realised and their political 'baggage' had not been applied. In any case, conventional firebombing of Tokyo caused casualties of the same magnitude.

2) Japanese society then (and even now) still had throwbacks to the Japanese feudal era, based primarily around the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA). The Daimyos (lords) had been replaced by the officer class and the Samurai were now the rank and file soldiers of the IJA. The civilian population (peasants) were not generally as fanatical towards the Emperor as the IJA was.

What does this mean? Well, the fact that 2 nuclear weapons were dropped on Japan did not carry the same negative overtones as using such devices would today. They were simply a weapon of war, not an instrument of doom. The Japanese population would have fiercely resisted but only to a point. Once the backbone of the IJA still stationed on the islands had been dealt with, the majority of the civilian population may have just melted away. However, none of this understanding was probably available to the US and even so, the risk was high. The decision to drop the nukes may be defendable but whether it would have saved 1 to 1.5 million US lives must now be highly debatable.

In fact, did the dropping of 'Little Boy' and 'Fat Man' even cause the Japanese surrender?

"[i]What did the U.S. military think? Here there is also dispute. We actually know very little about the views of the military at the time. However, after the war many–indeed, most–of the top World War II Generals and Admirals involved criticized the decision. One of the most famous was General Eisenhower, who repeatedly stated that he urged the bomb not be used: “it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.” The well-known “hawk,” General Curtis LeMay, publically declared that the war would have been over in two weeks, and that the atomic bomb had nothing to do with bringing about surrender. President Truman’s friend and Chief of Staff, five star Admiral William D. Leahy was deeply angered: The “use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. . . in being the first to use it, we . . . adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”


Similar Topics
This day in military history..
name two atomic bombers from the a bomb to now
Atomic bomb.
What If Iran Gets the Bomb? Good Analysis