The U.S dropped the bombs on two cities of Japan because of a wrong translation.




 
--
 
June 21st, 2006  
bullpup12
 

Topic: The U.S dropped the bombs on two cities of Japan because of a wrong translation.


The Potsdam Declaration (1945) pressed an unconditional submission to Japan but Japan did not surrender to the allied forces. After Japan ignored the offer, the U.S military and political chiefs had decided to use their new super-weapon to bring the war to a speedy end. Following the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Naggasaki, Japen surrendered, marking the end of the war on September 2, 1945.

The U.S dropped the bombs on two cities of Japan was because of a wrong translation. On 28 September 1945, the Japanese Premier said by a news conference that the Ministry would follow the ‘mokusastu policy’. The word ‘mokusastu’ has two meanings. One meaning is ‘ignore’, another meaning is ‘no comment’. At that time the Japanese government was hoping for a nonaggression pact the Soviet Union and the Japanese emperor Hirohito wanted the ministry which was the administrative organization to accept the Potsdam Declaration’s demand.
The premier meant ‘the government gives no comment’ also that meant ‘the government thick about the surrender’ but even all the Japanese media naturally explained it as ‘ignore’ and Japanese Union reporter also translated the word to ‘ignore’ on the English news paper. No one thought the word’s original meaning was ‘no comment’.

However the wrong translation might not be reliable then are the other reasons of why did the US drop on Japan were Japan lost the Battle of the Midway (June, 1942) but continued resisting. Japanese Gamigajae (新風) suicide squads resisted the combined-force. The U.S continuously won but losses were high. The US expected that if the war was continued by Japan, the US would lose more than a million people including the home island.
The Soviet Union entered the War against Japan. After Germany's surrender, tension mounted between the U.S. and the Soviet Union regarding (about) the disposition of postwar Europe. The U.S. began worrying about the increased-influence, the Soviets would obtain if they joined the war against. Japan and most Europe would be became communism by the Soviet Union. If that happened U.S economic development would be difficult/difficulty.

The wrong translation helped the US dropped the bomb on Japan. Japan continued losing after the Battle of the Midway (June, 1942) but they made the suicide commandos and resisted the combined-force. If the war continued, the US would lose more then 1million people. The U.S had two atomic bombs to finish experiments; they needed to experiment the valuation of the explosive power. The US had to keep the Soviet Union from acting against them because if The Soviets joined the war against and then the war would end, Japan and most Europe to become communisms. If that happened the U.S economic development would be difficult.

Source -(http://w2.hidemyass.com/index.php?q=...hl=1111101001)
Source Surprise the history of the world with pictures and photos 100. (풍부한사진과그림으로보는서프라이즈세계사 100) – Rick Beyer
(http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/vir...A2_2/2201.htm)
June 21st, 2006  
KC72
 
 
Irrelevant, if the Japanese wanted to surreder they could of articulated that fact easily enough.
June 21st, 2006  
tomtom22
 
 
A simple yes or no answer would have been sufficient.
--
June 21st, 2006  
LeEnfield
 
 
Don't some people just the conspiracy theories
June 21st, 2006  
redcoat
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullpup12
The U.S dropped the bombs on two cities of Japan was because of a wrong translation. On 28 September 1945, the Japanese Premier said by a news conference that the Ministry would follow the ‘mokusastu policy’. The word ‘mokusastu’ has two meanings. One meaning is ‘ignore’, another meaning is ‘no comment’. At that time the Japanese government was hoping for a nonaggression pact the Soviet Union and the Japanese emperor Hirohito wanted the ministry which was the administrative organization to accept the Potsdam Declaration’s demand.
The premier meant ‘the government gives no comment’ also that meant ‘the government thick about the surrender’ but even all the Japanese media naturally explained it as ‘ignore’ and Japanese Union reporter also translated the word to ‘ignore’ on the English news paper. No one thought the word’s original meaning was ‘no comment’.


Even if the Japanese PM did mean that his government was 'thinking' about surrender, it is still not a requst to surrender.
No nation would alter its military stratagy just because its enemy was only 'thinking ' about surrendering. In fact it would encourage them to continue their war efforts in order to push them into surrendering

Quote:
between the U.S. and the Soviet Union regarding (about) the disposition of postwar Europe. The U.S. began worrying about the increased-influence, the Soviets would obtain if they joined the war against. Japan and most Europe would be became communism by the Soviet Union. If that happened U.S economic development would be difficult/difficulty.

Not true,
The USA did everything it its power to get the Soviets to attack Japan, as they believed it would help force Japan into surrender
June 22nd, 2006  
godofthunder9010
 
 
There are several ways of translating the very very very old word that the Japanese used in this instance. If memory serves, they are 1.) We consider your proposal so ridiculous, we refuse to dignify it with a response. 2.) We're going to sit here quietly and wait for a better offer. 3.) We're thinking about it.

The mistake was not the American's mistake. The Japanese were playing games with us. They threw out a word game puzzle in hopes that it would buy them time. If they had any intention of surrendering, they could have just said so. They couldn't be bothered to do something so simple.

And about their hanging on for a non-aggression treaty with the USSR ... what has that got to do with it?? The very last thing that the USA was going to allow was the Soviet Union to become the primary occupier of the Islands of Japan after we were the ones to beat them. The USSR had conveniently left them alone entirely, but at the very end, they were happy to consider some land grabbing. But despite all that, the Americans felt they had no choice but to have the Soviets "in on it" since invading Japan was looking to be a very ugly thing indeed. The USSR dragged their feet, then rather suddenly jumped in. In the end, I don't think the outcome was so terrible. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think that the Japanese would have much cared for the same stupid Communist Japan/non-Communist Japan crap that Korea still endures today.
June 22nd, 2006  
Dean
 
 
The Japanese war cabinet, (in effect, the government) intentionally ignored the surrender demands sent by the Allies. Yes, they were indeed hoping to make contact through the Russians, but in the end, the surrender demands that had been made were not acceptable to the Japanese. The feelers that they were sending to the Americans were totally unacceptable to the Allies, and the Allied High Command knew it. They were asking for, among other things:

- officers keep their swords and sidearms
- no US troops on the Japanese home islands
- the post war government supervised by the US, but put in place by the Japanese
- the emperor keeps his status and could not be tried for war crimes.

The last one was the stickler. The Americans, who did not understand the Japanese government, were convinced that the emperor was responisble for the war. He was not, but the Japanese did not even want him tried. As it was, he was (if memory serves) investigated and quickly cleared, and that was a great relief to the Japanese. But in the end, the so-called mis-translation was totally irrelevant, and the Allies had sent a surrender demand with a deadline, and the Japanese intentionally missed it. As a result, the bombs were dropped.

Dean.
June 28th, 2006  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean
...
- the emperor keeps his status and could not be tried for war crimes.

The last one was the stickler. The Americans, who did not understand the Japanese government, were convinced that the emperor was responisble for the war. He was not, but the Japanese did not even want him tried. As it was, he was (if memory serves) investigated and quickly cleared, and that was a great relief to the Japanese. ...

Dean.
To say that the Emperor was completely without guilt for war crimes and for starting the war to begin with ... this is a difficult case to make. Technically, his consent and unspoken support was a requirement. Having said that, it should be understood that the Emperor wasn't likely to have been given a choice. Much like the King/Queen of England, he was a monarch with very little real power.

There is substantial historical evidence that would appear to link Emperor Hirohito to the Comfort Women attrocities (some sources show that he signed off on this proposed policy of forced sexual slavery.) His consent can also be demonstrated for several other warcrimes. Naturally, since Japan doesn't acknowledge that they ever committed any warcrimes, this becomes a murky matter. The primary reason that the Emperor WAS cleared was for the benefit of the Japanese people ... because the Allies knew that they'd go balistic if the Emperor HAD been convicted of warcrimes.
June 29th, 2006  
WarMachine
 
 
Yeah, it's not like today where the emperor is a respected figurehead, back then he was literally seen as the descendent of a sun god, therefore he is a god. I keep reading that the japanese kept trying to surrender during the summer but the 1 term the US never liked was that the emeperor had to keep his divinity. I guess that would make him exempt from any trial. Still, if they were going to give him a walk in walk out trial with no convictions, then what was the point of that surrender stipulation being such a big deal?
June 29th, 2006  
godofthunder9010
 
 
I'd have to suppose that the United States and Britain were essentially saying the same thing as Ulyssus S Grant in the American Civil War: 'Surrender and surrender unconditionally.' It seems unlikely that the United States ever fully intended on pursuing the jailing and/or execution of Hirohito. One of the main things that Japan really disliked that the USA was completely unwilling to budge on: Complete disarmament of the Japanese military.

I still fall back to my earlier statement. Whether or not history "went the right way" the end result was far better than the alternative. A divided Japan is what we'd have today minus the Atomic Bomb. Who knows, maybe the Japanese people would have managed to reunite by now. Then again, maybe a foothold in Japan would have offered enough moral strength to the cause of Communism that the Cold War would still be going on today. Who knows? What the Japanese people truly do not appreciate is how history would have played out if the US had not dropped the A-bomb.
 


Similar Topics
Was Lee Whi-So killed by the U.S Government?
The US roll in central & south America.
U.S. Pushing Japan to Boost Military Role
Shaking hands with Sadam Hussein
Several Killed as U.S. Bombs Wrong Target in Iraq (Reuters)