Thread: Did the nukes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

Did the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

This Sunday marks the 72nd anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, followed three days later by the bombing of Nagasaki.

The bombings have long been justified as an ethical choice in decisively ending the Second World War — but it’s not entirely clear that they did

To their dying day, there were senior White House officials who believed the bombings were unnecessary

Surprisingly, there was no shortage of men in the president’s inner circle who objected to atomic bombs being used against Japan. The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff even called them “barbarous.” But one of the most poignant critics was John McCloy, the assistant Secretary of War. Early plans for the end of the war had demanded unconditional surrender for Japan, save for one concession: The country would be able to retain its emperor as a powerless figurehead. However, this was later struck from surrender terms presented to Japan before the bombing. As men like McCloy would learn after the U.S. had occupied Japan, the issue of emperor retention was indeed a key reason driving Japanese holdout. “I believe we missed the opportunity of effecting a Japanese surrender, completely satisfactory to us, without the necessity of dropping the bombs,” McCloy was quoted as saying in Deadline, a book published two years after his death.

The bombings coincided with one of the largest invasions in history
On Aug. 9, just three days after the bombing of Hiroshima, as many as 1.6 million Soviet troops launched a surprise attack on Japanese positions in Manchuria. For comparison, D-Day involved 150,000 troops. Across a 4,400-km front, the war-hardened Red Army utterly steamrolled through Japanese defences — and within two weeks Soviet landing craft had begun hitting islands off the Japanese coast. When Imperial Japan came to the United States to talk surrender, they weren’t just facing nuclear bombs, they were staring down an unstoppable communist juggernaut that was just as ambivalent about death as they were.

But by 1945, the U.S. military had gradually become numb to the task of wiping Japanese cities off the map. More than 60 Japanese cities were hit by firebombing attacks, including a massive March 1945 firebombing of Tokyo that easily outstripped Hiroshima or Nagasaki for death toll, destruction and general horror. “In that single night, we burned to death 100,000 Japanese civilians in Tokyo: men, women, and children,” said Robert McNamara in the 2003 film The Fog of War.

However, talk of peace had been buzzing around Tokyo for weeks until the bombings. American cryptographers reading Japanese military communications reported that as early as July 13 Hirohito seemed to have “personally intervened and brought his will to bear in favour of peace.”

Did the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war? | National Post

War and empire is a racket.
A very profitable one for the usual controllers.

CNN see it differently:

Why did the U.S. bomb Hiroshima?
May 27, 2016

President Barack Obama on Friday will become the first sitting American president to visit Hiroshima, the first city ever to be devastated by a nuclear weapon. Here's why the President's visit to the Peace Memorial Park is such a historic event.

The United States detonates the world's first atomic bomb at a test site in New Mexico on July 16, 1945. Less than a month later, atomic bombs were dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The devastation led to Japan's unconditional surrender and brought an end to World War II.

What was the result?
At least 70,000 people were killed in the initial blast, while approximately 70,000 more died from radiation exposure. "The five-year death total may have reached or even exceeded 200,000, as cancer and other long-term effects took hold," according to the Department of Energy's history of the Manhattan Project.
The U.S. dropped another bomb on Nagasaki, Japan, on August 9, 1945, killing up to 80,000 people. Japan unconditionally agreed to accept the terms of surrender on August 14.

What do the critics say?
The utter devastation caused by the bombing has led many to criticize the decision.
In his 1963 memoir, "Mandate for Change," former President Dwight D. Eisenhower criticized the use of the atomic bombs, saying they weren't necessary to force the surrender of Japan.

In 1958, the City Council of Hiroshima passed a resolution condemning Truman for refusing to express remorse for using atomic bombs and for continuing to advocate their use in an emergency situation. The resolution said the city's residents "consider it their sublime duty to be a cornerstone of world peace and no nation of the world should ever be permitted to repeat the error of using of nuclear weapons."
The resolution called the ex-president's stance a "gross defilement committed on the people of Hiroshima and their fallen victims."

Why did the U.S. bomb Hiroshima? - CNNPolitics

This according to SA should be in the American section, or at the very least in the Japanese department.

The emperor agreed to surrender to save his own arse.

Had he not ordered the surrender, the Nips would have fought to the last.

I believe there was even an attempted coup to try and stop him surrendering.


The yanks and the russkies should have carried on demolishing the place.

The worst part for me is how US demanding a public speech from the Emperor, regarding how the imperial dinasty has actually nothing to do with the locl gods, and demolish the local Japanese history and believes, which i believe it was a bit too much

Originally Posted by moonx

bit too much

Mess with the bull - get the horns.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Did the nukes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

No, because some Japs hiding in the jungle on remote pacific islands did not surrender until the 1970s or 1980s.

(although the ones hiding out on Bikini Atoll gave up a bit earlier)

Why Hirohito was not tried as war criminal like Hitlers people?

U.S. General Douglas MacArthur insisted that Emperor Hirohito retain the throne. MacArthur saw the Emperor as a symbol of the continuity and cohesion of the Japanese people. Some historians criticize the decision to exonerate the Emperor and all members of the imperial family who were implicated in the war, such as Prince Chichibu, Prince Asaka, Prince Higashikuni and Prince Hiroyasu Fushimi, from criminal prosecutions.


General MacArthur and the Emperor at Allied GHQ in Tokyo, September 17, 1945



The Empress, First Lady Betty Ford, the Emperor, and President Gerald Ford at the White House before a state dinner held in honor of the Japanese head of state for the first time. October 2, 1975.



Emperor Hirohito and U.S. President Ronald Reagan, Tokyo, November 9, 1983


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirohito

(The Russian leaders, allies of USA in WW2 - without them the WW2 would not be won - were not so honored in WH like the biggest enemy of USA - who killed so many US people - Surely a good feeling for the families)

(No one of the world leaders was missing at the Hirohito funeral in 1989)

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Did the nukes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

No, because some Japs hiding in the jungle on remote pacific islands did not surrender until the 1970s or 1980s.

The war in the Pacific formally ended when Shigemitzu and Umezu signed the articles of surrender on the 2nd of September 1945 and not at any later time.

Sorry b0b, that was a joke about the japs in the jungle...

I forgot the dancing bananaman

Here you go

Originally Posted by DrB0b

MacArthur was the best thing that had happened to the Japanese since the time of the Shogunate

But he was not the best things that had happened afterwards to the Koreans (both North and South). Why it was so, after they had suffered so much from Japanese?

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Did the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

This Sunday marks the 72nd anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, followed three days later by the bombing of Nagasaki.

The bombings have long been justified as an ethical choice in decisively ending the Second World War — but it’s not entirely clear that they did

To their dying day, there were senior White House officials who believed the bombings were unnecessary

Postdam Accord among lots of other evidence.

All of "speculation" 72 years later is more stupidity.

Yes, the bombings were the final factor. And also, back then (as in any time in the past) they had to look at the situation then.

JHC, this moronic topic never goes away.

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

Postdam Accord among lots of other evidence.

Three Power Conference of Berlin (formal title of the Potsdam Conference) from 17 July to 2 August 1945, they agreed to and adopted the Protocol of the Proceedings, August 1, 1945, signed at Cecilienhof Castle in Potsdam. The signatories were General Secretary Joseph Stalin, President Harry S. Truman, and Prime Minister Clement Attlee, who, as a result of the British general election of 1945, had replaced Winston Churchill as the UK’s representative. The Provisional Government of the French Republic agreed with reservations on August 4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Agreement

(No mentioning of Japan, the bomb thrown only on 5th Aug.)

All of "speculation" 72 years later is more stupidity.

The "speculations" were before the bombing.

Yes, the bombings were the final factor. And also, back then (as in any time in the past) they had to look at the situation then.

"the final factor"? Yes, the situation was: if not bombed, the Japanese surrounder would be held by Russians.

JHC, this moronic topic never goes away.

???

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Did the nukes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

No, because some Japs hiding in the jungle on remote pacific islands did not surrender until the 1970s or 1980s.

(although the ones hiding out on Bikini Atoll gave up a bit earlier)

Could well be that those guys had laid down their arms and were living normally among the local community and not wanting to go back to Japan and then claimed that they were "still on duty" after being discovered

Originally Posted by Fluke

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Did the nukes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki really end the war?

No, because some Japs hiding in the jungle on remote pacific islands did not surrender until the 1970s or 1980s.

(although the ones hiding out on Bikini Atoll gave up a bit earlier)

Could well be that those guys had laid down their arms and were living normally among the local community and not wanting to go back to Japan and then claimed that they were "still on duty" after being discovered

No Fluke, it is as Klondyke describes.

There was one who for 29 years thought the war was still on. They had to wheel his old CO out to convince him that it was over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroo_Onoda

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

Postdam Accord among lots of other evidence.

Three Power Conference of Berlin (formal title of the Potsdam Conference) from 17 July to 2 August 1945, they agreed to and adopted the Protocol of the Proceedings, August 1, 1945, signed at Cecilienhof Castle in Potsdam. The signatories were General Secretary Joseph Stalin, President Harry S. Truman, and Prime Minister Clement Attlee, who, as a result of the British general election of 1945, had replaced Winston Churchill as the UK’s representative. The Provisional Government of the French Republic agreed with reservations on August 4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Agreement

(No mentioning of Japan, the bomb thrown only on 5th Aug.)

My error (I'm getting old).

It was the Postdam Declaration

The Potsdam Declaration or the Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender is a statement that called for the surrender of all Japanese armed forces during World War II. On July 26, 1945, United States President Harry S. Truman, United Kingdom Prime Minister Clement Attlee, and Chairman of the Nationalist Government of China Chiang Kai-shek issued the document, which outlined the terms of surrender for the Empire of Japan as agreed upon at the Potsdam Conference. This ultimatum stated that, if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction".[1][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration

Joseph Stalin, Harry Truman, and Winston Churchill at the Potsdam Conference, July 1945 POTSDAM AND THE FINAL DECISION TO USE THE BOMB

https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhatt...m_decision.htm

Potsdam Declaration

Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender
Issued, at Potsdam, July 26, 1945

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/Hi.../Potsdam.shtml

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

My error (I'm getting old).

It was the Postdam Declaration

The Potsdam Declaration or the Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender is a statement that called for the surrender of all Japanese armed forces during World War II. On July 26, 1945, United States President Harry S. Truman, United Kingdom Prime Minister Clement Attlee, and Chairman of the Nationalist Government of China Chiang Kai-shek issued the document, which outlined the terms of surrender for the Empire of Japan as agreed upon at the Potsdam Conference. This ultimatum stated that, if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction".[1][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration

The Declaration was never transmitted to the Japanese government through diplomatic channels. Despite the fact that picking up enemy propaganda leaflets and listening to foreign radio broadcasts was illegal, the American propaganda efforts were successful in making the key points of the declaration known to most Japanese.

The terms of the declaration were hotly debated within the Japanese government. Upon receiving the declaration, Foreign Minister Shigenori Tōgō hurriedly met with Prime Minister Kantarō Suzuki and Cabinet Secretary Hisatsune Sakomizu. Sakomizu recalled that all felt the declaration must be accepted.

Tōgō felt it was vague concerning the eventual form of government for Japan, disarmament, and the fate of accused war criminals, and still had hope that the Soviet Union would agree to mediate negotiations with the Western Allies to obtain clarifications and revisions of the declaration's terms. Shortly afterwards, Tōgō met with Emperor Hirohito, and advised him to treat the declaration with the utmost circumspection, but that a reply should be postponed until the Soviet response to the Japanese request to mediate peace. Hirohito stated that the declaration was "acceptable in principle".

(hurry hurry tomorrow with the bomb, otherwise they will surrender)

^ Perhaps you are corret....perhaps not.

Either way.

Who gives a shit besides you?

(Rhetorical question.)


Next --->

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

Who gives a shit besides you?

Right, whilst there are so many exciting events in WH and nearby...

This again?

IMO the first was enough to end the war with Japan and the second was a war crime.

No-one can be proud of dropping such devastating weapons with the practical knowledge of their effect. Lord help us if they are ever used again...

^
it may be the best way of dealing with the DPRK before that becomes impossible.

Originally Posted by CaptainNemo

^
it may be the best way of dealing with the DPRK before that becomes impossible.

It's already impossible. Do you seriously think Russia or China would tolerate a unilateral strike?

Nukes are only a deterrent when the intended recipient has something to lose. If NK and Iran had/have the capability, they would welcome the incoming as justification for virtually random retaliation, one for political and the other to religious ends.

In this context, the bigger deterrent would be to the west, which stands to lose far more by engaging than by making the occasional protest whilst keeping up the payments.

Trump is making a noise, maybe out of frustration.

Nagasaki marks 72nd anniversary of atomic bombing

NAGASAKI (Kyodo) -- Nagasaki marked the 72nd anniversary Wednesday of the U.S. atomic bombing, with Mayor Tomihisa Taue set to demand at the city's annual memorial ceremony that the Japanese government join a recently adopted treaty banning nuclear weapons.

This year's ceremony at the city's Peace Park follows the adoption by 122 United Nations members of the first treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons. States possessing nuclear weapons, as well as Japan and other countries under the U.S. nuclear umbrella, did not participate.

Taue also plans to call on the state to show the world the philosophy of peace written in the Japanese Constitution, at a time that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's Liberal Democratic Party is seeking to formally propose an amendment to the foundational document.

The prime minister will also make a speech at the ceremony, expected to be attended by representatives of nearly 60 nations and the European Union.

All five recognized nuclear powers -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- are scheduled to attend, as is undeclared nuclear weapon state Israel.

A plutonium-core atomic bomb named "Fat Man" dropped by a U.S. bomber exploded over Nagasaki at 11:02 a.m. on Aug. 9, 1945, at an altitude of around 500 meters, three days after the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima.

An estimated 74,000 people died from the bombing in Nagasaki by the end of that year.

Japan surrendered six days after the bombing of Nagasaki, prompting the end of World War II.

The combined number of "hibakusha," people who survived either bombing, stood at 164,621 as of March. Their average age was 81.41.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles...0m/0dm/006000c