Posted on 08/06/2023 7:01:59 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Beat me to it.
Japan did not surrender after Hiroshima. They were willing to carry on fighting.
After Nagasaki, they changed their mind.
The bombs were necessary — and they saved a million lives. Mostly they saved Japanese lives. The invasion of the home islands was going to be awful for everyone.
In early 1947, when urged to respond to growing criticism over the use of the atomic bomb, Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in Harper’s Magazine that by July 1945 there had been no sign of “any weakening in the Japanese determination to fight rather than accept unconditional surrender.” Meanwhile, the U.S. was planning to ramp up its sea and air blockade of Japan, increase strategic air bombings and launch an invasion of the Japanese home island that November.
“We estimated that if we should be forced to carry this plan to its conclusion, the major fighting would not end until the latter part of 1946, at the earliest,” Stimson wrote. “I was informed that such operations might be expected to cost over a million casualties, to American forces alone.”
Bullcrap to the war ending in two weeks without the bomb. They didn’t even surrender WITH the first bomb, and even after the second, it took Hirohito to break the stalemate in order to surrender.
Charming sentiment from the guy who wanted to bomb Viet Nam into the stone age, and darn near succeeded.
Really! Lemay of all people. I think they stretched it a little too far.
The Imperial Army had no intention of surrender, even after the second bomb.
The Imperial Navy, which by this time effectively ceased to exist, agreed with the ministry that surrender was the only option.
After the second bomb, Hirohito himself made the decision to surrender. He believed the US possessed many such weapons and refused to allow Japan to be vaporized.
Even then, some in the army refused to surrender and launched a plot to kidnap the emperor and continue the war.
Cooler heads prevailed, and the army was forced to abide by Hirohito’s decision.
We should hate ourselves?
We should make reparations by dropping one on D.C., with deep apologies to Tokyo?
If Japan were truly that close to surrender, why did they fail to do so immediately after the first nuke?
Did these remorseful leaders compensate by leaking nuclear secrets to the Soviets?
I looked up the Eisenhower quote. It’s genuine:
My father had already survived Guadalcanal and Peleliu. Guess where he was going next. I despise these stories.
We’re damn lucky Tojo didn’t off Hirohito, and then blame his “martyrdom” on the Americans.
Can you imagine the impact that would have had.
Watching “The Pacific”, Peleliu made the European Theater look like a cakewalk in comparison.
Notice two all stars aren’t quoted, Patton and MacArthur. Truman saved American lives.
Horse Shit!
I love the argument that “Japan didn’t surrender because of the Bomb - they surrendered because the Soviets had just declared war and invaded Manchuria.” ??? Did the Soviets have the capability to mount an amphibious invasion of the home islands? Or the long-range bomber capability to do what our B-29’s had done? Or the Bomb? No, no, and no.
Whether real or not, I notice a missing quote from the Supreme Allied Commander of the Pacific (MacArthur). Eisenhower was Europe and likely would not have given much thought to the Pacific.
MacArthur would had known what he was up against if he had to invade the Japanese Islands.
As it is, MacArthur wanted to use atomic bombs on the PLA in the Korean conflict. That would have saved many American lives at Chosin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.