[ChildOfThe60s]

Not to muddy the issue, but I always believed that the bombs saved millions of lives, both American and Japanese. And my father was then on a troopship in the Pacific, a young, fresh solider straight from Fort Dix boot camp, bound for Operation Downfall, the planned invasion of Japan.

ABSOLUTELY no question on that point. My father (USMC) also was in Pacific Theater for a time in 1944-45. He served in Korea and in Nam (adviser 1963-64). On military matters I always considered is opinion more astute than any civilian's. Especially a politician or a pundant of any kind. A manned invasion of the island would have been a long bloodbath of immense scale. American lives had to be a higher priority than Japanese lives in that situation. That's hard, cold reality. Still, there is good reason to believe that the bomb(s) resulted in FEWER Japanese casualties than an invasion would have.

[kearnyirish2]

At the time of the atomic bombs, Japan still had over a million armed troops in China. They would have fought to the deaths; the bombs undoubtedly saved many Aliied and Japanese lives.

[21twelve]

“...good reason to believe that the bomb(s) resulted in FEWER Japanese casualties than an invasion would have...”

The two atomic bombs killed something like 150 to 200 thousand. I think the firebombing of Toyko almost 100k died in a few days of that campaign. An invasion would have been far more costly to the Japs.

The invasion plan of Japan was called “Operation Downfall”

excerpt:

“Personnel at the Navy Department estimated that the total losses to America would be between 1.7 and 4 million with 400,000 to 800,000 deaths.

The same department estimated that there would be up to 10 million Japanese casualties.”

I’m not sure what percantage of Jap casualties would end up as deaths. A higher percentage than America I would imagine - so at least 2 million. Or - if they went the way of fighting to the death like they did on Iwo Jima - then closer to 10 million.