The Bombs of August

On Aug. 6, 1945, the United States dropped a uranium-fueled atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan. Three days later, another U.S. Army Air Forces B-29 repeated the attack on Nagasaki, Japan, with an even more powerful plutonium bomb.

Less than a month after the second bombing, Imperial Japan agreed to formally surrender on Sept. 2. That date marked the official end of World War II -- the bloodiest human or natural catastrophe in history, accounting for more than 65 million dead.

Each August, Americans in hindsight ponder the need for, the morality of, and the strategic rationale behind the dropping of the two bombs. Yet President Harry Truman's decision 73 years ago to use the novel, terrifying weapons was not considered particularly controversial, either right before or right after the attacks. Both cities were simply military targets.

Hiroshima was the headquarters of a Japanese army unit, and a key manufacturing center and port. Nagasaki -- a secondary target after clouds and smoke obscured the city of Kokura -- was the site of a huge Mitsubishi munitions plant.

Yet the sheer destructive power of the two bombs -- the 15-kiloton "Little Boy" Hiroshima bomb, and the 21-kiloton "Fat Man" Nagasaki bomb -- ensured catastrophic civilian casualties well beyond soldiers and munitions-plant workers. During the blasts, and long afterward due to radiation showers, perhaps 150,000 Japanese were killed.

Truman wanted to use the bombs to avoid invading the Japanese mainland. The recent battle for Okinawa resulted in an estimated 50,000 American casualties -- the bloodiest of all the American battles of the Pacific War. Truman's military planners warned that invasions of the Japanese mainland to end the war might cost the equivalent of 20 more Okinawa campaigns.

The idea that the nuclear bombing of Japan was a humanitarian act is set in stone. If you disagree you are some kind of lunatic. The bombing may have been necessary to impress the Russians but it did not necessarily shorten the war. The Japanese military was reluctant to surrender because they were aware of what was happening in Germany (The Morgenthau Plan). They were concerned about rape and pillage for good reason. The apparent insistence on unconditional surrender prolonged the conflict. Japanese pilots were not crazy. They sacrificed their lives for their country. Some people cannot understand this concept. The number of Russian casualties is frequently brought up. How many of these 26 million were killed by the Russians? The Russians could be accused of “stabbing Japan in the back” like Italy’s invasion of France. Their non-aggression pact was still valid. World War II may not have been the bloodiest human or natural catastrophe in history, accounting for more than 65 million dead. That honor might belong to Mao who is frequently credited with 100 million deaths. Thanks to FDR Russia was allocated two Chinese ports and concessions in Manchuria. How could he give our Chinese allies’ ports away? The Russians captured nearly a million slaves and the arms that they supplied to Mao. Had Japan been allowed to keep Korea and Manchuria they would have surrendered earlier and this would have saved many more American lives.

Vehmgericht: "The idea that the nuclear bombing of Japan was a humanitarian act is set in stone.
If you disagree you are some kind of lunatic."

"Humanitarian" is not the right word here.
"War winning", or "life saving" are correct.
"Humanitarian" is what we did after the war to help nation's survive & rebuild.

Vehmgericht: " The bombing may have been necessary to impress the Russians but it did not necessarily shorten the war."

Nonsense.
The only other way to force Japanese surrender was a years long invasion of Japan, costing at least hundreds of thousands of US lives and millions of Japanese.
So A-bombs hastened surrender by at least months and potentially by years.

Vehmgericht: "The Japanese military was reluctant to surrender because they were aware of what was happening in Germany (The Morgenthau Plan).
They were concerned about rape and pillage for good reason."

There was no Morganthau plan in Germany, and Nuremberg trials did not begin until November, 1945.
However, German territory was reduced about 1/4, 10 million Germans expelled and about half of manufacturing capacity confiscated.
Yes, Germans were mistreated by Soviets and neglected by Americans, but we must notice to nowhere near the degrees Germans inflicted on people they conquered.

Vehmgericht: "The apparent insistence on unconditional surrender prolonged the conflict."

Terms offered Japan were the same as those imposed on other Axis powers.
It was a lesson learned from the First World War.

Vehmgericht: " Japanese pilots were not crazy.
They sacrificed their lives for their country.
Some people cannot understand this concept."

Everybody understands such tactics are born of weakness & desperation.
It speaks well of Japanese courage and devotion, but poorly of their leader's ability to think through their problem.

Vehmgericht: "The number of Russian casualties is frequently brought up.
How many of these 26 million were killed by the Russians?"

Well... suppose that number is one million, it changes the moral equation how, exactly?

Vehmgericht: "The Russians could be accused of 'stabbing Japan in the back' like Italy’s invasion of France.
Their non-aggression pact was still valid.

So the Japanese had decided sneak attacks were no longer Kosher? Amazing.

Vehmgericht: "World War II may not have been the bloodiest human or natural catastrophe in history, accounting for more than 65 million dead.
That honor might belong to Mao who is frequently credited with 100 million deaths."

So, do you claim Mao now occupies an even lower ring of H*ll than Hitler or Tojo?
Interesting... and your evidence for this is what, exactly?

Vehmgericht: "Thanks to FDR Russia was allocated two Chinese ports and concessions in Manchuria.
How could he give our Chinese allies’ ports away?"

So which ring does FDR occupy?

Vehmgericht: "Had Japan been allowed to keep Korea and Manchuria they would have surrendered earlier and this would have saved many more American lives."

And your evidence for this is what?
Didn't the First World War teach us that peace short of Unconditional Surrender only provides a respite for the aggressor nations to recover, recoup, regroup & prepare for Round Two?

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.