[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]NealRaymond2 wrote:
[quote]NealRaymond2 wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]NealRaymond2 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s interesting that even until today, people debate whether the Bomb actually saved lives or not (it’s even been debated on this site).
Major Van Kirk has no doubt that lives were saved by avoiding a direct assault in the Main Islands.
[/quote]
Dropping the bomb or directly assaulting the Main Islands: were those really the only viable alternatives for ending the war in a realistically satisfactory manner? Or were those the only viable alternatives for getting “unconditional surrender”?
Would leaving the Japanese military in power on their home islands, with a peace deal that basically amounted to defeat for them albeit not “unconditional surrender”, have been such a bad thing that several million more human deaths were a sensible price to pay to get a more complete victory? Especially considering that the Japanese military government was not the only big evil left in the world?
[/quote]
I’m probably not going to get into it too much deeper than this, but, if you understood the mindset of the Japanese military government at that time, you would understand that UNCONDITIONAL surrender is absolutely the ONLY option available to us after getting into the war. There are still hold-offs calling for the reinstatement of the emperor today whose political “rallies” are enough to send chills down your spine. If they ever somehow take power here again, I will head strait back to Texas, never mind I’ve dedicated over 10 years of my life here and thus far I have no plans to return.
[/quote]
Japan was trying to obtain peace terms prior to the dropping of the atomic bombs.
[/quote]
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh hell no they weren’t unless you mean they were requiring the U.S. to surrender.
[/quote]
Yes they were, and Japan’s terms (in 1945 but before the A-bomb was dropped) did not involve the U.S. surrendering. Arguable whether or not the terms were being offered in good faith; or perhaps to gain breathing room to rebuild and go on the offensive again. Arguable whether or not the terms offered were enforceable on the entire Japanese military and government “machinery”/leadership prior to the dropping of the A-bomb. But they most assuredly were being offered, and they most assuredly did not involve the U.S. surrendering.
Yes, everyone below the highest leadership was expected and conditioned to fight to the death. But nonetheless the highest leadership was willing to offer major concessions (whether in good faith, or whether enforceable on all segments of leadership admittedly arguable) to alleviate the extreme situation developing in Japan in 1945, even before the A-bomb was dropped.
Also possible that a pullback peace agreement absent the A-bomb would have resulted in a coup in Japan, followed by an immediate renewal of the war. Any of a number of ways a peace agreement amounting to (substantial but not necessarily officially admitted) defeat for Japan but not unconditional surrender could have gone wrong. But such an agreement was being offered by the Japanese government. The third alternative to invasion of the Home Islands or dropping the A-bomb was not immediate stationing of Japanese garrisons in Kansas City.
[/quote]
This argument has always seemed highly questionable given that after Hiroshima they still didn’t surrender. Hell, even after Nagasaki it came down to a tie-breaking single “vote” for surrender to occur.[/quote]
I agree. Because it is true that even after Nagasaki, the Japanese wanted to continue the fighting. There was even an attempted military coup to over throw the government in order to keep the war going, but the top generals and even the Emperor had enough. They thought we only have one after ‘Little boy’, they didn’t know how the hell many we had after ‘Fat Man’.
I’ll give it this, it scared the living piss out of the Soviets.
The truth of the matter was full scale invasion was on the table next. When ‘Little Boy’ was dropped, they weren’t sure it would work. It wasn’t tested in a bomb scenario. So they were still prepared for full scale invasion.
I found zero credible evidence that Japan had any intention, what-so-ever to make peace at all.
Now imagine, our current arsenal, like the D5, can carry up to 12 war heads all more powerful than Fat man and little boy. Just fucking imagine what we could do now? Basically, we have weapons that are so powerful, we can’t even use them.
Imagine if we just dropped leaflets over Baghdad to get the fuck out because we are dropping the bomb in 72 hours? Instant end to the war.
You know, I am starting to think that wagging that stick in peoples face may not be a bad idea.
“Dear ayatollah,
You have 6 months to comply with our disbarment plans. If not, we are going to send a single D5 nuclear missile to completely wipe Terran off the face of the earth. 2 weeks prior to strike we will warn the citizens and even, if allowed, assist in evacuation precedings and then we will solve the problem ourselves.
Thanks,
The U.S.”
Could work, if we are serious and actually do it.