Do you think the allies have any blood on their hands for Heroshima and Nagasaki ...

[CivPatriot]

The people who have the blood of the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagaskai on their hands are the members of the Japanese government who began the war.

[Berzerker]

They leafleted virtually all targets of US bombing except for one:

Hiroshima.

Hiroshima was, prior to the bombing, completely unscathed. It had industry in the suburbs, but the bomb landed directly downtown on the civilian areas. Truman said to the American people that he had struck a "military base."

These are facts. You draw the conclusions.

I didn't know that.

My father would have been part of the invasion force prepared for Japan so my opinion is colored, but how many people on both sides would have died without an expedited surrender? I would have made more effort to obtain the surrender without targeting actual cities, something like inviting Japanese officials to observe the first bomb off the Japanese coast. I suspect Truman wanted the Russians to see what the bomb could do to their cities...

The Japanese are culpable, not the US. Now, obviously children can't escape the decisions of their elders so steps to avoid all out attacks on civilians should be taken, but ultimately none of this would have happened if not for decisions made by the Japanese leaders.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
Of course they do. All warfare not used to bring down your own government is evil.

That's pretty brave talk coming from someone who hails from a country that openly assisted the Nazis war effort, and which gleefully made big bucks from killing allied soldiers, so many of whom only wanted teir own countries back.
But hey, it's a free country. No thanks to your folks.

[Ned]

My father too would have been part of an invasion force. But, truly, had the bomb not been used and had the Japanese still refused to surrender except on the condition that they keep the Emperor, would Truman have ordered the invasion and killed millions of Japanese and Americans solely for this purpose? How would history have painted such a decision? Would the American people have supported a million KIA to support removing the Emperor?

I doubt it.

Many historians have said that given the "offers" by Japan to surrender prior to the use of the bomb, painting the decision to use the bomb as the alternative to invasion is clearly post-war justification created post-hoc by "victor" historians and politicians. Only when the Truman records were declassified forty years after his administration ended did we learn the full truth.

[Ned]

BTW, my dad was a US Army company commander in 1945 and was in line to become a battalion commander.

[Dr Strangelove]

IIRC the Soviet Union actually impeded Japan's efforts to begin surrender negotiations with the western allies. The Japanese had attempted to contact the western allies through the Soviet embassy, thinking that as a member of the alliance the Soviet government would have access to the those allied governments at war with Japan at that time. The Soviet government, which had been planning on offering assistance to the Chinese communists, surrepetitiously "lost" the messages. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria offered the Soviet Union an opportunity to leave huge stockpiles of weapons in the hands of Mao's army.

[Ned]

Dr. Strangelove, still, Stalin did tell Truman of the contact, give him a copy of the telegram and the Soviet response.

Also, to suggest, that we used the bomb to put off a coup in Japan is to suggest that somehow we knew of the coup even though the Japanese government did not. Anyone who seriously believes this crap is a fool.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ned
Dr. Strangelove, still, Stalin did tell Truman of the contact, give him a copy of the telegram and the Soviet response.

Also, to suggest, that we used the bomb to put off a coup in Japan is to suggest that somehow we knew of the coup even though the Japanese government did not. Anyone who seriously believes this crap is a fool.

Didn't the Soviets sit on the telegram until after they had declared war on Japan?

[Ned]

No. Stalin gave it to Truman on the initial meeting between them at Potsdam in early July, if I recall the dates correctly.

[Berzerker]

That's pretty brave talk coming from someone who hails from a country that openly assisted the Nazis war effort, and which gleefully made big bucks from killing allied soldiers, so many of whom only wanted teir own countries back.
But hey, it's a free country. No thanks to your folks.

Now now, guilt by association...

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ned
No. Stalin gave it to Truman on the initial meeting between them at Potsdam in early July, if I recall the dates correctly.

Which letter was it? I thought that the Japanese originally proposed to withdraw from areas formerly belongin to the western allies without stipulating the future of China.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Berzerker


Now now, guilt by association...

What? People who associate with Nazis are Nazis associates. What could be wrong with that?

[Ned]

Dr. Strangelove, I posted Truman's diary entry in the other thread on this topic that was just bumped this evening. IIRC, the letter was from the Emperor calling for negotiations to end the war on the basis that Emperor be retained. The surprising thing was that Truman did not follow up with the Soviets and call for a meeting one way or the other with the Emperor's representatives. He instead issued, with Great Britain, the call for Japan's unconditional surrender towards the end of July.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
A land invasion of Japan would have killed millions of people- dropping bombs and killing in the order of hundreds of thousands was definitely more acceptable as an issue

Two or three people have said this so far, and I have a question: is there no hierarchy of casualties in a war?

Leaving aside the question of whether the numbers are right, the "millions of people" killed in an invasion would have been, overwhelmingly, soldiers; the hundreds of thousands killed by the bombs were civilians. In wartime, are these really equivalent lives?

(BTW, I'm of the strong belief, based on entries in truman's diaries, that the bombing was more about scaring the bejesus out of the USSR than subduing the Japanese.)

[NeOmega]

The only people with blood on their hands are all the Japanese people who thought war was the answer to their problems.

I have read extensively onm Truman's Reasoning for dropping the bomb, and it was to end the war. He made the right choice.