Dropping the atomic bombs vs. an American invasion of Japan

[Frodo]

Time for a new generation to weigh in....

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

My first thought upon opening the thread was "Wait, Tweed is back?"

Anyway, clearly dropping the atomic bombs.

[Sestak]

Dropping the bombs probably saved more lives during the war. It wasn't a good course of action, of course, just the least bad one.

Not to mention, as some others have pointed out, the sheer destruction caused by the two bombs has probably disuaded use of nuclear weapons - including modern ones that are much more powerful - across the world.

Again, a horrible decision both ways.

[AtorBoltox]

It would have been nigh on treasonous for Truman to put American soldiers through an invasion of the home islands when he knew of a weapon that could end the war swiftly

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

It's a false dichotomy.

[Frodo]

It's a false dichotomy.

That's not how they saw it. 

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

It's a false dichotomy.

That's not how they saw it. 

Who is they? The scientists who developed the bombs? They were certainly not ok with it. The military? Not hugely - both Eisenhower, Nimitz and LeMay considered the Japanese effectively defeated already (and LeMay was not a man who was dovish in that regards). It's honestly shocking how many people - to this day - will naively repeat the Truman admin's justifications and their mysterious numbers as gospel.

The Japanese were a defeated power by 1945. Their military was dismembered, they had no raw resources and their cabinet was clearly trying to find ways to raise white flags without losing face. If I'm honest, a lot of the discourse relies on this weird racial trope that the Japanese are a naturally fanatical people (and if this notion that the Japanese would have all gone willingly to their deaths for the sake of Nippon is true, then why would the bombs even matter to begin with? It makes no sense).

The real reason the bombs were dropped had less to do with Japan, and more with what Truman (correctly) sensed would occur after WW2: a protracted showdown between the superpowers, and ensuring that the US could dictate terms of surrender. Why did the government explicitly rule out targeting a military base or giving a warning first (both actions which could have "demonstrated power" without leading to as many civilian deaths)? It was a show of strength - the US wanted to say that it had no qualms against using them in the future.

[Hammy]

The better option would've been not having an embargo around a country we weren't at war with, in a war we were officially neutral in...

[S019]

The bombs

An invasion would have been long, costly, and cost many lives.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

The better option would've been not having an embargo around a country we weren't at war with, in a war we were officially neutral in...

The Imperial Japanese Army was every bit as evil as the Wehrmacht.

[America Needs R'hllor]

The better option would've been not having an embargo around a country we weren't at war with, in a war we were officially neutral in...

The Imperial Japanese Army was every bit as evil as the Wehrmacht.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The bombs

An invasion would have been long, costly, and cost many lives.

[Karpatsky]

The better option would've been not having an embargo around a country we weren't at war with, in a war we were officially neutral in...

This is the same as subsidizing and therefore normalizing aggression.

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

"We'll bleed you dry for every inch of land!" is only a valid tactic if you know the enemy can't come back with, "Cool, we'll just kick back and use our shiny new superweapon that wipes out entire cities in nanoseconds to blast your country into oblivion."

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

"We'll bleed you dry for every inch of land!" is only a valid tactic if you know the enemy can't come back with, "Cool, we'll just kick back and use our shiny new superweapon that wipes out entire cities in nanoseconds to blast your country into oblivion."

Phwezer? Talk about a blast from the past.

[TJ in Oregon]

I have reversed my opinion of this since I posted several years ago in this thread. It was not okay for us to drop the atomic bomb on civilian targets as we did. I've come around to thinking a blockade was probably the best approach.

[fhtagn]

The bombs

An invasion would have been long, costly, and cost many lives.

Reluctantly going with this.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The bombs

An invasion would have been long, costly, and cost many lives.

Reluctantly going with this.

The thing is dropping the bomb, while a step of historical importance, was not the only factor that prompted Japanese surrender. Soviet entry into the war is often cited as at least as much of a factor. Tokyo was horrified with the speed the Red Army destroyed their forces in the mainland and preferred complete surrender to the Americans rather than face the Soviet invasion.

Also, I believe it was no one else than General Arnold that said at one point that with a total air superiority and the ability of essentially raze cities by conventional means, Japan would've been forced to surrender sooner or later anyway, without a need for the invasion. By that time, a very, very few Japanese officials contemplated "never surrender, carry on" notion. The difference was whether to swallow full capitulation or try to use the fact the mainland was still well-fortified to negotiate. It's likely the former faction would prevail in time with the Emperor's support.

This is all, of course, just a big what-if scenario, and given all the information, as well as the mood of the time, I think Truman made a right call. Also, from strictly cynical point of view, the world had to see on its own eyes what the atomic bombs are and what they could do.

[muon2]

On a personal note, my father served in WWII and then again in Korea. When the troops were assembling to go to Korea, my dad was in position to see the plans for the invasion of Japan. Those plans were detailed to the unit level and included a casualty estimate by unit. His WWII unit was slated for the second amphibious wave of the initial invasion of Honshu, and was estimated to have 90% casualties. There was also no desire in the US to prolong the conflict through blockades or other diplomatic means after 4 years of fighting.

Needless to say I'm biased towards the option that was taken, since the odds are against my existence had the invasion been used as planned.

[TML]

The alternative option to what actually happened would have resulted in the war dragging on into 1946 or later.

[HillGoose]

Dropping the bombs! Although I am more of the persuasion that the targets should have been more military than civilian. Anyway, in my opinion the bomb is responsible for the relative peace the world has seen since the end of the Second World War. That's a good thing.

Heaven can wait, we're only watching the skies.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Heaven can wait, we're only watching the skies.

Hoping for the best, but expecting the worst.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

On a personal note, my father served in WWII and then again in Korea. When the troops were assembling to go to Korea, my dad was in position to see the plans for the invasion of Japan. Those plans were detailed to the unit level and included a casualty estimate by unit. His WWII unit was slated for the second amphibious wave of the initial invasion of Honshu, and was estimated to have 90% casualties. There was also no desire in the US to prolong the conflict through blockades or other diplomatic means after 4 years of fighting.

Needless to say I'm biased towards the option that was taken, since the odds are against my existence had the invasion been used as planned.

I wonder what was your dad's rank and clearance if he, despite being slated to take a place in the landings, was able to see it. Not something the brass would want the soldiers to know I think.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Dropping the bombs! Although I am more of the persuasion that the targets should have been more military than civilian. Anyway, in my opinion the bomb is responsible for the relative peace the world has seen since the end of the Second World War. That's a good thing.

Heaven can wait, we're only watching the skies.

Unfortunately the line between military and civilian targets can be pretty blurry, given it's pretty common for a major population centers to be strategic communication routes, points of troop concentration and military industrial sites.

[GoTfan]

Probably going to get a lot of hate for this, but I'll say it anyway.

You bomb and invade other nations unprovoked (when you're a nation yourself), commit genocides and war crimes the likes of which have not been seen before nor since, expect to be bombed back ten times over. Same goes for Dresden.