75 Years Later, It’s Clear Truman Was Right To Drop The Atomic Bomb

The Federalist ^ | 08/06/2020 | Joshua Larson

[DFG]

On August 6, 1945, 30-year-old U.S. Air Force pilot Col. Paul W. Tibbets Jr. took to the sky in the Enola Gay, his Boeing B-29 Superfortress heavy bomber. His destination, the Japanese city of Hiroshima, was not an especially notable target. His payload, however, a single bomb nicknamed “Little Boy,” would change the course of history.

True watershed moments in history are rare — the agricultural revolution is one such example, as was the Battle of Salamis, the advent of Jesus Christ, and the fall of Western Rome. Yet in the last 1,500 years, no two distinct epochs of time are as clear as the time before the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and all the time since.

[Wuli]

The negative views all come from the Left and ignore the (a) predictable consequences of an all out invasion of the main island of Japan and (b) the very high likelihood that that is what the Japanese military would have otherwise required of the U.S., in order for the U.S. to have achieved a Japanese surrender. That all out invasion would have included tons of conventional bombing all over Japan, to “soften it up”, producing more total deaths and destruction nationwide than that produced at Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

[The Free Engineer]

My father was 17 when the war ended, turning 18 in November. Through high school ROTC he had 200 hours in gliders and 100 hours in powered aircraft. Next stop would have been Japan for him. Instead next stop was engineering school.

[Dave Wright]

Edward Luttwak, the American political scientist who has studied the history of this decision was on Steve Bannon’s podcast this morning and had an interesting comment. The decision to actually use the bomb on a city in Japan was approved by a panel of military and civilian experts well in advance of Truman’s final approval and before it had even been tested.

None of the panel was briefed on or had any awareness of the effects that the radiation would have on the population. They all believed it would just explode but not generate further casualties from fallout.

[Seruzawa]

The argument that Japan would have surrendered without the bomb is false. The Japanese Army was itching to fight us. Throughout WWII we had faced mostly Japanese Navy ground forces in the island campaigns and some Japanese Army units but the bulk of the Japanese Army sought direct battle. They believed that in order to “lose honorably” to us they had to take millions of casualties amongst the Japanese civilians. But in fact there would have been no civilians.

The Japanese were mobilizing their entire population. Women with spears. Children. Civilians who would allow our forces to pass by and then engage in biological and chemical attacks. There were tons of of cheap wooden kamikaze planes planned that didn’t show up on radar. Plus loads of kamikaze boats. The fighting and tenacity of the Japanese would have been worse even than at Okinawa and Iwo Jima. A landing may very well have failed.

Hirohito did acknowledge that the A-bombs were the impetus that finally got him to accept surrender. A million weasel words won’t change the fact that the A-bombs were necessary. It’s easy to sit behind a desk smoking a pipe and talk about these things. None of the people who decry the bomb are in the demographic of those who would have had to storm the beaches. The lives of the farm boys and mechanics who fought the Japanese were just as important as the self-satisfied academics who condemn them. Actually the lives of those men are worth more than any pundit or professor.

[Salvey]

I was around and sentient: it was a highly favored move by an overwhelming number of the American people at the time.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks DFG.

• The humiliation of Western history
• Over 80,000 mail-in ballots disqualified in NYC primary mess
• The American public holds media in contempt. The public is right
• WaPo 'Fact-Checker' Field Tests a New Excuse for Biden to Not Debate
• VIDEO: TDS Afflicted Tom Friedman Hilariously Desperate to Remove Trump from Office
• Craigslist Founder Craig Newmark Spent at Least $170 Million on Journalism to Beat Trump
• Ilhan Omar's opponent endorsed by her city's dominant newspaper

  ---

• Cities go to extremes with quarantine crackdowns: Checkpoints, power shutoffs, steep fines
• Beshear says state considering 10 p.m. curfew for bars, restaurants to curb spread of COVID-19
• Has Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot lost the city?
• LA Mayor Will Cut Power, Water To Homes And Businesses That Disobey Him
• 70% more California inmates than previously estimated may be released early due to COVID-19
• Lake Tahoe sees record property sales and rocketing prices amid the pandemic as Silicon Valley tech employees work remotely and families flee big cities for refuge in the mountains
• Millennials are snatching up 'cheap old houses' via Instagram

  ---

• Attack Woman at Her Home, Police Chief Says, 'Enough Is Enough'
• Oprah soundly spanked for encouraging white people to admit that they're 'racist' 'Who in the world screwed up and let The Oprah become a billionaire?
• Pakistani court sparks outrage by ruling 14-year-old Christian girl must stay married to alleged abductor
• President Trump coming to Cleveland on Thursday on campaign trail

[Varda]

[Vehmgericht]

Left wing propaganda has been incredibly effective. Even conservatives have bought the bombing necessity. Because of FDR’s “unconditional surrender” demand the Japanese fought on long after it was obvious they had lost. They saw the results of the Morgenthau Plan philosophy in Germany and thought it didn’t matter if they fought to the death. Had there been a negotiated peace where they retained Korea and Manchuria there would have been no Korean War or Red China. Soviet agents in the U.S. government did not want this. In the end the Japanese did not surrender unconditionally. They were allowed to keep the emperor. No one commented that there were opposing views: William D. Leahy - “It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.” (I Was There, pg. 441). Gen. Curtis LeMay, former head of Strategic Air Command, “We torched and boiled and baked to death more people in Tokyo that night of March 9-10 than went up in vapor in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.”

[Dead Corpse]

I've been to Peace Park and seen the "evil American" propaganda.

Nukes are a horrible weapon. Period.

But... Some times horror is exactly what it takes to end a war. You do not go into a fight with one hand tied behind your back. Especially against an enemy who knows no limits to what they would do to win. That is idiocy.

It was right then, and it could be argued that we should have probably used one or two more since then.

Until we come up with something equivalent, it will still be needed tomorrow as well.

[lowbuck]

“It basically allowed us to avoid dividing Japan with the Soviets like it happened in Germany”

A major and often overlooked reason to force an end to the war. That and the fact that the Japs were willing to all die and take us with them sealed the deal.

I have read extensively about WWII all my life. The enemies in Europe were seen and (generally) treated as reasonable combatants.

In the Pacific the Japs were viewed like cockroaches who could only be subdued by killing the lot. There was no reasoning with them and the mentality that they would die to serve their emperor was totally alien. Starting Leyte Gulf and suicide fliers which terrified our Navy I think the die was cast to end the war no matter how. Just my 2¢

[Wuli]

1. “Had there been a negotiated peace where they retained Korea and Manchuria there would have been no Korean War or Red China.”

The prospects of that under any U.S. administration was nil. Its pure crystal ball fantasy.

2. Leahy said: “The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... “

But in fact there is no proof in the diplomatic record that Japan had officially adopted that position.

[Don Corleone]

The Japanese would have fought to the last man as they did on all the islands leading up to the homeland. Millions would have died.

[jmacusa]

My late father-in-law served in the 4th. Marine Division and was wounded on Iwo Jima. He got the ‘’million dollar wound’’-a leg wound and it got him off that horrible island. he came home, met and married my late mother-in-law and they had four girls, one of them is my wife.

Those bombs saved his life and because of that I have a wife.

[abb]

Several artifacts at the WWII Museum in NOLA of this event. Col. Tibbett’s watch, a copy of the operation order, co-pilot log book, General Groves’ uniform.

[mjp]

pleasure-pain principle:cause the Japs enough pain and they stopped

[Bernard Marx]

Let me look at this a different way. If Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany had the bomb and the capability to deliver it, do you think they'd have used it? I'm totally confident they would have with no moral compunction or regrets.

A close relative of mine, a Marine, was in Tientsin, China waiting for the invasion of Japan. The bombs saved him, his descendants, and millions of other Americans and Japanese. It was the right thing to do.

[Seruzawa]

My Dad had his orders for the invasion force in hand when the bombs ended the war. The bombs ended the war. Everyone in the US was overjoyed. F*** a bunch of academic handwringers.

[saminfl]

We were living in Carrizozo, NM at that time. I was seven years old and still remember today stories going around town that we(the US) were building a bomb no bigger than a softball and it would destroy a whole city.

[Phil DiBasquette]

That’s not what the Smithsonian says!

[Phil DiBasquette]

That was before Guam tipped over!