“Japan surrendered because of Russia, not the bomb. By the time we dropped the atomic bombs, we had already destroyed most of Japan’s major and medium cities by conventional bombings. There weren’t many cities left for us to bomb, except the ones that were so far north, we couldn’t reach.”
Japan surrendered because of the atomic bombs. It surrendered right after the bombs were dropped.
Dropping the bombs was a good thing because it ended the war, saved at least 1 million and more likely several million lives. It was a good thing because if there had been an invasion and the Japanese had fought to the last man as they were ordered, Japan would have never recovered and would not be the free and prosperous country it became after WWII.
There are very few actions in history that saved as many lives and prevented as much suffering and destruction as dropping the atomic bomb.
By the way. My father served in the Pacific during WWII. He said everyone who was there felt there would have been horrendous casualties and a prolonged war if the bombs had not been dropped. Everyone who was there supported it 100%.
Well said.
Los Alamos is a fascinating place. Amazing work done by all..
Actually, you should check on that. The Supreme Council declined to meet after the Hiroshima bombings. Yet, they decided to meet BEFORE the Nagasaki bombings.
Prior to the Russia attack, the Japanese were hoping Russia would help them end the war with the U.S. Once Russia invaded, the knew they had to surrender.
You are also ignoring the conventional bombings all summer that had reduced so many Japanese cities to rubble. Hiroshima and Nagasaki's destruction were a small part of the total.
Keep in mind, I am not saying it was immoral, or the U.S. shouldn't have done it. But the major reason was a shot across the bow of the Soviet Union. Why were those dates picked? The USSR had committed to the Allies to declare war on Japan by that time. (The real crime is that the Allies hadn't obligated the USSR to invade sooner for all we did for them. Many U.S. lives could have been saved.)
I'm sure that's the case. Given the Japanese mindset, that was probably an accurate assessment.
However, the morality of an act is a different question from what support it may have had. If you are a Christian, you have to make a convincing case how dropping those bombs jives with classical Christian just war theory that civilians cannot be targeted.
My father was in the mountains of Italy standing under the Allied bombs, one of which almost killed him. Not too far from the massive strategic blunder and moral failure that was Montecassino. For a long time, I was very resistant to admitting he was right about what happened there--that it was a huge mistake. But he was: that order should never have been given.
The idea that dropping the A-bomb was good or bad is a bit esoteric.
I agree that it was necessary on several levels and the proper course of action at the time. The primary value was two-fold. First that it showed the Japanese that the US was willing to do whatever was necessary to get them to surrender unconditionally. Second it showed the Russians, that we had the ability to contain them as well.
I am tired of the second guessing of the use. You can’t un-ring that bell and I am not going to be guilt-tripped into disarming the US of nuclear weapons.