(August 8, 2015 at 12:02 am)Shinagami Wrote: The bomb wasn't needed. It was used to see how it would work and to intimidate the Soviets from advancing further south. The claim that more civilians would have died in a ground invasion is pure speculation. But even forgetting all that, it's disgusting that Americans can't honor the innocent people killed in Hiroshima and always launch into some lengthy defense of the bomb. Even conflating Pearl Harbor, a military target, with Hiroshima, a city with little if any strategic importance.

We didn't want to nuke the higher value cities such as Kyoto (cultural center) or Tokyo (political center) or the few remaining manufacturing centers (needed for rebuilding after the war).  So we hit a couple of the out-of-the way places that weren't too heavily populated.  They served their purpose well and they were rebuilt better than ever in just a couple of years.  

Japan was stupid for starting the war because it didn't have the capability in manpower or in weapon systems to actually defeat the US.

(August 7, 2015 at 8:22 pm)Minimalist Wrote: If they were that important Lemay would have taken them out. 

http://fdr4freedoms.org/wp-content/theme...ombing.pdf

Quote: From
mid-May to mid-June 1945, the USAAF
wreaked havoc on Japan’s most important
industrial centers, devastating Japanese
industry and killing more than one hundred
thousand civilians. By the end of July 1945,
the USAAF had virtually run out of targets.
With the Japanese economy shattered, its
industrial capacity cut by more than half,
its lines of communication in shambles,
and more than 8.5 million people rendered
homeless, the emperor and civilian
Japanese leadership questioned the wisdom
of continuing the war.

Gen. LeMay had two juicy ones if he had been allowed to hit them.


But don't take my word for it.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html

Quote:In a trenchant new book, The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb (Praeger, 1996), historian Dennis D. Wainstock concludes that the bombings were not only unnecessary, but were based on a vengeful policy that actually harmed American interests. He writes (pp. 124, 132):
General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific, stated on numerous occasions before his death that the atomic bomb was completely unnecessary from a military point of view: "My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender."

General Curtis LeMay, who had pioneered precision bombing of Germany and Japan (and who later headed the Strategic Air Command and served as Air Force chief of staff), put it most succinctly: "The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war."

Sounds like revionist history.  MacArthur wanted to use nukes in Korea.

(August 8, 2015 at 12:02 am)Shinagami Wrote: The bomb wasn't needed. It was used to see how it would work and to intimidate the Soviets from advancing further south. The claim that more civilians would have died in a ground invasion is pure speculation. But even forgetting all that, it's disgusting that Americans can't honor the innocent people killed in Hiroshima and always launch into some lengthy defense of the bomb. Even conflating Pearl Harbor, a military target, with Hiroshima, a city with little if any strategic importance.

Honor them?

What, like the Japanese honor Korean victims?  Like they honor the comfort women from all over Asia (many of whom were in their early teens)?

No. . . you mean honor as in how the Japanese PM and other government members keep visiting the shrines of Japanese war criminals, even those known to be directly responsible for child rape and the deliberate wholesale slaughter of Chinese civilians.

Look. . . Japan was a fucking evil nation, paid heavily for that fucking evil, and now are ALMOST okay. . . except for the part about crying like they're victims and demanding honor that they've never been willing to give others.  Be like Germany-- accept history for what it is, and let it go.

And tell me. . . how is Pearl Harbor a military target for two countries AT PEACE?  Is that how an honorable people declare war?  By striking a peaceful nation in the early hours of the morning? No, it's tricky and cowardly, and based on modern diplomacy, I'd say very little has changed.

How'd LeMay get the fucking Emperor to go along with his dastardly plan ?

Quote:how is Pearl Harbor a military target for two countries AT PEACE?

Pearl Harbor was supposed to be attacked 1/2 hour after Japan declared war according to Yamamoto's plan.  It was probably a fuck up but also may have reflected dissension within the Japanese government.  The Army controlled the government, not the Navy.

(August 8, 2015 at 10:27 am)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:how is Pearl Harbor a military target for two countries AT PEACE?

Pearl Harbor was supposed to be attacked 1/2 hour after Japan declared war according to Yamamoto's plan.  It was probably a fuck up but also may have reflected dissension within the Japanese government.  The Army controlled the government, not the Navy.

The 14-part message (Teikoku Seifu no Taibei Tsucho Oboegaki)  was not a declaration of war. It did not break off negotiations with the US. It was not an ultimatum. And it made absolutely no difference when it was delivered. I give you the following options:

 For a warning to occur based on that message the following events would have had to happen:
(Note: No parties in Washington would have any idea that there was a deadline looming. FDR could have easily have waited until Monday to make a reply. Yamamoto would have been aware of this possibility.)

Japan delivers note on time.

Hull reads note.

Hull responds to Nomura and Kurusu.

They reply, etc.

Hull talks to FDR, explains note. 

FDR correctly interprets this as a war warning.

FDR advises SecWar and SecNav to alert all forces.

SecWar and SecNav compose warning message.

Warning messages are handled through military channels, if available, to all commands.

Local commanders assimilate warning message and act properly. 



On the other hand, if the US had acceded to every demand in the 14-part message:



Japan delivers note on time.

Hull reads note.

Hull responds to Nomura and Kurusu.

They reply, etc.

Hull talks to FDR, explains note. 

FDR agrees to completely change US policy without consulting Congress.

FDR communicates this to Hull.

Hull explains things to Nomura and Kurusu.

They discuss any fuzzy details.

Nomura and Kurusu return to their embassy to contact Tokyo.

(Originally they were ordered to destroy all codes, but got permission to retain one low level code.)

Somehow they get the information to Tokyo.

Gaimudaijin receives message.

Foreign Minster interprets message correctly.

Foreign Minster goes to Prime Minister and explains message.

Prime Minister contacts SecWar and SecNav, who contact their forces to halt attack.



In both the above cases you can see that more than 1/2 hour was needed. So the timing issue is just a farce.

Quote:On December 7, 1941, two hours after the Japanese attack on American military installations at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, Japan declared war on the United States and Great Britain, marking America’s entry into World War II. The Japanese government had originally intended to deliver the declaration thirty minutes before the attack, but the Japanese embassy in Washington took too long to decode the 5,000-word document.

https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by...s-war-1941

Did you miss the part about the Army being in control of the government and not the Navy?

Admiral Toyoda commented that he would rather his daughter marry a beggar than an army man.  The constant internecine strife between the Japanese Army and Navy was a great asset to us.

What Yamamoto envisioned did not happen but he did not call the shots.

(August 8, 2015 at 12:29 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Did you miss the part about the Army being in control of the government and not the Navy?

Admiral Toyoda commented that he would rather his daughter marry a beggar than an army man.  The constant internecine strife between the Japanese Army and Navy was a great asset to us.

What Yamamoto envisioned did not happen but he did not call the shots.

Tōjō Hidecki was the Prime Minister and the War Minister, that's true. But the Navy could bring down the government by ordering the Navy Minister to new duty and not assigning a replacement.  And Tōgō Shignori, Gaimudaijin, had to beg the Navy to send Teikoku Seifu no Taibei Tsucho Oboegaki ,  which was only allowed on the condition that it did not tip off the raid on Pearl.

(August 8, 2015 at 1:55 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(August 6, 2015 at 2:02 am)Minimalist Wrote: As Chuck said, by 1945 the Japanese were totally defenseless.  General Curtis Lemay began repeated low-level, nighttime, incendiary raids in March 1945.  The Japanese had no night fighters to oppose the B-29s and losses were light even though the B-29s were stripped of most of their guns. 

Had we wanted to burn Hiroshima and Nagasaki we could have done so with ease.  Which frankly makes it looks like they were being saved for the sacrifice.  I don't know that it was our finest moment.

The nukes actually saved lives because the Japanaese military was willing to fight to the last person.  We were also willing to kill every Japanese without mercy.  So the best thing to happen was that they got nuked and the war ended just like that.  It was actually a win-win for everyone.  Look at Japan today.  Imagine how it would have looked if we had killed everyone there in 1945.

Well accept the damages that are still happening to japan after the bombs. Japan should have apologized to china instead of the U.S