60 Years Ago

Originally posted by zeeblebot
here, i'll restate it for you, no1m:

it's your conclusion i'm disputing, that a report that took that many resources to produce AFTER the bombing could be significant in a discussion of whether the decision to drop the bombing.

obviously, no such survey was possible prior to the bombing.

and the survey was taken from a defeated military. you might well have expected a different answer prior to august 1945.

here you go ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Support

"Debate over bombings

Support
Those who argue in favor of the decision to drop the bombs generally assert that the bombings ended the war months sooner than would otherwise have been the case, thus saving many lives. It is argued that there would have been massive casualties on both sides in the impending Operation Downfall invasion of Japan,[44] and that even if Operation Downfall was postponed, the status quo of conventional bombings and the Japanese occupations in Asia were causing tremendous loss of life.

A nation historically suspicious of Western imperialism, Japanese military officials were unanimously opposed to any negotiations before the use of the atomic bomb. The rise of Japanese militarism in the wake of the Great Depression had resulted in countless assassinations of reformers attempting to check military power, such as those of Takahashi Korekiyo, Saitō Makoto, and Inukai Tsuyoshi, creating an environment in which opposition to war was itself a risky endeavor.[45]

While some members of the civilian leadership did use covert diplomatic channels to attempt peace negotiation, they could not negotiate surrender or even a cease-fire. Japan, as a Constitutional Monarchy, could only legally enter into a peace agreement with the unanimous support of the Japanese cabinet, and in the summer of 1945, the Japanese Supreme War council, consisting of representatives of the Army, the Navy and the civilian government, could not reach a consensus on how to proceed.[46]

A political stalemate developed between the military and civilian leaders of Japan, the military increasingly determined to fight despite all costs and odds and the civilian leadership seeking a way to negotiate an end to the war. Further complicating the decision was the fact that the representative Japanese Imperial Army was chosen by the Army and no cabinet could exist without the JIA’s representative. This meant that the Army could veto any decision by having its Minister resign thus making it the most powerful post on the SWC. In early August of 1945 the cabinet was equally split between those who advocated an end to the war and those who would not surrender under any circumstances. The hawks consisted of General Korechika Anami General Yoshijiro Umezu and Admiral Teijiro Toyoda and were led by Anami. The doves consisted Prime Minster Kantaro Suzuki, Naval Minister Mitsumasa Yonai, Shigenori Togo and were led by Togo.[47]

The peace faction, led by Togo, seized on the bombing as decisive justification of surrender. Kōichi Kido, one of Emperor Hirohito's closest advisers, stated: "We of the peace party were assisted by the atomic bomb in our endeavor to end the war." Hisatsune Sakomizu, the chief Cabinet secretary in 1945, called the bombing "a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war." The pro-peace civilian leadership was then able to use the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to convince the military that no amount of courage, skill, and fearless combat could help Japan against the power of atomic weapons. The cabinet made a unanimous decision to surrender and accept the terms of the Potsdam agreement.[48]

Supporters of the bombing also point out that waiting for the Japanese to surrender was not a cost-free option—as a result of the war, noncombatants were dying throughout Asia at a rate of about 200,000 per month.[citation needed] Firebombing had killed well over 100,000 people in Japan since February of 1945, directly and indirectly. That intensive conventional bombing would have continued prior to an invasion. The submarine blockade and the United States Army Air Forces's mining operation, Operation Starvation, had effectively cut off Japan's imports. A complementary operation against Japan's railways was about to begin, isolating the cities of southern Honshū from the food grown elsewhere in the Home Islands. "Immediately after the defeat, some estimated that 10 million people were likely to starve to death," noted historian Daikichi Irokawa. Meanwhile, in addition to the Soviet attacks, fighting continued in The Philippines, New Guinea and Borneo, and offensives were scheduled for September in southern China and Malaya.

The Americans anticipated losing many soldiers in the planned invasion of Japan, although the actual number of expected fatalities and wounded is subject to some debate. It depends on the persistence and reliability of Japanese resistance, and whether the Allies would have invaded only Kyūshū in November 1945 or if a follow up Allied landing near Tokyo, projected for March 1946, would have been needed. Years after the war, Secretary of State James Byrnes claimed that 500,000 "American" lives would have been lost, however in the summer of 1945,[citation needed] U.S. military planners projected 20,000–110,000 combat deaths from the initial November 1945 invasion, with about three to four times that number wounded. (Total U.S. combat deaths on all fronts in World War II in nearly four years of war were 292,000.)

The atomic bomb hastened the end of the Second World War in Asia liberating millions in occupied areas, including thousands of Western citizens; about 200,000 Dutch and 400,000 Indonesians ("Romushas"😉 from Japanese concentration camps. Moreover, Japanese troops had committed atrocities against millions of civilians, such as the use of chemical and bacteriological weapons, the sanko sakusen or the infamous Nanking Massacre (see Japanese war crimes), and the early end to the war prevented further bloodshed.

Supporters also point to an order given by the Japanese War Ministry on August 1, 1944, ordering the disposal and execution of all Allied POWs, numbering over 100,000, if an invasion of the Japanese mainland took place.[49]

Supporters of the bombings have argued that the Japanese government waged total war, ordering many civilians (including women and children) to work in factories and military offices and to fight against any invading force. Father John A. Siemes, professor of modern philosophy at Tokyo's Catholic University, and an eyewitness to the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima wrote:

"We have discussed among ourselves the ethics of the use of the bomb. Some consider it in the same category as poison gas and were against its use on a civil population. Others were of the view that in total war, as carried on in Japan, there was no difference between civilians and soldiers, and that the bomb itself was an effective force tending to end the bloodshed, warning Japan to surrender and thus to avoid total destruction. It seems logical to me that he who supports total war in principle cannot complain of war against civilians."[50]
Some supporters of the bombings have emphasized the strategic significance of Hiroshima, as the Japanese 2nd army's headquarters, and of Nagasaki, as a major munitions manufacturing center.

In his speech to the Japanese people presenting his reasons for surrender, Emperor Hirohito refers specifically to the atomic bombs, stating that if they continued to fight it would result in "...an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation..."[51]

"

I won't argue with a cut and paste. Post the opponents side of the cut and paste and you'll have the full wiki argument. And you won't have to think at all!

i looked at it, and it's pretty weak. you can post if you want. as you haven't don't so already, you probably came to the same conclusion i did.

your thread title is hopelessly vague .... especially as RHP does not nominally post the start date of threads on the thread list.

you can wander over to Thread 64721 "dropping the A-bomb " if you want ...

bye.

Originally posted by zeeblebot
i looked at it, and it's pretty weak. you can post if you want. as you haven't don't so already, you probably came to the same conclusion i did.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Utter nonsense. Japan's military was defeated well before 1945 as the relevant military leaders pretty much all attested to. Your uninformed speculation is worthless. And you're disputing not merely my conclusion, but Eisenhower's, Sharpe, McArthur's, the Bombing Survey, etc. etc. etc based on nothing.

Slimjim can believe whatever fairy ta ...[text shortened]... ey did when we have the information available to us now that SJ's uncle didn't have then.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

It saved time, resources and money that is all that matters.

Originally posted by slimjim
Fairy tales? Well I'd rather believe my Uncle who fought the Japanese in WWII than some Attorney from Albany New York who wasn't even born yet.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Your uncle, like all soldiers including my grandfather who was at Okinawa, did not have the information we have now or that the top military leaders had then. It is just stubborn and ignorant to refuse to look at facts because someone who lived at the time didn't have them (though others who lived at the time did).

Originally posted by no1marauder
The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. 100,000 people, almost all civilians died in the blast or in the immediate aftermath; at least that many died from the effects of radiation sickness in the months and years afterward.

It is now an unquestioned conclusion that the dropping of the atomic bombs was necessary to end the war against Ja ...[text shortened]... omb was a "military necessity" can be found at http://www.doug-long.com/ga1.htm.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
no1: " What is not known by most Americans is that high US military officers did not agree with this assessment."

.... "high US military officers" .....

As we all know there are always disagreements among the top brass .... even today .....

Which military body (chiefs of staff ?) advised the President ? Who were the members who were in favour ...[text shortened]... e majority of those who were against ?

Do you know how the cards were dealt at the time ?

Originally posted by shavixmir
150.000 civilians died in the Hiroshima bombing.
48.000 in Nagasaki.
130.000 in the bombing of Tokyo (conventional bombs).


That's 82 9-11's.

Just in case you are interested.