13 Sep 20
@mott-the-hoople saidThe Union blockade of Southern ports.
How was the US to know japan did or did not possess an abomb. Several countries were in an arms race to develop nuclear weapons. USSR finalized theirs soon after.
Name one blockade that has worked.
This destroyed the South’s economy and cost very few lives.
Oh yes. Heroic tales of blockade runners... sure. But the main supply lines were basically cut and that destroyed the South’s ability to supply itself.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147484
13 Sep 20
@deepthought said“ I think that this may have confused the writer of the FAS article, who will have been more interested in politics and current state policy than physics. ”
If you read your own link you will see that Japan was essentially hampered in their attempts to build a device by their lack of weapons grade uranium [1][3]. Incidentally the link gives a figure of 560 kg of uranium oxide being transported to Japan on U234 before it surrendered. The FAS article says that it contained 3.5 kg of Uranium 235, which without checking sounds ...[text shortened]... .wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_nuclear_weapon_program
Full of yourself arent you?
Earlier you said you didnt follow links...now you have posted three wikipedia links in reply to me.., 😂
13 Sep 20
@vivify saidA blockade would not have been necessary; the Soviet entry in the war exposed Japan to the high probability of Red Army invasion of their homelands. Indeed, Stalin had given orders to commence an attack on the northernmost island of Hokkaido on August 23rd only cancelling it after Truman objected because the island was in the agreed upon US sphere and the Japanese had already agreed to surrender (to the US and other allies, not to the Soviets). From Max Hasting's Retribution, pp. 527-28.
Yeah, the more I thought about it, the less realistic the idea of a blockade became. Just goes to show that finding a better alternative to the A-bomb is not as easy to come up with as people think.
Also for clarity, I'm not defending the use of a nuke, I legitimately want to know *specifically* what a better option would've been.
In my view, the USSR's entry into the war and quick destruction of Japanese forces in Manchuria, along with the occupation of the Kuriles, would have forced a quick surrender regardless of the atomic bombs. Of course, there has been endless debate over this by historians.
13 Sep 20
@mott-the-hoople saidThe question you should be asking is: why did Japan attack America when they knew the US could out-man and out manufacture them.
The question should be...how stupid was japan to attack a country with superior power?
What drove them to such a measure?
13 Sep 20
@shavixmir saidJapan thought the USA was soft and would back down.
The question you should be asking is: why did Japan attack America when they knew the US could out-man and out manufacture them.
What drove them to such a measure?
@mott-the-hoople saidThe South was pretty stupid to attack the North too. Another case where people who thought they were superior and decided to throw their weight around got the crap beat out of them.
The question should be...how stupid was japan to attack a country with superior power?
Whatever the US did, it worked, they havent attacked since.
13 Sep 20
@athousandyoung saidBackdown from what?
Japan thought the USA was soft and would back down.
13 Sep 20
@shavixmir saidBy "back down" I mean the Japanese military machine thought the USA would not challenge Japan's attempts to create a large empire.
Backdown from what?
13 Sep 20
@earl-of-trumps saidThis is false. The US did not agree to this condition. The US eventually determined that it would be more prudent for the Emperor to remain on the throne, but they had not accepted this as a condition of Japanese surrender.
Let us not forget, the US did agree to a condition, that Hirohito remained the emperor of Japan.
Historian John Dower (the leader scholar of the Occupation of Japan) points out that when Japanese officials told General MacArthur that they interpreted the Potsdam Declaration as providing for a conditional and contractual surrender, "they were crisply informed their capitulation was and always had been unconditional."
Dower notes that the American authorities had not decided, by the end of the war, whether the best course was to "reform the imperial institution or abolish it completely"; thus Hirohito’s position "remained unresolved through the end of 1945."
Washington considered having the Emperor tried as a war criminal at the end of that year. MacArthur, on the ground in Japan, took steps to prevent this outcome, since he had reached the pragmatic decision that retaining the Emperor would make it easier for the Americans to run the Occupation effectively.
13 Sep 20
@mott-the-hoople saidJapan's unprovoked attack was on a military target and almost all the casualties were military personnel. It could be argued that a just and proportionate response would limit itself to military targets.
Japan had already shown their intentions when they attacked unprovoked.
Japan's military had, of course, committed much more heinous acts than Pearl Harbor in the previous years - though not against American citizens - since it had pursued an imperialist war in China with extreme brutality, encompassing the deaths of many millions of civilians.
I think I agree with shav - the good guys can be defined as the people who don't kill children.
13 Sep 20
@athousandyoung saidI don’t think that was the reason at all.
By "back down" I mean the Japanese military machine thought the USA would not challenge Japan's attempts to create a large empire.
13 Sep 20
@mott-the-hoople saidKennedy's military blockade of Cuba in 1962 was instrumental in resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis.
How was the US to know japan did or did not possess an abomb. Several countries were in an arms race to develop nuclear weapons. USSR finalized theirs soon after.
Name one blockade that has worked.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147484
13 Sep 20
@shavixmir saidis there an echo in here?
The question you should be asking is: why did Japan attack America when they knew the US could out-man and out manufacture them.
What drove them to such a measure?