Nuklear bomb

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Splitter

I agree with much of that. I would just say that the indoctrination of the population, and the training of civilians to resist invasion, took the form of kamikaze attacks and mass suicides/murder-suicides on Okinawa. It is one thing to train citizens to resist invasion, it is another to encourage them to blow up their families with grenades to avoid capture.

The only point to that paragraph is to show once again that the Japanese were not going to give up willingly under the terms of the Allies.

The terms of the surrender offer were set forth at the Potsdam Conference. They were pretty straight forward and on re-reading, did not mention the Emperor. The last part of the surrender demand stated that it had to be unconditional and, short of that, Japan would be annihilated.

Japan rejected this and sought conditions to the terms, such as the retention of the Emperor as head of state (basically) among others. Even after two A-bombs and Soviet invasion, the Japanese hierarchy was split on surrender. Some in the military actively resisted.

A very determined people to say the least.

BTW, I have absolutely no doubt that military leaders in the west (the US) wanted to use the bomb as soon as it was deployable. It's what they do: kill people, break things, occupy territory. They are the sharp end of the spear.

I will also say that one can tell a lot about a culture by the way they treat those they have conquered. MacArthur and the Allies treated the Japanese much better than they expected.

Splitter

Fair points made all around, which i have no problem conceding. Reasonable debate? On my internets? Unbelievable!

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by Splitter

Just to clarify for those actually reading this thread, I think you meant to say that the Allies were looking for "unconditional" surrender.

The Japanese wanted conditions, such as the retention of the Emperor, no demilitarization, no Allied occupation, and also wanted to keep some of their territorial gains.

The Japanese went to the Soviets (neutral with Japan at the time) to have them act as intermediaries to get the conditions put into the surrender terms. Here again, the Soviets did not want the war to end so quickly so they sort of played both sides against the middle. It didn't matter though because the Allies had agreed that "unconditional surrender" was the only option.

So yes it is true that Japan refused to surrender until after the second bomb and not immediately even then. I just discovered a piece of history I did not know before: elements of the Japanese military tried to stop the surrender with a coup and nearly succeeded.

Splitter

Hmm, I may have to do some more reading to refresh my memory.

But:

I thought the US basically gave an ultimatum that entailed: "surrender or you will be viciously attacked on your homeland." In other wards, the actions, or in this case, lack of actions of the emperor led to the 1st and 2nd bomb drop. I also thought any sort of negotiations to the terms of the conditional/unconditional surrender didn't even take place until Japan finally responded back well after the 2nd bomb had been dropped. Of course, I may be wrong, but I thought that's how I studied it.

In any case, Japan's emperor had the power to stop the attack at any time and knew full well of the consequences of not responding or not surrendering.

Such a tragic loss of life in any case.

Cheers!

[ATAG_Bliss]

Also,

As Blackdog previously stated. Very nice calm debate on this one. I've enjoyed it!

Thanks!

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by SYN_Bliss

Hmm, I may have to do some more reading to refresh my memory.

But:

I thought the US basically gave an ultimatum that entailed: "surrender or you will be viciously attacked on your homeland." In other wards, the actions, or in this case, lack of actions of the emperor led to the 1st and 2nd bomb drop. I also thought any sort of negotiations to the terms of the conditional/unconditional surrender didn't even take place until Japan finally responded back well after the 2nd bomb had been dropped. Of course, I may be wrong, but I thought that's how I studied it.

In any case, Japan's emperor had the power to stop the attack at any time and knew full well of the consequences of not responding or not surrendering.

Such a tragic loss of life in any case.

Cheers!

To the best of my knowledge, the terms for surrender were negotiated amongst the Allies days before the bomb was dropped at the Potsdam conference. The bomb was tested early on during the conference and Truman was informed of the success. He told Churchill and hinted about it to Stalin, but Stalin didn't think the Manhattan project would come to fruition that quickly.

At the end of the conference, they put out a joint declaration (it took some convincing for Stalin to sign off on it). The declaration contained the terms for surrender with the last sentence speaking of "unconditional" and total destruction. It was also decided that none of the Allies would make a separate peace.

Good info here from what I remember: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan

Japan ignored the declaration but kept up diplomatic efforts to get the Soviets to intervene and get them better terms. Then time ran out.

To the best of my recollection.

Splitter

EDIT: I just repeated myself, sorry.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Back on the topic of the A-bombs, reading from the scientists involved in the project would be an eye-opener for many. A few years ago i was reading a book by Richard Feynman, a world-reknowned physicist that was involved in the manhattan project (he was also in the comittee investigating the Challenger space shuttle disaster that identified the problems that caused the fuel leak and explosion).

It wasn't a complete autobiography, more like a series of chapters from his life, but a lot of it centered around science and the moral implications regarding its application. According to this guy, most of the scientists involved in the manhattan project were believing, hoping and downright advocating to use one of the weapons for display purposes.

The idea was to arrange a meeting with a Japanese delegation, drop the first bomb on an uninhabbited atol and tell them that unless they surrender, the rest will be dropped on their cities (Japan didn't know how many bombs the US had in stock). However, the military denied it because they wanted to observe the bomb at work on a live target. That's it, straight from the horse's mouth, the people who built the bombs and asked the authorities to conduct a display drop but had their request denied.

Generally the scientists involved had a far different view of the weapons to the politicians. In fact one of the motivations for the various spies leaking sensitive Manhattan material to the Soviets was a belief that US and British politicians could not be trust with a first strike capability. In that sense they showed great insight.

[jameson]

For those who would actually like to gain an understanding of why the atomic bomb was dropped on Japan: World At War - The Bomb. Those involved at the time explain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8pjb...eature=related

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by Splitter

To the best of my knowledge, the terms for surrender were negotiated amongst the Allies days before the bomb was dropped at the Potsdam conference. The bomb was tested early on during the conference and Truman was informed of the success. He told Churchill and hinted about it to Stalin, but Stalin didn't think the Manhattan project would come to fruition that quickly.

At the end of the conference, they put out a joint declaration (it took some convincing for Stalin to sign off on it). The declaration contained the terms for surrender with the last sentence speaking of "unconditional" and total destruction. It was also decided that none of the Allies would make a separate peace.

Good info here from what I remember: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan

Japan ignored the declaration but kept up diplomatic efforts to get the Soviets to intervene and get them better terms. Then time ran out.

To the best of my recollection.

Splitter

EDIT: I just repeated myself, sorry.

Yes I understand and realize the negotiations took place, days prior, between the allies. But what I'm saying is it took the 2nd bomb to actually get the emperor to the negotiating table. In other words, he ignored everything and didn't respond until the 2nd nuke had been dropped. Is that correct?

If so, that was my point. He could have stopped it and was well warned of the consequences of his choice or lack there of. That's why I say the US should not have the majority of the blame placed on them for the drops. The emperor knew and was well warned of what would happen "IF" he didn't surrender or respond. But if we want to go back to cause and effect, we could also go back as far as what started the war in the 1st place.

Again, I could be wrong, but that's how I thought I remembered studying the strike.. Gonna watch the youtube video that was posted..

Cheers!

[Splitter]

Ah, understood. My understanding is the same.

Splitter

[julian265]

I don't see the point of the discussion of the moral correctness of the A-bomb as used on Japan in the second war.

Why? Even counting delayed death to radiation related causes, I think many, many more people were killed in conventional (fire) bombing of cities across Japan. If they didn't drop the A-bombs, they probably would have continued the large-scale bombing raids to the same effect, just over a longer time.

IMO, a discussion more relevant to human suffering would be about the mass bombing of civilian population, regardless of the weapon type. That's not to say that A-bombs aren't worth talking about, I am just puzzled as to why they're talked about as the cruellest thing the west did to Japan, when the numbers say otherwise.

Willing to discuss, of course

[swiss]

But what I'm saying is it took the 2nd bomb to actually get the emperor to the negotiating table.

And that's ok - since this bomb had the name of a different city already painted on it...