Was Dropping the Atomic Bomb Necessary for Ending the War with Japan?

[DDLDSDB]

Originally Posted by jdbeatty

Japanese A-Bomb: Rhodes, "Making of the Atomic Bomb;" Powers, "Heisenberg's War;" Frank, "Downfall."

Surrender: Bix, "Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan;" Frank, ibid; Herries, "Soldiers of the Sun;" Varley, "The Samurai."

Why?

Cause. "Hirohito :Behind the Myth by Yoshio Nishina states they (Japan)were very close to a workable, doable A-bomb.. They only lacked a good supply of uranium. I'm sure you recall U-234 which was on it's way to Japan when Germany surrendered. On board was 1,120pounds of uranium oxide,mercury and other critically needed items. The Navy crew who boarded the sub reported 560 kilos of uranium oxide intended for Japan. Enough for two atomic bombs. It was reported an experimental atomic bomb was set off on Aug. 10 1945 off the coast of N.Korea near Hugnam by Japan.And 5 days later,well,you know.

And yes, for several months prior to the end of the war Japan was trying to go through Russia to 'end' the war. Stalin of course had his reasons to keep it secret.

[DDLDSDB]

As an add on, even Gen MacArtur and Adm Nimitz were against the bombings.

[jdbeatty]

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

Cause. "Hirohito :Behind the Myth by Yoshio Nishina states they (Japan)were very close to a workable, doable A-bomb.. They only lacked a good supply of uranium. I'm sure you recall U-234 which was on it's way to Japan when Germany surrendered. On board was 1,120pounds of uranium oxide,mercury and other critically needed items. The Navy crew who boarded the sub reported 560 kilos of uranium oxide intended for Japan. Enough for two atomic bombs. It was reported an experimental atomic bomb was set off on Aug. 10 1945 off the coast of N.Korea near Hugnam by Japan.And 5 days later,well,you know..

Nishina's ludicrous claims on the Japanese nuclear program have been refuted several dozen times over the years by far better authorities than I. Just on the surface they make no sense whatsoever.

How would the crew have determined what the cargo was "intended" for?1120 pounds of uranium ore or oxide would yield just over 1.5 grams of fissionable material by 1945 technology, a far cry from the 20 kilos required to reach critical mass. The ALSOS mission scientists who inspected that cargo in May 1945 determined that the high-grade Belgian pitchblende was probably all that was left of the German project, left over from the 1300 metric tons abandoned in France in 1940. Others have asserted, in other forums, that there was a live German A-bomb on board, bomb release mechanisms (!) and other paraphenalia, none of which was listed on the inventory that ALSOS prepared.

Japan had no delivery means, no way of triggering a device, no production facilities for making the fuel. How in the name of anything would Japan have gotten all that equipment to Korea for an "experimental atomic bomb" when US submarines were battle-surfacing on junks in the Inland Sea and the air-dropped mines had brought even coastal traffic around Japan to a near standstill?

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

And yes, for several months prior to the end of the war Japan was trying to go through Russia to 'end' the war. Stalin of course had his reasons to keep it secret.

What reasons? He hid them so well that no record of them exists in the archives, and no one remembers them actually taking place. Even the Japanese have no record or memory of them beyond the single contact, well documented and rebuffed, in April 1945.

[jdbeatty]

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

As an add on, even Gen MacArtur and Adm Nimitz were against the bombings.

So? Their opinions have what bearing on the nessesity?

[DDLDSDB]

Nishina (father of the Jap atomic bomb) had a very distinguished career.He designed and built Japans first Cyclotron in 1940.He discovered uranium 237. In 1941 he was chosen to head Japans uranium bomb project.(among other things) He was hardly the "nut " case you make him out to be.

The crew just reported what was on board. I did not say they determined what it was for. Enough to build 2 bombs. Delivery ..in their locality ,they sure could have made a mess of our troops.

As far a Stalin and surrender talks, He had to much to gain by Japans defeat. And we all know what happens to 'records'. at least should.(especially Soviet Russia) Heck Russia didn't let 'records' of things that happened till many yrs. after the war. The U.S. as well as most any Nation on earth still has 'records' that are not disclosed to the public.

ANd as for MacArthur and Nimitz, just what was this pole about??

[jdbeatty]

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

Nishina (father of the Jap atomic bomb) had a very distinguished career.He designed and built Japans first Cyclotron in 1940.He discovered uranium 237. In 1941 he was chosen to head Japans uranium bomb project.(among other things) He was hardly the "nut " case you make him out to be.

He was making claims for which he had no physical or documentary evidence. There is still no evidence to support his claims.

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

The crew just reported what was on board. I did not say they determined what it was for. Enough to build 2 bombs. Delivery ..in their locality ,they sure could have made a mess of our troops.

Actually you said "the crew determined they were headed for Japan."

And that volume was nowhere near enough to build two bombs.

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

As far a Stalin and surrender talks, He had to much to gain by Japans defeat. And we all know what happens to 'records'. at least should.(especially Soviet Russia) Heck Russia didn't let 'records' of things that happened till many yrs. after the war. The U.S. as well as most any Nation on earth still has 'records' that are not disclosed to the public.

What did Stalin have to gain from Japan's surrender? From their defeat, yes, but nothing from negotiating a surrender on the terms the samurai were offering that no one would accept.

What would the current regime gain by hiding such records? Stalin has been thoroughly discredited since the 1950's. Evidence of perfidity would only shed more light on his monstrosity.

Originally Posted by DDLDSDB

ANd as for MacArthur and Nimitz, just what was this pole about??

Ah, no. It was about "was it nessesary," not "who agreed with the decision."

Look at it this way: If Japan did have an advanced nuclear weapons program, don't you think, some time in three generations, some one would have published the evidence, and loudly, for it as justification for the weapons used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki against the shrill anti-nuke crowd?

Look at the evidence. Think. Look at more than one source.

That's all that need be said.

[DDLDSDB]

Your first point... hearsay

2nd....You totaly misquoted me.
And yes, enough for two bombs. hearsay again on your part.

3rd....Yes ,MacArthur and Nimitz said it was not necessary. As the poll question asked.

4th... Just what I said. Stalin would gain nothing with the surrender. He was already to get China(communism) with the sellout of Chiang Kai-shek by FDR.

You like to take note of your expertise. Just what is it? I hope it's not a 'college professor'.

You are correct about ONE thing...enough said.

[PatM]

I'm afraid both bombs were necessary for the closer we got to the Home Islands, the stiffer the resistance. The Battle for Okinawa unfortunately has been overshadowed by Iwo Jima and except for those who were there and people such as ourselves is relatively unknown. I don't think I need to go into the casualty figures for that 82 day campaign, but using Okinawa as a yardstick, I would say it's a safe bet that Operations Olympic and Coronet would have been horrific.
I don't think a blockade would have been feasible given the kamikaze threat-I don't think the American people would stand for us just sitting there and taking it. We lost 34 ships and suffered another nearly 300 damaged just from April to June alone with 5000 sailors killed and nearly just as many wounded. The only time I know of a blockade "working" was the Cuban Missile Crisis-even then is wasn't called a blockade but a quarantine. And the only reason it worked was that both ourselves and the Soviets realize we were looking into an abyss from which we could never return. And anyone remember the Berlin Airlift? No, barring use of the atomic bomb meant we would have had to slug it out with Japan suffering an even worse fate given the casualties she would have incurred and the very good chance she would have been divided up like Germany.

[Mollypitcher]

Originally Posted by Jim O

Perhaps. The bombings resulted in an estimated 200,000-250,000 deaths between them. I think many more than that might have had to die by starvation before Japan would surrender, if they would consider surrender at all. Remember, this was not a culture that believed in surrender. They were prepared to fight for their islands inch by inch and to arm their populace to do just that. Commonly used estimates at the time were that in an invasion the US would suffer about 500,000 casualties (estimates ranged from very low numbers to almost 2,000,000 - see Casualty Projections for the Invasion of Japan; Kyushu, 1945; Truman). Judging by how the tenacity of Japanese soldiers, those were not unreasonable estimates.

I voted that they were necessary, and that while cruel, did actually serve several purposes. They ended the war, they showed the world the real danger of atomic warfare, and they saved Allied lives. I make no apology for the fact that Imperial Japan had been embarked on a war of expansion and had committed many atrocities in areas that they occupied. One can argue whether US policy provoked Japan into war (it surely did) but it also is historical fact that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war, invaded the Philippines and southeast Asia, raped and killed many innocent Chinese in Nanjing and elsewhere, mistreated prisoners of war, and forced women to work in "comfort stations". Sadly, this was the fate that the Emperor and the militarists had wrought upon their own populace. If it meant saving an equivalent number of Allied lives then there is no question in my mind of what was "necessary".

You've pretty well covered all the major reasons why the bombs were absolutely necessary. One might add amongst the atrocities the Japanese exercised were the killing and eating of American airmen by certain officers. Westerners still do not understand the Japanese mind at the time, nor it's capabilities.

Mollypitcher

[hangar]

The dropping of that atom bombs were not absolutely necessary. As has been stated, American military leaders knew Japan was beaten at that point. However the invasion of Japan would have been costly. Also, the quick defeat of Japan did not allow the Soviet Union to gain much of the Japanese controlled land. Japan also certainly avoided much destruction because of the dropping of the bombs.

edit- sorry for resurrecting this dead thread, i had to post for english class.