Quote:
Originally Posted by Enkidu22
This discussion has started to go into wrong direction IMO.
Just read this: The Hiroshima Myth by John V. Denson
It's not that I say americans were the evil ones, japanese did just as bad things. What I can't stand is the fact that japanese crimes are called crimes against humanity and many heard about them but american ones aren't, they are instead called lesser evil or necesary evil. You have to understand that those few hundred thousands japanese cilvilians didn't have to die to end the war. That was a lie made up by US politics. |
I have read it, and I read "The Decision to Use the Bomb" by Gar Alperovitz in full as well. As I said, my degree was in History with a specialty on WW2, and my 32 page honors thesis was on the dropping of the bombs. So I've read books on both sides, read translated accounts from Japanese officials, and much, much more. Don't mistake my disagreeing with you for ignorance of the opposing arguments. I've read them, and disagree with most of what Alperovitz and others wrote.
Key things to consider:
The "feelers" were unofficial and had no authority to do anything. They were sent out to gauge the will of the opposition, and in the event surrender became necessary, what were the best terms they could get. They basically presented 3 options to see what the reaction to them were, (though again, they had no authority to actually surrender for Japan in any way):
1) Japan keeps what little remains of its empire (a few islands and Manchuria) as well as its entire govt. Basically, we stop where we are and everyone keeps what they still have.
2) Japan surrenders it's empire but keeps its entire govt.
3) The rest of the govt steps down by the Emperor remains.
"Feelers" were also sent to the Russian govt to see if they could be encouraged to stay out of the war.
If the US govt looked too eager to compromise and accept terms of surrender, it would have emboldened the Japanese and encouraged them to fight on longer in order to get even better terms.
The Japanese were preparing a massive build up of forces in Kyushu to defend against the coming invasion. If they were planning to surrender, there was no need or reason for this
The Japanese govt, although it secretly had a few "doves" looking for a way to surrender, officially was 100% opposed to surrender before the atomic bombs, and even after Hiroshima and the Russian declaration of war!
The Potsdam Declaration was just one of many opportunities for the official govt of Japan to surrender or offer terms for surrender if they really wanted to, but they unanimously rejected it.
Alperovitz states that the main reason the bombs were dropped was to intimidate the Russians after they declared war on Japan. But the US had been asking for the Russians to join the war for months, they wanted their help, they didn't want to frighten them off! Since his book was written during the cold war, I think he fell into the trap of seeing EVERY US action as a counter to the Russians, even when evidence strongly suggests it was not.
I've examined the claims and evidence from both sides, weighed them, and I came to the following conclusion, which I've stated before: While more effort might have been made to follow up on the feelers and see if an official offer of surrender could be obtained, I don't believe that the Japanese were truly willing to surrender at that lowest rung of conditions yet. They
might have settled for retaining Manchuria and their entire govt at that point, but that was unacceptable to us. Even keeping just their militaristic govt was unacceptable, because they could just start another war in a few years. Something more needed to be done to truly convince them to surrender, either a land invasion or the bombings. IMO, an invasion would have cost far more civilian lives than were lost in the bombings, PLUS millions more US and Japanese soldiers' lives. And I therefor believe that the atomic bombs were sadly the best option available.