Why didn't the US drop an atomic bomb off the cost of Japan,

Are you asking why, in a scenario of total war, a combatant would attack a strategically important objective instead of deliberately missing it?

Seems like that would be a lot less effective.

>>1488171
Because we wanted to win

>>1488182

A demonstration would have been almost as effective, just minus the 80,000+ civilian casualties

>>1488171

Why didn't the germans bomb off the coast of Britain instead of bombing london? Surely a demonstration would have been almost as effective.

>>1488220
The 80,000+ casualties is exactly the reason it was effective you moran

>>1488171
message to Stalin

>>1488171
>Surely a demonstration would have been almost as effective.

YEAH ITS NOT LIKE THE NEEDED TO DROP 2 BOMBS BEFORE THE JAPS GOT THE MESSAGE

>yfw America won the War with terrorism

Why didn't the US drop the bomb on a military or strategic target instead of exterminating population centers?

inb4 quasi-racist arguments that Japanese are an insectoid hivemind who only respond to total annihilation. Those arguments might have held sway in the 1940s, not today.

>>1488276

>The 80,000+ casualties is exactly the reason it was effective you moran

Not really

>>1488171
why didn't nippon just not act retarded and stay in war to no gain

>>1488220
>>1488298
They had a demonstration, you idiot. The Japanese thought it was bait until the US actually dropped the damn thing on Hiroshima.

>>1488295
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both strategic targets - Hiroshima had a good sized military base and Nagasaki was a major industrial center.
I imagine the US had already BTFO every other strategic asset that wasn't in a population center so that kind of narrowed down the remaining available targets.

>>1488309
>they had a demonstration
Are you suggesting that the Trinity test was some kind of international demonstration, and not a highly classified weapons test that was not revealed publicly until after the war?
Because that would pretty fucking retarded.

>>1488309

Where and when?

The Japanese sent observers?

>>1488260

You're retarded to compare the two scenarios.

>>1488171

Japanese tried to surrender multiple times. It basically comes down to the fact that Japan did not want to get rid of their 2600 year old dynasty. Japan wanted to keep the Emperor. Japan also agreed to give up all conquered land if they got to keep the Emperor. They were turned down on several of their peace treaties.

Source: Japanese Peace treaty attempts

Also, it makes you wonder. Maybe the US did it so no one in the future would mess with them. Think about it. No one would mess with a country knowing they have superior military technology.

>>1489510
That's actually a hypothesis I've heard for the rather flippant use of the second bomb, basically a warning to the Soviets.

To imply that the nukes were somehow magnitudes more heinous than a conventional bombing campaign is just foolish.

Had the US just conducted the kind of bombing raid that it had conducted all over Japan, ultimately killing far more people than the A-bombs, would that have been preferable? The death tolls achieved at Hiroshima & Nagasaki could have been repeated without even using the A-bomb. Would it have been better if their deaths came from conventional weaponry?

>>1488288
war is terrorism, so you gotta finish it quick

t. sherman

>>1489510
They got to keep the Emperor.... it was in the treaty offered before the nukes were dropped,. they declined.

>>1489510
You mean, the attempts they made through a soviet embassy that were by and large not even transmitted to the Americans because they didn't meet minimum American requirements on things that had nothing to do with the Emperor, like continuing their occupations of the DEI and Malaya?

>>1489545

I'm talking about the power of the Emperor...

>>1489569

Spreading culture is bad? Even if it makes the people more civilized?

>>1489591
>hacking people to death as a game
>more civilized
Are you retarded?

>>1489510
>Boo hoo the Japs tried to surrender (and keep some of their pilfered territory)
>Why didn't the evil Americans accept?!?!
We told them what they wanted and said that there would be no negotiation. They didn't seem to understand that until they got nuked.

>>1488260
Great analogy anon. 2,000lb bombs equal 200kt bombs

>>1488276
More like the destruction that caused those deaths.

>>1488309
Bait

>>1488171
Expensive. 1945 American leaders didn't want the war to go on any longer so they took the quick way out.

>>1489517
Would have been much more accurate tbf.

>>1488171
Because it wasn't about defeating Japan, but spooking the Soviets.

>>1489591
(You)

>>1489618
That doesn't make the nuking any more morally justifiable.

Everyone will have their excuses but imo the reason is that people were going insane during WII and all sense of human decency was dying on all sides. We don't notice now because the winning side (of whom includes the majority of this site) writes the history books and WWII has been reimagined as the good war that most closely resembles a magnificent war between good and evil as can be expected to exist out of fantasy.

Truman simply did not care about Japanese civilian lives. No one did at that point, everyone was targeting and massacring civilian centers when they could. It was just a statistic and one sin everyone else was doing and had done previously. The realpolitik reasons were a bonus, but I don't think they truly factored in to a weighting measurement on the utilitarian justification for the bomb because they weren't even seriously considering it as something not to be done on universal human rights grounds. The question isn't why but "why not?".

>>1489628
It was about defeating Japan, defeating Japan before the Soviets could land a small infantry battalion in Hokkaido then claim half of Japan post-war.

>>1488171
Because they wanted to actually do some damage with the incredibly expensive and time intensive weapons they had built. There was no guarantee that japan would surrender following the bombs. america was preparing for a ground invasion and anything that made that invasion easier was a good thing. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both actual military targets

>>1489653
>I have a six year old's understanding of politics

>>1489618
It's funny because the "unconditional surrender" was actually still conditional. The US made certain assurances to Japan, assurances that were very similar to some of the dove's demands.

>>1489545
>hey got to keep the Emperor.... it was in the treaty offered before the nukes were dropped,
There was no treaty offered. Only "offer" was unconditional surrender.

>>1489510
>Source: Japanese Peace treaty attempts
That's not how source works, tomodachi.

>>1489662
Source: certain assurances made by the US

Rofl, everybody knows that the only reason why US used nuclear weapon is to scare the Soviet Union and show the soviets american power. If you learn some history you would exactly know, that even after these 2 bombings japanese didn't agree to accept the surrender. Though after soviet blitzkrieg in Manchuria (when ussr army fully defeated and crushed superior japanese army almost withous casualties), which ended only 08.20.1945 (less than 2 weeks), Japanese Empire agreed to surrender and capitulate to the Allies. So funny to read here that some american kids surely believe that their country saved a lot of american lifes with these bombings. Sorry to disappoint you, but it was only made to show the world the power of US and make other countries cooperate with it. Ofcourse, what do the lives a couple of hundred thousand japanese civilians mean against the economic and military influence of the great murrica?

>>1489775
>So funny to read here that some american kids surely believe that their country saved a lot of american lifes with these bombings.
>drop nukes
>don't land troops
American lives saved
>don't drop nukes
>land troops
American lives lost

Not exactly rocket science family

>>1489792
Seems like you didn't even read. Told ya japanese would surrender anyway whether murrica attacked them or didn't. It was not the question of atomic bombing, it was the problem of crushing their army on land which was fully solved by soviets in less than 2 weeks. 2 bombs didn't make any sense at all as after the second one on august 9-th japanese refused to surrender, but they agreed after russian blitzkrieg on 20-th. Do you get it know?

>>1489775
>>1489828
>IT WUZ THE BIG BAD SOVIETS
Fuck off, Vatnik.

>>1489977
Actually you are the only vatnik here as you dont have any arguments to confirm your point of view and use stupid memes on /his instead of trying to prove your position. Oh, sorry, ofcourse, you dont have any kind of position as you haven't even ended the school.

>>1489510
>Oh no we going to lose war
>herro? America? Y-yeah, we surrender!
>now just let us surrender in peace and leave us alone and let us do whatever we want

>>1489775

Yeah, it's totally not like you have statements by the Japanese government contradicting it, the surrender speech by the Emperor specifically mentioning a "new and terrible weapon that would utterly annihilate us".

It's also not like the Kwangtung army was their entire land force, or that the Soviets had a fleet with which to invade Japan. (Their plan to continue by invading Hokkaido literally started with "beg some ships from the Americans)

And it's certainly not like the extremely dysfunctional dynamics of the Japanese government, where multiple independent bodies all had veto power over decisions like this, can't come to decisions quickly.

Get bent, retard.

>>1489570
>I'm talking about the power of the Emperor...
The Emperor of Japan hadn't had any real power since the Shogun took over in medieval times, you clearly have no fucking clue what you are talking about.
>>1489667
The Potsdam declaration made absolutely no mention of the Emperor, so you're talking shit.

>>1489661

different anon here, and >>1489653 is correct

>>1489653

Given that the Soviet plan to invade Hokkaido involved getting ships from the Americans, if Truman was that hellbent on denying Soviet access, why didn't he just..... deny them access?

>>1488171

Why didn't they just blockade japan with battleships until they surrendered?

>>1490199

They had already done that, except the blockade was accomplished more by airplanes, submarines, and mines than battleships, BB are overkill when your enemy's fleet is in ruins and you've got a lot of coastline to cover.

>>1490209

So then all they had to do was wait.

>>1490217

Theoretically. But of course, they weren't sure how long it would take for the blockade to bring about surrender, they weren't sure how many people would die from starvation, but it was certain to be an enormous number, and they hadn't gotten any indication since February when they started the mine dropping that Japan was ready to call it quits, even with the blockade.

>>1490027
>Yeah, it's totally not like you have statements by the Japanese government contradicting it, the surrender speech by the Emperor specifically mentioning a "new and terrible weapon that would utterly annihilate us".

That's a speech to the people, not the internal rationale of the Japanese High Command. It makes sense for the Emperor after the decision to surrender has already been made to claim that it was the fault of a 'terrible new superweapon' because then it's not the Japanese leaders fault the war was lost. It was unavoidable. Nothing could be done about it. No need to blame your leaders. Nobody could have foreseen this.

That line of reasoning shifts Japan from being violent imperial aggressors responsible for numerous warcrimes to being the prostate victims of some new heinous weapon.

>>1489520
Underrated

>>1489517
To imply that the Holocaust was somehow magnitudes more heinous than a conventional genocide is just foolish.

Had Nazi Germany just conducted the kind of mass killings that it had conducted all over Eastern Europe, ultimately killing far more people than the Holocaust, would that have been preferable? The death tolls achieved at Auschwitz & Treblinka could have been repeated without even using industrial methods. Would it have been better if their deaths came from conventional executions?

>>1488171

Because it didn't take seeing the devastating aftermath of ONE atomic bomb destroying a city for Japan to finally surrender....it took seeing the devastating impact of TWO atom bombs destroying their cities, before the stubborn yellow bastards finally gave up.

>Wahhh wahhh muh 200,000 civilian deaths
>meanwhile mainland Asia civilian casualties caused by japs 5 million and up

Crocodile tears

>>1490233
And the rest of it?

>>1490027
Funny to watch at murrica dog barking in pathetic attempts to excuse US war crimes. Besides the already mentioned fact that it was the much better way to talk about super weapon than to admit that they were totally beaten by soviet union, russian empire in the past, it is also has to be mentioned that from this moment until today japanese are licking american boots without stopping, so it is not suprisingly at all that they started to blame the great murrica in their loss.

And yes, the Kwangtung army was the hugest one, and it's total destruction in few days simply led to rise of the defeatism and, finally, capitulation of army which, since this moment, could not protect it's country anymore, especially from the best army in the world at that moment, trained by the most bloody war of 20-th century.

And ofcourse, you probably don't know about coup d'etat attempt which took place on 08.15 and was orginized by group of people who were against of capitulation. Seems strange that after 6 days of using a GREAT SUPER MURRICA(GOD BLESS IT) WEAPON stupid japanese generals still had some hope, isn't it? Only after the suppression of this uprising and realization of the fact that one country cant fight versus all others, including the one with the strongest army, led to final capitulation of Japan.

But it's okay, murrica dog, you can still believe that Japan would fight till the end versus all the nations around the world if only the great god bless it long live holy murrica would not kill some civilians, which, ofcourse are more important for winning the war than trained soldiers, more than 1.000.000 of which were killed or captured by russians in a few days (more than were killed or captured by the great murrica through all the 4 years of war).

>>1490270
>Had Nazi Germany just conducted the kind of mass killings that it had conducted all over Eastern Europe, ultimately killing far more people than the Holocaust
>implying they wouldn't have if they had the chance to

>>1488295
>inb4 quasi-racist arguments that Japanese are an insectoid hivemind who only respond to total annihilation. Those arguments might have held sway in the 1940s, not today.

Do you have any argument refuting this or are you just going to assert this without evidence??????????????????????????

>>1488295
>inb4 quasi-racist arguments that Japanese are an insectoid hivemind who only respond to total annihilation
>implying this isn't not only true, but true for all Asians
>implying that Germany, who were much less collectivist, didn't need to be totally subjugated in a conventional campaign
>implying that there isn't a huge amount of historical precedent for this shit

Seriously, it's funny to see some really believe this crap. Isn't it obvious that US wouldn't have lost anything if they didn't use nuclear weapon? Were there some japanese soldiers threatening the security of the United States? No. Were there any serious economic problems? No. Had they to get their soldiers landing on the japan to fight their army? No, it was enough to block the country and wait or to let the soviets deal with it. How is it possible to believe this american propaganda crap for 6-years old children? Shame on you.

>>1489606
its more civilized than the cannibalistic rituals pacific islander tribes were participating in

File: eb4.jpg (102KB, 654x539px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 654x539px

>>1490291
>>1490291

Or they could have just blockaded the islands and waited for a surrender.

They didn't actually need to bomb anybody.

>>1490231
>America
>worrying about starving civilians of foreign and hostile country
>lol

>>1490231
Guess japanese have to thank US nonstop for this great of mercy. Just think about how many people could die in case of blockade! And America saved all these innocent people lives by dropping 2 atomic bombs on small cities. Isn't it sweet?

>>1490483
>why don't we go with the humane option
>starvation

Have you heard of a place called Biafra?

>>1490444

>And yes, the Kwangtung army was the hugest one, and it's total destruction in few days simply led to rise of the defeatism


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwantung_Army

http://www.taiwandocuments.org/japansurrender.htm

Objectively wrong.


>And ofcourse, you probably don't know about coup d'etat attempt which took place on 08.15 and was orginized by group of people who were against of capitulation.

Because coups get organized in a day, right? Oh no wait that's retarded. It's almost like Japan had a "government" formed of feuding cliques who didn't see eye to eye, and the various factions had different appraisals.

>But it's okay, murrica dog, you can still believe that Japan would fight till the end versus all the nations around the world if only the great god bless it long live holy murrica would not kill some civilians, which, ofcourse are more important for winning the war than trained soldiers, more than 1.000.000 of which were killed or captured by russians in a few days (more than were killed or captured by the great murrica through all the 4 years of war)

Kwantung dind't even HAVE a million soldiers you idiot. And I suggest you do the math for the Philippines+ the Solomons, because I get the impression you're too drunk on cheap vodka to do basic addition.

And let's not forget, that the Soviets didn't have the means to GET to Japan. Surely, the Japanese were shaking in their boots from the "form bridge of drowned bodies from Korea to Honshu" method that Stalin probably had planned.

Were you born this stupid, or did it take some hard work to get there?

>>1490475
Butthurt faggot
We didn't want more Americans to die
That's enough justification to turn the whole shitty island into glass

>muh Japan surrendered because they were afraid of the Soviets meme
Japan knew the Soviets would attack them months before the nukes when Soviets refused to renew the nonaggression pact.

>>1490507
Guess you should better try to learn to read all words correctly at first. Then there may be a discussion.

>>1490501

Who said anything about being humane?

I'm just pointing out that there was no actual reason why Truman HAD TO drop the bomb.

Japan was already soundly defeated. All they had to do was surround the japanese islands and wait for a surrender.

The primary motivation for dropping the bomb was to demonstrate the power of the atom bombs to the soviet union.

>>1490509
But they didn't knew it will take less than 2 weeks for soviets to completely defeat them.

>>1490522
That or we'd already been bombing them to ashes for years, and we simply moved onto the next deadliest thing.

The atomic bombings weren't even the deadliest American bombing raids.

>>1490444
>Besides the already mentioned fact that it was the much better way to talk about super weapon than to admit that they were totally beaten by soviet union, russian empire in the past,

>russian empire in the past

You lost the Russo-Japanese War senpai.

>>1490525

>There were no forces in China
>There were no forces in Korea
>There were no forces in Japan itself


Inbred vatnik cannot into counting or geography.

>>1490530

>The atomic bombings weren't even the deadliest American bombing raids.

My point is there really wasn't any reason to be doing any bombing raids at all, nuclear or otherwise.

Just blockade the islands and wait.

>>1490522
What are you talking about? You are forgetting the japanese terrorists invaded US which were ready to take the hostages any moment until their country surrender. Ofcourse the american government couldn't risk their lifes.

>>1490522
No, the japs were mad cunts who would have fought to the last man, woman and child before they surrendered to the West.

The atom bombs just scared them into submission, and even then there was a planned coup to stop the surrender

>>1490537
Because we wanted the war to end.

This isn't tremendously complicated, people don't like being conscripted and dragged from their homes, and governments don't like spending billions of dollars a month to send them halfway around the world.

>>1490533
Yeah that is exactly what i was speaking about. It was hard for japanese to admit their total defeat by those russians who lost versus them 40 years ago

>>1490542

>No, the japs were mad cunts who would have fought to the last man, woman and child before they surrendered to the West.

You can't really fight a naval blockade after your own navy has been destroyed.

>>1490535
>there were no forces in china
Where do you think the Kwangtung army was disposed, 10-years old historian?

Fucking butthurting brainwashed kids, it's hilarious sometimes to see how much the population of US is hypnotized by it's own massmedia and stupid education system.

>>1490545
>This isn't tremendously complicated, people don't like being conscripted and dragged from their homes, and governments don't like spending billions of dollars a month to send them halfway around the world.
Yeah, much cheeper is to construct some atomic bombs.

>>1490545

I'm just pointing out that Truman did in fact have other options that didn't involve risking American lives.

This whole idea that somehow Truman was forced to drop the bomb "to save American lives" is just wrong.

All they really had to do was blockade the islands and wait.

Yes, it would have taken a bit longer, but not very much longer because by that point Japan was already defeated anyway.

>>1490562
I love that phase when somebody is so BTFO that they can no longer respond to individual posts, so they start leaving passive aggressive comments instead.

>>1489775
That is literally all conjecture based on Stalin's personal reaction...

>>1490573
Yeah, probably.

The Manhattan project was pretty expensive, but it was probably cheaper than a blockade.

>>1488171
ethnic cleansing.jomon

>>1490585

The immense cost of the manhattan project is another factor in why alternative options weren't considered.

>"We spent a bazillion dollars developing this bomb, we have to use it whether it makes sense or not!!!!!"

>>1490562

Fucking butthurting brainwashed kids, it's hilarious sometimes to see how much the population of Russia is hypnotized by it's own government and stupid education system.

>>1489620
this

>>1490605
The Manhattan Project cost 2 billion bucks.

That's actually a lot less than it would cost to maintain a blockade until Japan surrendered.

Military operations are not cheap things.

>>1490554

Manchuria, you epsilon minus retard, which if you look at a period map, was considered a different territory entirely.

>>1490614

I don't know.

2 billion dollars could go a long way in 1945.

>>1490624
Are you retarded or a stupid troll? Manchuria was always a part of China, these times it was occupated by japanese. Oh my lord please phone your history teacher and beg him to give you some special lessons.

>>1490656
>Manchuria was always a part of China
Holy shit, not even him but no. The fucking Chinese HATE Manchus and it was only "Chinese" under the Qing and even then it wasn't considered Chinese. Manchuria being Chinese is a post-war phenomenon.

>>1490614
2 billion bucks for the most powerful weapon on the planet striking fear into the heart of your ideological enemy and ensuring that no sane nation would attempt to fight you seems like a good deal to me.

>>1490662
chinese couldn't hate manchus cause they assimilated and became a part of chinese folk. AND OFCOURSE in the middle of 20-th century it was a part of fucking china for several hundred of years. That guy was so damn trying to find a fault in dislocation of armies, when it's obvious that soviet army defeated japanese one wherever they were located, China, Mongolia, or a fucking Australia.

>>1490626
WW2 cost 600 billion total.

I'd bet money that 2 billion was less than the cost of a sustained blockade of the home islands, with every plane left in Japan crashing themselves into your ships.

Plus, that's program costs, not per bomb.

File: 1463745808257.jpg (65KB, 500x712px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 500x712px

>>1488171

Why waste a perfectly good bomb?

>>1490743
>we want to conquer you because you are so awesome and i want to be just like you

>>1490547
This, it's like saying defenders of a castle are going to fight to the last man woman and child when they can't even muster enough troops to sally forth.

>>1488295
Considering literally everything else was leveled....

>>1490757
Has a blockade ever actually forced a nation to surrender? Germany was blockade in WWI and they were still able to put up a fight.

>>1488171
This was actually considered. They considered dropping one in Tokyo Bay.

In the end they thought that actual destructive evidence was needed or else Japanese scientists might not believe it.

>>1490662
>Manchuria being Chinese is a post-war phenomenon.
wew lad even the concept of Manchuria was foreign to the Manchus.

>>1493188

Germany isn't an island.

Japan is literally just a collection of islands.

A naval blockade would completely cripple Japan.

>only have two bombs
>toss one into the fucking ocean

>>1488171
Cause Truman had a small man complex and wanted to throw his weight around and cause as much chaos as possible to impress Stalin

Stalin didn't care that much.

>>1493297
>refused to interbreed with han chinese until the 1930s
>foreign national concept
I don't think so, you fucking idiot

I used to wonder this as well, the best answer I was told or could come up with was: What if the bomb fails to explode, then we just look like retards.

File: Gin_Rummy_5262.jpg (18KB, 198x235px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 198x235px

>>1488295
>the largest still-functioning port and the largest untouched military base in Japan aren't strategic targets and you're racist if you think they are

>>1488171
They only had three.

File: 1423687664487.gif (2MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x300px

>>1488171
Truman was an ass

>>1493904
>>refused to interbreed with han chinese until the 1930s
Retard,Kangxi's mother was Han as well as Han defectors from Liaodong.

>foreign national concept
>The name Manju (Manzhou) was invented and given to the Jurchen people by Hong Taiji in 1635 as a new name for their ethnic group; however, the name "Manchuria" was never used by the Manchus or the Qing dynasty itself to refer to their homeland.

>>1490757
You forget that 2 billion was a sunk cost. It was spent before Germany surrendered. The US already paid for it. It was choosing between the 2 billion dollar bomb they had buyer's regret over or spending another 2 billion on a blockade and keeping their 2 billion bomb unused.

>>1494282
>One elite is the Manchu populace

>It was reported that among Banner people, both Manchu and Chinese (Hanjun) in Aihun, Heilongjiang in the 1920s, would seldom marry with Han civilians, but they (Manchu and Chinese Bannermen) would mostly intermarry with each other.[60] Owen Lattimore reported that during his January 1930 visit to Manchuria, he studied a community in Jilin (Kirin), where both Manchu and Chinese bannermen were settled at a town called Wulakai, and eventually the Chinese Bannermen there could not be differentiated from Manchus since they were effectively Manchufied. The Han civilian population was in the process of absorbing and mixing with them when Lattimore wrote his article.[61]
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchuria#cite_note-60

You can spin it however you want, they saw and knew the distinction. Fuck off.

>>1494529
To be fair, the Manchus are a bit of an exception because they're the last dynasty that ruined Imperial China. A lot of it was foreign influence yes, but the way the Manchus handled it was laughable.

>>1490499
It is!
Especially considering Japan has had the good fortune of being turned into one of the first East Asian postwar powerhouses due to American money being funneled into their economy due to the Korean War, and has also had an extremely generous defence agreement.

General t. Armchair here.

At the end of the war, the United States hand an upper hand. They were winning, any contemporary could see. Ideally, when you're winning, you keep it that way through momentum of force and initiative. The enemy reacts to you therefore you control how the war goes.

So when the Home Islands were in reach they saw only two options, invade or try their new bomb.

>why didn't they blockade?

They would have lost the initiative. Sitting your navy (the most crucial aspect of the front, the only real way to project force) outside the islands was inviting attack. Suicide bombers were a real threat and can sink enough ships to render their blockade ineffectual.

No, it wasn't useless, it would've worked eventually. After months of drained resources and watching civilians starve and kill each other for food, the war would've ended. Likely, in the US' mind, due to violent social upheavals, which the US didn't want. Remember the USSR were just mutual enemies of Russia, they weren't Allies in a sense, and would've taken any opportunity to claim territory rich in industry and resources, as well create yet another puppet state to protect their interests.

A blockade just wouldn't have done enough quickly. I don't think an invasion would be better either. The best option was an atomic bomb, a poorly understood but timely alternative.

Why didn't the japanese just bring some sex dolls to the outskirts of nanking and rape and murder them there?

>>1494547

You do realize that the Americans had a blockade in place for months by the time they dropped the bomb, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Starvation

>Remember the USSR were just mutual enemies of Russia, they weren't Allies in a sense, and would've taken any opportunity to claim territory rich in industry and resources, as well create yet another puppet state to protect their interests.

With that fleet in the pacific they didn't have?

>>1494567
A blockade to WIN, like the other anons asked, not a tactic used all the time for its intended purpose.

The USSR could've invaded Japan with an inferior navy; with enough air superiority and man power they could've done it I think.

>>1494688
It's not a matter of having an inferior navy.
It's a matter of having no way to get enough troops across to manage an invasion.

>>1494688

>A blockade to WIN, like the other anons asked, not a tactic used all the time for its intended purpose.

I'm not seeing the difference between the two. Block off the access with mines or ships or planes; how is one version "To win" and the other version an "intended purpose"?

>The USSR could've invaded Japan with an inferior navy; with enough air superiority and man power they could've done it I think.

You need landing craft. Even assaulting beaches like Tarawa, where the U.S. enjoyed overwhelming air and naval superiority were bloodbaths without both proper landing craft and proper technique in using them, neither of which the Soviets had.

Their invasion of those Kuril islands demonstrated that even against lightly held opposition, they're set to lose almost a third of what few boats they have scavenged together, and at the end of that operation, I think they had 11 left. 11 tiny little boats are not going to get you onto Hokkaido, no matter how much manpower or air superiority you've got.

Little yellow bastards are lucky I wasn't the commander in chief as I'd have dropped that shit right on fucking Tokyo.

I respect the Japs a lot, but when it comes to war, FUCK YOU.

Those nukes weren't shit compared to the firebombs dropped on ze Germans....and FUCK THEM too...

>>1488302
>Japan
>surrendering

You don't know how much they value honor. It's ingrained in their culture for centuries.

>>1488171

They wanted to see what it could do. Hence why all the targets were cities that were still relatively intact.

>>1488220

If they had dropped it off Tokyo Bay where the Emperor himself could see, it would've left a lasting impact on him.

File: this kills the jap.jpg (12KB, 240x312px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 240x312px

>>1488295

The Command and Control center at Matsushiro would've made a far better target since it would've crippled coordinated defense of Honshu, thereby avoiding the moral quagmire of massive loss of civilian life (this would've been on Truman's mind since the press was horrified at the destruction of Dresden months prior) and forwarding the tactical objective of preparing Japan for a ground invasion.

>>1494716
That just shows him you've got a really cool explosive, doesn't show him the direct result of using it on his country

File: Krauts fear the Harris.jpg (39KB, 400x417px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 400x417px

What if we had finished the bomb a year earlier and given it to Bomber Harris to use on the Germans?

It's safe to assume the Krauts would've finally given up but would the Japanese see the writing on the wall and quit while they were ahead?

>>1494740

I'm sure he could've guessed what the results would be if used on Japanese soil. It's not like he was surrounded by a city that was being burned every few weeks by B-29 raids.

The human loss and material loss of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was relatively inconsequential to the Japanese war effort, they were losing cities like that on a weekly basis. It's psychological impact was far more devastating.

>>1494744

First off, the notion is retarded. Why would the USAAF, already chafing enough as it was in having to work with Harris, give them their new superweapon?

And why do you think that it's "Safe to assume the Krauts would've finally given up"? I mean hell, they didn't give up until full occupation, no matter how flattened their country got and how battered their armies were.

>>1494744
>and given it to Bomber Harris to use on the Germans?
Why the fuck would they need to do that when the AAF was bombing Germany perfectly fine on their own

>>1494791
>>1494805

Because Brit/pol/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_QY3xsLQNI

Also, RAF Bomber Command were the ones drawing up criteria for which cities to target and using the bomb on Germany would've necessitated coordination with other nations to avoid accidentally vaporizing friendly forces, so they probably would've had to go through him anyway. And of course, once Harris, a fervent advocate of strategic bombing hears of a bomb that can do the work it would've taken a 1000 B-17s to do, he would've demanded to get in on it.

Also the Nazi war effort was pretty much only being held up with Hitler's stubborn refusal to give in. Even Himmler wanted to negotiate by the end. So if the Allies at used the atomic bomb on Berlin and wiped out Hitler, the party leadership, and OKW, the remaining German armies would likely have swiftly collapsed.

>>1494529
How dense can you be?

You claimed that the Manchus refused to interbreed with Han Chinese.

Now you are moving the goalposts that Han bannermen don't count as Han Chinese.

>>1494830

>Also, RAF Bomber Command were the ones drawing up criteria for which cities to target

For the RAF. The USAAF was doing its own independent calculations, and targeting different targets because they had different criteria. The oil war in 1944 was almost entirely done by American planes, in large part because Harris rejected "panacea merchants".

> would've necessitated coordination with other nations to avoid accidentally vaporizing friendly forces,

Considering that all interdiction and strategic bombing was targeting dozens to hundreds of miles away from the lines, no, not really.

>And of course, once Harris, a fervent advocate of strategic bombing hears of a bomb that can do the work it would've taken a 1000 B-17s to do, he would've demanded to get in on it.

And pigs would fly before they got it. The U.S. wasn't interested in sharing their nukes even after the Soviets had duplicated. Britain was an ally and everything, but there's no way they're turning an atomic bomb over to anyone.

>Also the Nazi war effort was pretty much only being held up with Hitler's stubborn refusal to give in.

Agreed.

>So if the Allies at used the atomic bomb on Berlin and wiped out Hitler, the party leadership, and OKW, the remaining German armies would likely have swiftly collapsed.

What the hell makes you think they'd get Hitler with the things? These are 1945, non fusion nukes. They're devastating, sure, but they aren't that powerful. You're not penetrating a bunker unless you know exactly where it is (and they didn't) and do a ground level strike, not an airburst.

A much more plausible scenario is that the increased devastation prompts a coup that ousts Hitler rather than killing him directly, but even that's pretty unlikely re: July plot.

>>1494847
>Considering that all interdiction and strategic bombing was targeting dozens to hundreds of miles away from the lines, no, not really.

The Allies were flying air raids over Germany almost 24/7, coordination would still be required to make that the target would neither bombed by another air force (negating it's usefulness as a testbed) or that passing Allied aircraft would be caught in the blast zone.

>Britain was an ally and everything, but there's no way they're turning an atomic bomb over to anyone.

Pre-war British research was the one of the reasons we were able to build the bomb to begin with. The Manhattan Project was very much an Anglo-American operation, as neither country alone could've built the bomb. And whereas the Pacific was an American-dominated theater, Europe was a collaboration between the US and Britain, and if the US was going to use the bomb, the British would have demanded at least some symbolic form of participation.

>You're not penetrating a bunker unless you know exactly where it is (and they didn't) and do a ground level strike, not an airburst

Well you wouldn't necessarily need to kill Hitler and his leaders instantly to have that effect. Nazi Germany was already suffering a crisis in leadership even while Hitler was still alive (Goring attempted to take control of the Reich because Berlin was on the verge of being cut off). If Berlin gets wiped off the map with some mystery weapon and all communication with the Fuhrer and the OKW is ceases, you'd pretty much get the same effect. People assume Hitler is dead (even if he escaped being incinerated or buried alive as the Reich Chancellery collapsed on his bunker, the devastation of an entire would so extreme that it would days before a rescue could be made) and a breakdown in German command structure results.

>>1489628
this. the military wanted to see what their shiny new toy would do to humans, and they wanted to show power to the soviets. japan was utterly sapped of resources and would have surrendered within weeks or months without the nukes and without an invasion.

>>1489658
>military targets
fuck off. they were of no military value. stop trying to justify mass murder you tubby neckbeard faggot

>>1489517
this is true. the firebombings of japan and germany specifically targeted civilians and killed far more people than the nukes. an overlooked and shameful part of allied conduct in the war.

>>1490298
>its ok when we do it!

>>1495129
>army HQs and ports are of no military value

>>1489517
>To imply that the nukes were somehow magnitudes more heinous than a conventional bombing campaign is just foolish.
It is though. It's a cruel and unusual weapon like chemical weapons that often brings slow painful death over conventional weapons, and is basically the modern day equivalent to salting the earth

>>1495129

Hiroshima was right next to the headquarters for the Chugoku Regional Army (although this wasn't the area the bomb was dropped on) and Nagasaki was the naval base the attack on Pearl Harbor was launched from and home to the infamous Unit 731. Both had significant industries used in the Japanese war effort.

They were definitely of military value.

>>1495187
They could have just bombed Kyoto and Tokyo.

>>1495214
Tokyo was still smoldering from firebombings and Kyoto was purposely avoided due to cultural and historical value. Not even kidding.

>>1495222
I know that. My point was that just because those other cities had military value doesn't mean they were picked for their military value. It meant they weren't that important but good enough to prove a nuke could blow a city off the map.

>>1495240
>that just because those other cities had military value doesn't mean they were picked for their military value
That's precisely why they were picked though. Japan didn't have any cities of military value left besides Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

File: Henry_Stimson,_Harris_&_Ewing_bw_photo_portrait,_1929.jpg (287KB, 1850x2669px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1850x2669px

>>1495222
>Kyoto was purposely avoided due to cultural and historical value
No need to to thank me, guys.

>>1495247
Nagasaki wasn't even on the original list of 5 targets.

>It was agreed that psychological factors in the target selection were of great importance. Two aspects of this are (1) obtaining the greatest psychological effect against Japan and (2) making the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it is released. Kyoto had the advantage of being an important center for military industry, as well an intellectual center and hence a population better able to appreciate the significance of the weapon.
> t. the target committee

>>1495266
I like Kyoto and am glad it wasn't nuked, thanks. But lets be fair, if the goal of the nukes was to deal maximum damage, it would have been Kyoto.

>>1495268
I'm aware. It replaced Kyoto and thus became the second most important target.

>>1495295
It was the 6th most important target. If it was the 2nd, it would have been on the original top 5.

>>1488171
We only had 2 bombs, it would've taken months to produce another.

The Japanese were stubborn. It had to be done.

>>1495300
When something replaces another on a list, it takes its spot.

>>1495304
>When something replaces another on a list, it takes its spot.
Are you just pretending to be retarded?

>>1495316
I'm literally telling you what happened so I'm going to ask you the same thing. I'll even break down the chain of events for you

>Hiroshima first on list, Kyoto second
>Kyoto scrubbed from list
>Nagasaki replaces it, taking its spot on the list
>Nagasaki becomes the second most important and thus the second target on the list
It's not a hard concept to grasp unless you're a literal retard. I never stated it was originally the second most important or the second target, but that it BECAME the second most import and thus the second target.

File: Inquisitive English Slag.png (281KB, 334x357px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 334x357px

Why didn't they just kill Tojo with a drone strike?

>>1488171
The Supreme War Council still refused to surrender after the second bombing until Hirohito directly commanded them to and you think they would have been swayed by dropping bombs into the sea?

I'm in the camp that considers the bombings to be unethical, but that wouldn't have done shit

File: frodo.jpg (30KB, 840x481px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 840x481px

>>1495327
Why didn't they just fly the nukes to Hiroshima with the eagles?

>>1495323
No it wasn't. They were classified and ranked as AA, A and B targets. Nagasaki didn't arbitrarily become a AA target because Kyoto was struck from the list as an AA target.

>>1490833

wasn't that what the romans and ottomans basically did?

>>1490270
>To imply that the Holocaust was somehow magnitudes more heinous than a conventional genocide is just foolish.

It literally is though. The only reason why the Holocaust is so remembered is because it was so brutally efficient, and the fact the Jews used it as a massive bargaining chip for the creation of Israel, and continue to gin up media around it. If the Gypsies were as specifically and systematically targeted as the Jews, it would not nearly have as strong a impact the consciousness of the world.

>>1495165
They had no idea what radiation would do to people though.

>>1490547
>You can't really fight a naval blockade after your own navy has been destroyed.
No, but they could wait, and wait, and wait, and wait, and fucking wait, until the U.S was willing to give up wasting vast resources on maintaining a naval blockade a world away, and grant Japan amicable terms of surrender allowing them to keep some of their pilfered lands, and independence. Furthermore, you think the other powers in the war would stand for this shit? U.S might have been fine with dragging on the war, but Stalin sure as fuck wouldn't.

>>1495375
True, but this is 20/20 hindsight. I'm not blaming the decision making, but from our current understanding of radiation, we should be able to look back and realize, that it was pretty fucking bad.

It's like if you kill a kike by skewering him on a stick because he's seditious and a risk to the empire, but in hindsight you realize oh shit he's actually the son of god and he topples the empire anyways. But you'll be forgiven for making the wrong choice because it was the best choice you had at the time. But it's still pretty fucking bad when you realize you killed the son of god and destroyed the empire single handedly.

>>1495353
Except that's exactly what happened. In your fantasy scenario, Nagasaki would have never been hit. In reality, it was scrubbed from existence when Kyoto originally was going to be.

>>1495222
both hiroshima and nagasaki were christian historical landmarks, why weren't they avoided?

File: Morgans_Raiders-Troop-Inspection.jpg (75KB, 600x372px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 600x372px

>>1495327

Why didn't they just stop the Holocaust by having a battalion of Partisan Rangers raid the camps?

>>1495491
It was picked for other reasons that military significance.

>>1495425
Well gee whiz, war sure is horrible and stuff, wow.

>>1495606
>literally picked because it was a major port and an industrial complex
>picked for reasons other than military significance
Wot

>>1495587
Because Stimson was a weeb before it was cool

The question is, where just two enough?