post #31 of 31
Originally Posted by Arg0
the estimate deaths of the initial bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was 350,000. It would have been more in Nagasaki, but the bomb dropped 2-3 miles off target so the blast didn't kill as many as they were hoping too. Deaths would have been higher if it had been on target. Also if we had to do a main land invasion, some military planners had thought it would have last well into 1946 if not 1947. This is the Key reason why Truman chose to drop the 2 bombs we had built.

I wrote this in the "Bush Bashing" Thread and since it has alot to do with what we are talking about, I'll post it here again, with a twist in the last paragraph.

They were teaching boys, girls, women and old men to fight with bamboo sticks and anything else they could get their hands on to kill allied forces that landed on mainland Japan. Some would even commit suicide before surrendering, which happened when we reached the Japanese Islands. There grim footage of this when they reach Okinawa where you see children and women jumping from cliff’s, killing themselves. It was very brutal.

The military refused to surrender. However, it is speculated, if not out right true, that the Emperor did want to surrender to end the killings but no one from the military would listen and what was left of his government went either way. The military was so against surrender that they even attempted a take over the government, a coup, to continue the fight of Americans to the last solider stood in the Japanese military. They were deathly afraid of the Russians and tried to make every effort to make sure they could get a cease fire agreement with them, but that never happened. Anyways, as we know the coup failed (thanks to a bombing raid that caused a blackout) and the rest is history as they say.

One other thing I have been reading up upon, and even the History Channel had an interesting documentary on was Japans Atomic weapon. There is a lot of debate on this, but the History channel approached the old scientists that were still around, and essentially, said it was done to a point and rather proud of the project that they were apart of. Essentially, Japan had a bomb too, if you were to believe what the eyewitnesses have said about it. Today for the most part, it’s agreed in the mainstream that they were never close, but there are some, including a few veterans (one I can even quote) that they had it, and one reporter (David Snell) in 1946 after talking to a few eyewitnesses claimed it was even tested. Something to think about there on the “what if’sâ€. I’m not sure about the German atomic weapons program; I know that it’s pretty well that it was having its problems, including supply problems. But I don’t know exactly how close they were. I know that there were plans on using it against New York City, if the war went on a year longer… but then again, that would have been impossible to make it extend that long.
You have written about one side of a hotly debated part of history. The necessity isn't debated by "revisionists" only. To say so (I know you aren't the one who made it Arg0) is inaccurate and marginalizes a perfectly legitimate disagreement between historians. If you really want to get into this, start another thread. As I said, I just wanted to mention (without getting into a big thread hijack) that using that event as an example won't be as definitive to everyone.