Instead of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, why didn't we drop the bomb on Mt. Fuji?

Question

I'm not prejudice to the Japanese, just seems like a much bigger target and after all IT IS a volcano and I'm sure it would've been reactivated.

Answer 1

1. It might not have been reactivated, so one of the two bombs available would have been wasted.

2. Mt Fuji is sacred to the Japanese, and an atomic bomb dropped on it by us might have angered them enough to fight even harder to defend their homeland. It is also a very big mountain. The bomb might have put a dent in it, but it would still be there.

The historical point of using these weapons was in an attempt to bring about an early end to the war in the Pacific. The decision was made based on the theory that an industrial/military target, and the collateral civilian casualties would frighten the leaders into a surrender.

A hit on a mountain would not have that effect, and, may done the reverse.

Answer 2

First, I don't think that an atom bomb would have re-activated the volcano unless the bomb were planted under the mountain.

Second, Mt. Fuji could not be said to be essential to the war effort.

Third, I think it would have been really malicious to destroy a beautiful mountain like that for no real military benefit beyond hurting Japanese morale. It's the kind of thing Hitler did with his London buzzbombs. The U.S. claimed to be above that sort of thing (despite its participation in the massive firebombing of Dresden, a city populated primarily with civilians).

Answer 3

We wanted to make a point, but not damage any cultural icons which might incent the Japanese people to keep fighting. This is why we did not bomb the city of Kyoto (a religious capitol) during the war. Also we needed to be sure that there was some sort of civilian government to surrender.

There was an attempted military coup against the emperor the night before he announced the surrender. (Hooray for the History Channel).

Answer 4

Yeah, covering up the bombings, good one. For the question, lol, it's a good theory that, had it been attempted and worked, would have been much more efficient. I'd give credit to the guy with the productivity answer, though too.

Answer 5

We were trying to show them the power of an atomic bomb not a volcano.

Answer 6

Yeah, Pam, we covered up the bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That's why no one knows about them.



WTF?????

Answer 7

First off, no one ever tried to "cover up" the bombings. Secondly, its because they was considerd strategic targets to help cripple japans productivity

Answer 8

I'm pretty sure they got the point with what happened anyhow.

Answer 9

because that would have been more difficult to cover up