Did the U.S. have to use the A-Bomb on Nippon?

Question

Before anyone says "NO"! They should be made aware of the fact that Nippon had heavy water and experiments in a submarine that was sunk on the way to Nippon. The statistical information is that it saved millions of human life on both sides as strange as it may seem.

Answer 1

Yes.

The final two battles in the Pacific Theater, Iwo Jima and Okinawa were a preview of what would have happened had we invaded Japan.

Casualties on Iwo Jima were about 17,000 U.S. servicemen wounded, 6,000 killed. Of more than 21,000 Japanese troups on the island, only 200 were taken alive. Total casualties were over 44,000.

Casualties on Okinawa were worse. Of 130,000 Japanese troops on Okinawa, less than 11,000 were taken prisoner. 42,000 Japanese civilians were killed. That's more than 160,000 Japanese deaths. More than 12,000 U.S. servicemen were killed and more than 35,000 were woulned. Total casualties on Okinawa were well over 200,000.

Estimates of casualties for the invasion of Japan were upwards of 1,000,000 Allied troops killed and upwards of 10,000,000 Japanese troups and civilians killed.

It's easy, 60 years after the fact to talk about how many other solutions there were to end the war with Japan. Why couldn't we have found a diplomatic solution to ending the war? Don't forget that we were seeking a diplomatic solution when the Japanese killed more than 3,000 Americans at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. We were still negotiating with the Japanese in good faith while they were plotting their attack.

The turning point in the war with Japan happened at the Battle of Midway in June of 1942. The Japanese lost four carriers and most of their experienced fliers, they could replace neither. Yet the Japanese continued to fight a war that they could not win. The closer they came to being defeated, the more fanatically they fought.

The United State would have had more service men and women killed in the Battle for Japan than had been killed in the previous 3.5 years of the war. The same is true for the Japanese.

President Truman made the absolutely right decision in bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nothing else would have brought home to the Japanese the futility of continuing the fight -- to that point in the war, nothing else HAD brought home the point that they were fighting a war they could not win.

Answer 2

Yes, Nippon was bombed, but not with the atomic bomb.

In 1985 the US Government released classified secret information that six days after the last atomic bombing of Nagasaki, one more city was bombed. As the Domei News Agency of Japan announced to the US Government the "Surrender is coming soon" one last target was set for destruction. This was the Nippon Oil Refnery at Tsuchizaki near Akita, 300 miles north of Tokyo on the West Coast of Japan.

This was done with 1300 men and 134 B29's from the Pacifc Island base on Guam and the Air Forces 31Sth Bomb Wing. Their final mission was timed to make a point to the Japanese. 143 B29's would fly the longest mission of the war to attack Japan's last standing refinery under cover of total darkness.

On the August 14, 1945, after eight long hours in the air the planes located its target with primitive radar scopes. By the time the bombing had stopped the total destruction of the remaining oil production capabilities had been achieved.

As the aircrart was returning to base President Truman made the announcement that the Japanese had surrendered and the war was over.

Answer 3

WOW, I REALLY CAN'T BELIEVE SOME OF THESE ANSWERS.


Germany the more appropriate target? How so? 1) they'd already surrendered and 2) assuming the bombs were ready prior to V-E day, the Nazi war machine had been broken for quite some time, and 3) German attitude towards war was vastly different than the Japanese (1 in 100 American POWs died in the hands of the Germans, compared to 37 in 100 at the hands of the Japanese...Japanese viewed American POWs in the Philippines with great contempt and treated them as sub-humans, because they believed warriors do not surrender, etc. etc.)

No A-bomb on Nippon? Are you on crack? Nippon is another name for Japan.

WOOOOOOW.

Answer 4

"Some have claimed that the Japanese were already essentially defeated, and therefore use of the bombs was unnecessary. General Dwight D. Eisenhower so advised the Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, in July of 1945.[33] The highest-ranking officer in the Pacific Theater, General Douglas MacArthur, was not consulted beforehand but said afterward that he felt that there was no military justification for the bombings. The same opinion was expressed by Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the President), General Carl Spaatz (commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Forces in the Pacific), and Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials);[33] Major General Curtis LeMay;[34] and Admiral Ernest King, U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, Undersecretary of the Navy Ralph A. Bard,[35] and Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet.[36]"

The war with Japan could have easily been won using conventional bombing. At this point in the war, Japan was even supplying their troops in the Pacific-resulting in cannibalism. There is still much speculation that Hirohito ordered the surrender prior to the bombings but his entourage didn't want to be part of the disgrace. They were a very stubborn people-but a land invasion would not have cost millions of lives as everyone likes to say. The US only lost 400000 during the entire war-I'm willing to bet liberating Europe was more of a challenge than the tiny island of Japan posed. Final counts of civilian deaths in WW2 are around 35 million people. Military deaths around 20 million. Seems a bit inhumane don't you think?

By the way, the Allies successfully raided heavy water and manufacturing plants in Germany without using nuclear weapons.

Answer 5

No the USA did not have to use the A bomb but chose to use it. There has been a lot of information coming out recently that the real reason the Japanese surrendered was that The Russians entered the war against them. This completely shocked the Japanese high command and was actually more of a reason for surrender than the dropping of 2 A bombs on Japan.

Answer 6

I will say no, not because of how horrible the effects of such weapons are, but because no action in war has to be done. The US could have taken other steps, but looking back on it, conventional warfare would have prolonged the conflict and lead to more deaths in both armies. The first bomb dropped on Hiroshima changed that equation, and the second may not have been necessary. We will never know, but looking back on events before my time, I would have preferred to see more diplomacy between bombings, in order to make more effort at minimizing damage and deaths.

That said, I do not think the actions were wrong, for those to take at the time. Hindsight is always 20-20 and we now know more about the ghastly side effects on nuclear weapons. It is easy to say we should not have done this today, but at the time events were colored by things we did not know, as well as things that were much more immediate such as the Holocaust and destruction in Europe from WWII.

Answer 7

Absolutely. The Japanese were miles away from surrendering. Hundreds of thousands more Allied lives would have been lost, if not millions. And then the land battles that would have taken place on the Japanese mainland would have been horriffic for both sides. Plus- war is hell. They deserved it for Pearl Harbor, they way they tortured, kidnapped, and killed Koreans, the way they tortured US servicemen, etc. I thinkj the Japanese are a great people now, but they had to be stopped.

Answer 8

Given the loss of life that occurred at Okinawa, dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was the correct decision, given how intense the fighting would have been on the Japanese mainland had the US been forced to invade. Casualty figures on both sides would have been monstrous.

Answer 9

It was the decision (by Harry Truman) at the time. MacArthur estimated a quarter of a million soldiers and marines would die in the invasion.

In light of this estimate, the A-bomb probably saved lives.

Answer 10

they didnt HAVE to as mcarthy (how do you spell his name?) had drawn up a plan to 'win' the war in the pacific

it would just have taken a couple of years and cost a lot of lives ~ IF it had of succeeded

they used it to end the war quickly and to basically demonstrate power

even though those were the only two atomic bombs they had ~ no one knew that and frankly given what they did would you keep going ?