Why didn't the US drop the Atomic Bomb on a Japanese Base versus a major city filled with women and children?

Question

Same Image
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsiarto/144598402/

Same Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMkP4T-eqig&mode=related&search=

Answer 1

Those cities were manufacturing hubs in Japan. The second bomb need not even have been dropped had Japan surrendered after the first. Both cities had strategic importance.

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

For one thing, the people who chose the targets were worried that they might miss a military target because of its relatively small size and waste the point of dropping the bomb, i.e. instilling fear and forcing the Japanese into submission. For this reason, they chose large urban areas that would be utterly destroyed.

That might sound a bit crazy when talking about nuclear weapons, but consider the extreme height the bombs were dropped from as well as the fact that the bomb dropped on Nagasaki did in fact miss by two miles.

Check the document I included. It is a formerly classified document released by the people who chose the targets.

Answer 4

Because it was a Phsycological Attack.
That city also had factories producing weapons, and while i am against the death of citizens i do see that the dropping of that bomb did what it was supposed to and that was to end the war. Had it been dropped on a base it would not have mattered much. Remember there were only two atomic bombs, and they needed to be used wisely. It was a Bluff, the Emperor did not want to see anymore people die. So he Surrendered.

Answer 5

Chi Guy. The reason is because Hiroshima and Nagasaki were never bombed throughout the war. Why did we choose two cities we never really touched instead of Tokyo? Our scientists and top brass were itching to test the effects of their new toy and Germany had already surrendered. So naturally they used the scientific method. The fact they were unbombed was the scientific "control" factor where they could measure the exact effects of nuclear weaponry on a city with no other conventional damage to interfere or obfuscate pure data. The reason there was specifically two cities bombed was for the repeatability factor of the scientific method. They also wanted to flex their muscles in front of the Soviets.

Answer 6

Because we wanted to get the Emperor's attention, and demonstrate to him that we could bomb his country with impunity.

Unfortunately, he refused to believe that Hiroshima was destroyed by a single bomb, and it took Nagasaki to convince him.

"The Target Committee at Los Alamos on May 10–11, 1945, recommended Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, and the arsenal at Kokura as possible targets. The committee rejected the use of the weapon against a strictly military objective because of the chance of missing a small target not surrounded by a larger urban area. The psychological effects on Japan were of great importance to the committee members. They also agreed that the initial use of the weapon should be sufficiently spectacular for its importance to be internationally recognized. The committee felt Kyoto, as an intellectual center of Japan, had a population "better able to appreciate the significance of the weapon." Hiroshima was chosen because of its large size, its being "an important army depot" and the potential that the bomb would cause greater destruction because the city was surrounded by hills which would have a 'focusing effect'."

Answer 7

Not only to destroy the manufacturing capabilities of the two cities, but also to break the will of the people to continue fighting. The main reason for using the atomic bombs was to force a surrender without having to invade the Japanese homeland. An attack on military bases may not even have been reported to the citizens, and if it was, it may have been considered simply the standard cost of war. But once the war came home to such a degree, the Japanese people realized the time to swallow their pride had come.

Answer 8

Reverse the situation: Japan developed the bomb first. What would they attack? Pick a military target in the US that would:
1. Be an effective demonstration of the awful power of Atomic weaponry.
-and-
2. Be of strategic importance to the war effort.

The place you have in your mind is undoubtedly near a city with civilians.

BTW: Their actual plan was to bomb the panama canal to stop US shipping to the Pacific.

Answer 9

1) The US bombing of Japan was more aimed at industrial production of military materials than actual military bases.

2) The state of Japanese industrial production depended on many small dispersed shops often times with 30 or fewer workers each. Technology simply wasn't available to pick out each shop much less hit them with unguided bombs.

3) The fire-bombing of Tokyo was far more destructive than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki and it did not lead to a Japanese surrender.

4) In the context of "Total War" which was used by all the major participants of World War II, bombing industrial population centers was more acceptable than in our day of satellites, laser guided bombs, cruise missiles and bunker busters.

Answer 10

when countries go to war, it is more than just the military bases that you need to destroy. you must also destroy the ability of the opposing country to make the weapons of war. that is one reason why the US was able to supply our allies in WW ll. our manufacturing base was for the most part unreachable by our enemies. yes the north american aviation factory and the boeing factory, and all of our shipyards were along the coast, but the majority of the trucks, tanks, bombs, bullets, etc. were far inland. hiroshima and nagaksaki both were industrial targets, and were large enough to provide an effective demonstration, yet small enough to minimize casualties.