Should Enola Gay have stayed home?

Answer 1

Despite the fallacy supported propaganda spewed by Timoc, the mission completed by the Enola Gay shortened the war considerably and save thousands if not millions of lives.

Let’s examine the facts and compare them to Timoc’s claims:

Timoc states that the Japanese had already surrendered to the Soviet Union. Not true; in fact a state of war never existed between Japan and the user, at this point note the existence of the neutrality pact of 1941-1946 in which a state of neutrality existed between the ussr and Japan. ergo a peace treaty was not enacted between the ussr and Japan (you’ll notice that the USSR was not represented at the signing of the Potsdam Declaration; only Britain, China and the US as well as Japan signed the treaty as the pacific war only included those parties). The truth Timoc is warping is that Japan approached the USSR on a diplomatic level hoping to get the soviet union to broker a ‘negotiated peace’ as opposed to the unconditional surrender required by the allies (Japan wanted to keep its military, conquered territories, political structure and avoid paying reparations). In support i offer the following:

In April 1945, Admiral Kantaro Suzuki was chosen to replace Koiso. The "Fundamental Policy" of Suzuki's government was to fight on and to choose "honorable death of the hundred million" over surrender. However, underlings in the government bureaucracy were pointing out the weakness of Japan's position, particularly the shortages of petroleum and food. Despite the Soviet Union's announcement that it would not renew its 1941–46 neutrality pact with Japan for another five years, Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo was authorized to approach the Soviet Union, seeking to maintain its neutrality, or more fantastically, to form an alliance.

"It should be clearly made known to Russia that she owes her victory over Germany to Japan, since we remained neutral, and that it would be to the advantage of the Soviets to help Japan maintain her international position, since they have the United States as an enemy in the future".

On June 30, Togo told Naotake Sato, Japan's ambassador in Moscow, to try to establish "firm and lasting relations of friendship". Sato was to discuss the status of Manchuria and "any matter the Russians would like to bring up". Sato finally met with Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov on July 11 but without result.

On July 12, Togo directed Sato to tell the Russians that,

"His Majesty the Emperor, mindful of the fact that the present war daily brings greater evil and sacrifice upon the peoples of all the belligerent powers, desires from his heart that it may be quickly terminated. But so long as England and the United States insist upon unconditional surrender, the Japanese Empire has no alternative but to fight on with all its strength for the honor and existence of the Motherland."

The Emperor proposed sending Prince Konoe as a Special Envoy, though he would be unable to reach Moscow before the Potsdam Conference. Sato advised Togo that in reality, "unconditional surrender or terms closely equivalent thereto" was all that Japan could expect. Moreover Togo's messages were not "clear about the views of the Government and the Military with regard to the termination of the war," questioning whether Togo's initiative was supported by the key elements of Japan's power structure.

On July 17, Togo responded,

"Although the directing powers, and the government as well, are convinced that our war strength still can deliver considerable blows to the enemy, we are unable to feel absolutely secure peace of mind ...
Please bear particularly in mind, however, that we are not seeking the Russians' mediation for anything like an unconditional surrender."

In reply, Sato clarified,

"It goes without saying that in my earlier message calling for unconditional surrender or closely equivalent terms, I made an exception of the question of preserving [the Imperial House]."

On July 21, speaking in the name of the cabinet, Togo repeated,

"With regard to unconditional surrender we are unable to consent to it under any circumstances whatever. ... It is in order to avoid such a state of affairs that we are seeking a peace, ... through the good offices of Russia. ... it would also be disadvantageous and impossible, from the standpoint of foreign and domestic considerations, to make an immediate declaration of specific terms."

Timoc claims that 500,000 Japanese lives were lost as a result of the bombing of Hiroshima (I assume he is including Nagasaki, although the Enola Gay did not drop that bomb). Patently untrue according to historical accounts and estimates kept by the U.N. In fact the high side of the estimates come in at 200,000 up to and including collateral deaths occurring 5 years after (longer term affects of radio-active fallout) the ending of WWII (1950). The immediate casualty estimates range from 70,000 to 200,000 civilian and military casualties (for both cities combined). Further I offer that the total civilian casualty count for Japan was approximately 510,000 for the total duration of WWII. As well, in Japanese run POW camps there were over 540,000 allied prisoner casualties at the hands of the Japanese.

These claims are supported by the U.N.’s Commission on the World Wars study; and I quote:

“According to most estimates, the bombing of Hiroshima killed approximately 70,000 people due to immediate effects of the blast. Estimates of total deaths by the end of 1945 range from 90,000 to 140,000, due to burns, radiation, and subsequent disease, aggravated by lack of medical resources. Some estimates state up to 200,000 may have died by 1950, due to cancer and other long-term effects. The numbers for Nagasaki are consistently lower, because the valley terrain reduced the impact of the bomb, with immediate deaths estimates ranging from 40,000 to 75,000. In both cities, the overwhelming majority of the deaths were civilians.”

The only correct conclusion to be drawn is that the mission, although not a joyous one, performed by the Enola Gay was in fact the correct thing to do morally, ethically and pragmatically.

Answer 2

No.

Should the Japanese have stayed at home and not invade Manchuria, China, Malaya, Siam, French Indochina, the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, the Gilbert Islands, the Caroline Islands, and Palau?

Yes.

Answer 3

Yes it should have stayed home because the Japanese surrendered to the Russians two weeks earlier. A little fact kept out of American history books.

And since the Russians were allied with the United States the surrender should have been observed.

They dropped it anyway because the Red Army was making its way across Europe and the White House didn't want them to gain more territory so they killed 500,000 people to show the Russian what they could do and hopefully stop the advance of the Red Army.

I guess it worked

Answer 4

The Japanese should have kept Enola Gay, the plane that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, at home. The way to do that was not to bomb Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7. The Japanese admiral Yamamoto said to the Japanese emperor Hirohito on Dec. 6, "Ha so! We gonna bomb the Yankees tomorrow!" Hirohito should have said, "Ha so, Yamamoto!Maybe you don't do that!" The rest is history.

Answer 5

No, we had to end the war. An invasion of the home islands of Japan would have been catastrophic to us and Japan. Estimates were 1/4 of million Americans killed or wounded and twice that number Japanese civilians and troops. Not mention the total destruction of many Japanese cities, towns, and agricultural areas.

Answer 6

Nope. She did what she was meant to do.

What people need to realize is that we asked them to surrender BEFORE we sent Enola Gay. We asked again after and they refused so we hit them again. They agreed the third time we asked.

THEY WERE WARNED- A courtesy that we gave them despite what happened at Pearl Harbor.

Answer 7

That kiss she gave is never ever gonna fade away.