Was the dropping of the atomic bombs during WWII just for show?

Question

In a book I am reading, the author purports that the atomic bombs were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima to show Stalin that we had the technology and we weren't afraid to use it. The author states that Japan was near surrender already as they did not want war with the Soviets and that Stalin had a spy in Los Alamos and knew all about the Manhatten Project.

I'd just like to see some other thoughts on this, so would you please share your opinions.

Answer 1

The RAF declassified some of their memos on the firebombings done in Germany near the end of the Euro theater. They openly admit that a large reason for the excessive force was to make sure the Russians knew what they were capable of so they would not continue marching through Europe taking over.

The US was privy to this and participated in these bombings.

I find it highly unlikely that this wasnt at least a part of the reasoning behind the atom bombings. Granted they were deemed necessary for other reasons, but Im sure that was a factor.

Interested side note: Japan did not surrender after either atom bombing, they surrender after the Russians declared war on them. The Russians were terrifying not because of their strength, but because of their abuses of the people they overtook. No one wanted to go to war with them if it could be prevented.

Answer 2

The statement that Japan was near surrender is generally based upon the peace feelers sent out by part of the Japanese government. These peace feelers generally were from factions of the government which had no authority to make peace.

Note that even after the atomic bombs were dropped, there was nearly a coup to continue the war. The Japanese militarists (who had started the war) did not want to surrender, and it took the intervention of the Emperor to bring the surrender about.

While the destruction of two cities is unfortunate, it seems to be the best of the alternatives -- a blockade would have killed millions more through starvation, and an invasion would have killed more than died when the cities were destroyed.

Answer 3

I always thought the dropping of the atomic bombs was an effort to prevent greater civilian and soldier casualties on both sides. If Japan did not surrender, the US was planning an invasion of Japan which would have killed more US/Japanese soldiers and many more civilians.

Also, the dropping of the a-bombs was also a means to show that the US was ready and able to use more of these weapons in the future.

Unfortunately, many people died in the 2 bombings and the effects of radiation exposure had effected later generations. The dropping of the 2 bombs also ushered the world into the nuclear age and was the start of the cold war.

Answer 4

Japan never planned to surrender until the Russians were on the verge of Invading. The Japanese knew the Russian forces had committed atrocities on the Eastern Front and, probably, like Patton, believed Russia would in one way or another keep whatever it captured. The bombings were an attempt to save both Japanese and American lives; casualties would have been far graver if an invasion would have taken place.

Judging by the speed in which Russia created its own bomb, the Manhattan project probably contained several informants. This would mean that Stalin already knew about the weapon. Although this fact wouldn't undermine your idea.

Answer 5

The idea that Japan was "near surrender" is not completely valid. First, the Japanese military government refused to surrender, and was preparing to combat the invaders to the last man, woman and child. Secondly, even though some elements of Japanese society were starting to feel it was time to surrender, they had no real clout yet. And the US certainly had no hint that any contention was present.

The A-bombs were dropped on the Japanese to attempt to shorten the war. If Stalin already had a spy at Los Alamos, then he knew all about the test detonation.

Answer 6

The atomic bomb was dropped on Japan so that the planned invasion of that country would not be necessary. It was projected that if the USA had invaded Japan, over one million fighting men from our country would have died in the effort. Japan was NOT ready to surrender and had vowed to fight down to their last man. Even the first atomic bomb did not bring any talk of surrender, however the second one did. By the time the USA dropped the bombs on Japan, the war in Europe was already over, having ended three months earlier.

Answer 7

Yes and No. It was to show the world that we had the technology. It was to test that technology.
Finally it was to stop the war. In my opinion it was a very drastic move on human beings. However, the Japanese were on a move to conquer most of the world and had no problem of the millions of Asian, European, and Americans they killed. They also used all sorts of methods/experiments to torch-er/kill human beings.
So, the final calculations was it was better to kill the so many innocent Japanese people in order to prevent more lives being lost.
It also was retaliation for Pearl Harbor, otherwise they would have tested it on Germany or Russia.

Answer 8

Japan was not near surrender. It was near DEFEAT, but for the japanese that's an entirely different thing. Any invasion of Japan would have been very costly, not just for the american soldiers but also for innocent japanese civilians. Instead, the United States decided to demonstrate its god powers and its ability to completely destroy the japanese civilization without ever setting foot on japanese soil.

Answer 9

It may have been partly a good excuse to test their new toy, but it was also in an effort to end a war that would have still been won, but at the cost of millions of more lives, and several more years of fighting.