Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, they were trying to ease out of it with their command structure intact and the war hawks in their cabinet still running things, free to start building up with the same people in charge later. That's hardly a "surrender", and for obvious reasons was completely unacceptable.
Not sure where you're getting your "information". You need to do a lot of homework.
Not sure where you get your info from oh that's right Fox News
"Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion."
What justifies the bombings was the intransigence of Japan.
Put bluntly, they would not surrender unless they were confronted with overwhelming force.
Now, why don't you come out and say that you wish that several tens of thousands more of American and Japanese soldiers had been killed because you think that an invasion of Japan would have been more humane than dropping those bombs.
What justifies the bombings was the intransigence of Japan.
Put bluntly, they would not surrender unless they were confronted with overwhelming force.
Now, why don't you come out and say that you wish that several tens of thousands more of American and Japanese soldiers had been killed because you think that an invasion of Japan would have been more humane than dropping those bombs.
They already were beaten badly! and were trying to surrender, what part of that do you not understand?
"Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion."
Not sure where you get your info from oh that's right Fox News
"Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion."
Or not.
How many more American lives would have been lost? How many more American lives would you have willingly sacrificed?
We now know that the Japanese, the Russians, and Germans were working on nuclear bomb programs themselves. If any one of these countries had beaten us to it, does any thinking person really believe they wouldn't have used it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.