Would FDR have dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ?

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by OpanaPointer

I am completely comfortable with calling it a stepchild. During the period 1945-1965 this was a non-issue. Then the antiwar people started looking for issues and dug this one up. It's silly and a clear case of retrofitting knowledge and morality on a prior time.

Frankly, the anti-war people should have asked their parents about their beforehand. Indeed, their parents would have probably known more about this topic than they would have, no?

[OpanaPointer]

Originally Posted by Futurist110

Wouldn't this have meant that much more Japanese military personnel would have been killed and captured by the Soviet Union, though?

More dying all around.

[OpanaPointer]

Originally Posted by Futurist110

Technically speaking, though, Japan actually did get some informal terms of surrender:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration

The Potsdam Declaration said what would happen after surrender. There were no conditions there.

[OpanaPointer]

Originally Posted by Futurist110

Frankly, the anti-war people should have asked their parents about their beforehand. Indeed, their parents would have probably known more about this topic than they would have, no?

Facts weren't the issue there, attitude was. As noble as the anti-war movement's goals were they still were guilty of "selective reading" and "moral and intellectual retrofitting" in this case.

[M3 Mitch]

Not that I think it changes our overall conclusion, but just for edification and discussion, here is "Restricted Data" on FDR and the Bomb:

FDR and the bomb | Restricted Data

Thoughts?