Something often overlooked...

Did the show provide any evidence for this? Everything I've seen is that they planned to fight to the bitter end. Sure, some people were coming to accept reality, but the military leadership believed it was better to die doing the "right" thing than to compromise or surrender. John Toland, who was sympathetic to the Japanese, cites the propaganda slogan "One hundred million die together" in his history The Rising Sun (militarist propaganda exaggerated Japan's population for effect).

 

To return to this, the Japanese leadership had deluded themselves into thinking that they not only could deal with the Soviets, but could get a better deal.

I say "deluded", because there were major signs that the Soviets were preparing for a major offensive against Japanese territory.

The Soviets had already told the Japanese that the Non-Agression treaty between the two nations was null and void.

Japanese military attaches & observers had been reporting for months on the ever increasing numbers of Soviet military troop, tank, & supply trains heading from Moscow to points East in Siberia.

Yes, the 2 civilians wanted to end the war, the 2 Army generals wanted it to continue, while the 2 Navy admirals were split; Yonai favoring peace & Toyota favoring war. The Army & Navy leaders favoring war figured that the US had shot their bolt with the Atomics and there would be no more(a third core was being prepared for delivery to Tinian at this time).

The Bombs were dropped in the hopes that they would end the war with a minimum loss of American lives. There was no guarantee that they would end the war though. Tokyo had suffered worse than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki and Japan had not surrendered. Firebombing had essentially destroyed the larger Japanese cities(without the level of civilian deaths of the major Tokyo raid).

Further, Soviet participation was considered essential by the military leadership, and Lend-Lease was being provided in amphibious assault vessels for a Soviet landing in Hokkaido.
Army factions had only planned on a brief stand at whatever beach the allies landed at, and then surrender. Again, America was not aware of this.

Had FDR lived, the Bombs likely still would have been dropped as Japan did not surrender. Now giving FDR the choice of a costly invasion of Japan or 2 Atomic Bombs...Which one do you think he would have chosen?

Truman did not upset negotiations, as the Japanese were not negotiating with the US. Nor would it effect Soviet negotiations, as the Bomb was already known to them, as was the fact that there were only a few, and production was not for seen to dramatically increase any time in the near future.

Guaranteeing the Emperor was only one of the demands of the militarist. Further, if you give in to one demand, there will be more following demands, because you now operating from a position of weakness. You are not confident in your chances for victory. The Japanese found this out when they were negotiating with Chiang to end the war in China. The Japanese kept offering him better deals to concede. Chiang never took the deals, because he knew if he did, all the assistance coming from the United States would disappear. And that, to Chiang, was the sweetest deal.

As I said before, if the much hyped "demonstration" is a dud. What do you think the response of Japan would be?

The Americans were quite clear on what they wanted...Unconditional Surrender is a very simple concept to understand.

The Japanese were also quite clear that they would not willingly accept this. The civilian leadership would have been happy with keeping the Emperor, but they lacked the necessary political clout to end the war. So what they would be happy with is meaningless. The militarist wanted to keep Manchukuo, Korea & their territory in China, as well as no troops landing in Japan. The militarists had the power and control, so they would be the ones that needed to be satisfied.

The Russians were also quite clear on what they wanted with their military build-up and Stalin's promise to enter the war against Japan.

You should have stopped with "spoils of war". The Soviets had seen several of their cities leveled by German artillery bombardments, and as they came west, they saw German cities leveled by Allied air bombardment. Besides, they leveled their own share of German cities with artillery bombardment & street fighting. Do you really think it matters to Stalin & the Soviets whether a city has been leveled by artillery, bombers or Atomics?

I don't think so, if they were so concerned about the Emperor, they would have surrendered much earlier, rather than much later

 

Do you have a source for this?

Japanese documentation, troop movements, fortification preparations, supply stockpiling, airfield construction, using local generals as local commanders, etc. All point in a very different direction. Not to mention that the militarists were greatly strengthened in their belief of holding out with the Japanese troops on Okinawa held out for 100 days against 5 times their number of American troops that held equal or greater numbers of artillery, tanks, warships, aircraft, etc.

So, no, I highly doubt the Japanese would conduct a brief beach defense and then...Just give up.

 

Probably not. If you read FDR he was growing quite tired of what he saw as Stalin going back on his word. FDR had a longer breaking point than Truman, but it was rapidly approaching that in his relations with the Soviets in 1945.

Hardly, Stalin was more concerned about getting his troops into action before the Japanese quit and/or the Americans invaded. There is evidence that suggests he moved up his timetables in a projected response to Operation Olympic, and was planning an amphibious Soviet invasion of Hokkaido.

To Stalin, the Bomb was just another tool in the toolbox.

The nature of politics is the same in the East as it is in the West...Power...Having it, keeping it, and how to get more of it.

 

Im going to go back through the doco for a clear answer to this one.....

Also, the reason I chose this particular documentary to begin with was that it was the very first of its kind, where as many of the participants that were still alive at the time of manufacture were interviewed face to face......
The BBC have a reputation for producing history that gets to the bottom of complex historical events by direct questioning in this case in particular

Thanks again for all your consideration and effort....will reply soon...

 

Right...

it seems that the descision to use "The Device" was based on a chain reactrion…..rather like the bomb itself.

1/ The Soviets had begun to lie about their intentions in Eastern Europe after seemingly agreeing to something quite different at Yalta...this leads to

2/ New president responding by being "direct with the Soviets, saying to Molotov "Well if you stick to your agreements, you wont be spoken to like this, ...which leads to

3/ The Potsdam Declaration going unanswered by Japan....a direct result of Mcloy and Stimson's suggestions of "keeping the Mikado" and a "demonstration of the bomb" being constantly overridden by James Byrnes. Burns wants to keep the Soviets out of the pacific and strengthen the western allies bargaining position in Europe.
Thhe lack of action to terminate the war by Japan in turn leads to Truman authourizing to drop the Device "as soon as they are ready."...this leads to

4/ The Japanese attempting to negotiate through the Russians to keep the negotiations secret from their people. They fear a revolution and loss of their own power...this leads to...

5/ The Russians stalling the negotiations to gain access to the Pacific fighting at the agreed upon date. This is Russias idea of "keeping to agreement". This leads to..

6/ The dropping of the Hiroshima bomb without warning....which leads to...

7/ Ever more desperate attempts to continue Russian negotiations, which are rejected by the Russians for the sole purpose of wanting to grab their own slice of pacific spoils...this leads to...

8/ The dropping of the second bomb on Nagasaki, because even though the western allies can read Jap codes and are aware that they want something to happen before the Soviets enter the pacific arena, they also realise that by August 9th, the agreed upon date, those hopes are smashed, so Nagasaki is destroyed on the same afternoon that the Russians open up their pacific attack....this leads to

9/ The Japanese Cabinet digging its heels in an asking the Emperor for a surrender for the very reason that they know they can keep the Mikado. The army still object strongly, and intend to fight to the end...so a second meeting is called, where Hirohito explains that he will address the people and ask for surrender terms. The army try to stop the recording but fail...


Something of the intentions of the Japanese military to fight to the end is revealed by the Japanese assertions that American leaflet raids could break the secret that negotiations are going on at all. It is felt that the people will rebel and those in power, including the Empperor, will be out of a job. The entire reason for mediated negotiations is to win concessions, like having no occupation force for instance. The military slowly realise that a full scale invasion of Honshu island will deliver Japan a military occupation on much tougher terms....

So...

The whole negotiations with Russia are a POWER PLAY by the ruling clique to stay in power...and

The negotiations are kept secret for the same reason.

THEREFORE....

The very secrecy of the negotiations and the power games to keep the Emperor in and cabinet in power have lead to the Russians dragging out the negotiations beyond the time period given by Truman for the Air Force to be ready to drop it, and beyond the promised date of Russian entry, which seems to be the Russian version of "sticking to agreements", the very thing that Truman "got tough" with them in the first instance...

In other words, its a chain reaction that comes full circle to run the Japanese out of time, and force Truman's hand to drop the bomb without warning and with no demonstration...

Phew! Complex but straight line logic....

No Japanese mention of "just fighting on beach and surrendering...my mistake...and

This also leaves the issue of "What if the Bomb did not work for the demonstration?

Well, the Uranium Bomb, ("Little Boy") did not need testing at all, they were so confident that it would work. If the demonstration was carried out with the plutonium device ("Fat Man"), this might have been an issue, but "Fat Man" worked just fine when dropped, so its just an academic point....

Also, had James Byrnes sided with Mcloy and stimson, he would have advised Truman to deliver a "Keep the Mikado" policy BEFORE the Potsdam Declaration, which in turn MIGHT have included the use of one of the devices, probably "Little Boy", in some kind of demonstration. As stated, Oppenhiemer and Groves were so confident that "Little Boy" would work, they dropped it on Hiroshima without testing it....

Got all that?

Thanks for your replys….Ive learnt a lot and hope you have enjoyed answering as much as Ive enjoyed posting.

It seems that American honesty in sharing the secret of the Bomb with our Russian "allies" was picked up and used against the Western Allies for the sheer purpose of POWER PLAYS....just as stated by the members of this forum....

Congrats to them for telling the truth....its not propaganda..

Regards to a Wonderful Forum Group....an HONEST forum group

Christopher

 

Correction.

The scientists were confident the physics were right for Little Boy. They had worked out how much uranium needed to be brought together at such and such speed So that it would go BOOM rather than fizzle. That is why it was not tested.

Fat Man used conventional explosives to compress a Plutonium core to achieve the required fission for explosion. They were less sure about this - if the explosive wave was not uniform, the timing of the conventional explosives had to be just right, too little explosives were used, and several other factors were not right, it would not explode, that is why it was tested.

Now, the fuses & detonators for each bomb are the weak links. No matter how often you test them, the are fragile and prone to damage, and you can never be truly certain that they will trigger the explosive. Going back to May, 1943, the very first target was Truk - The US did not want to drop it on Germany out of fear if it did not detonate, Germany could reverse engineer it. If it fell in Truck Lagoon, it could probably not be recovered. Also the reason keeping the VT fuses from being used early against Germany was that the Germans would reverse engineer one that failed to detonate.

Why do you think we are still digging up unexploded ordnance from WW1 & WW2.

This alone justifies against a demonstration.

 

Production was up to 3 a month by August, 5 a month by November, and 7 a month by December. An even greater increase in production was foreseen to be in early 1946.

Atomic Bomb: Decision -- Bomb Production Schedule, July 30, 1945.

 

1. yes, look at the battles before that--no surrender
2. if the Germans didn't surrender until the Russians were in the capital, surely, surely the Japanese would not ...they were more fanatic at dying than the Germans were

 

I was looking for a source for this statement by Christopher67.

Back on page 2.
However, he explained that he had misread his source, and the edited the statement out of his post.

 

1. yes I know
2. the Japanese were not going to surrender

 

They most definitely were not.

 

Hitler did have this hilarious plan that the Russian forces would be destroyed in front of Berlin. When it did not happen all the generals were betraying him. Even the yes men realized earlier that their fate was sealed.