Americans were also told that use of the bombs "led to the immediate surrender of Japan and made unnecessary the planned invasion of the Japanese home islands." But it's not that straightforward. As Tsuyoshi Hasegawa has shown definitively in his new book, "Racing the Enemy" - and many other historians have long argued - it was the Soviet Union's entry into the Pacific war on Aug. 8, two days after the Hiroshima bombing, that provided the final "shock" that led to Japan's capitulation. (my bold)
The bomb was dropped, as J. Robert Oppenheimer, scientific director of the Manhattan Project, said in November 1945, on "an essentially defeated enemy." President Truman and his closest advisor, Secretary of State James Byrnes, quite plainly used it primarily to prevent the Soviets from sharing in the occupation of Japan. And they used it on Aug. 6 even though they had agreed among themselves as they returned home from the Potsdam Conference on Aug. 3 that the Japanese were looking for peace.
There are other reasons we used the bomb, but you have to look kinda deep (foreign documentaries on The History Channel at 3AM) to find 'em:
Justification for the $2,000,000,000 (with a "B") expense.
Plain old-fashioned Revenge, served hot.
Because we could.
Not to justify it, but kindly remember that the Japs killed more civilians at Nanking with bullets and bayonets than were killed with the two A-bombs, not to mention their atrocities elsewhere.
I think it's fortunate for Germany that they surrendered before the bomb was ready, although we may not have used it on them because they didn't sneak-attack us, and they're white. They certainly committed atrocities that dwarfed Japan's.
No comments:
Post a Comment