Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai007
No, not really. I did a 32 page Honors History Thesis on the subject, reviewed tons of sources (both American and Japanese), and I can tell you that a) impressing the Soviets was never the goal, it was at most a secondary or tertiary side effect, b) plans were most definitely underway to invade Kyushu if the bomb had not been developed in time, which would have resulted in millions of casualties, and c) the Japanese were not on the verge of surrender, they felt they could hold out for many more months and were very hopeful the Americans would negotiate a favorable cessation of hostilities rather than invade. Even after the Soviets entered the fight and Hiroshima was bombed, there was 100% unanimous agreement by the Japanese leadership to continue the war. After Nagasaki, it was a 50/50 split, allowing the Emperor to cast the tie-breaking vote to surrender. If just 1 single member had voted the other way, the invasion was set to go ahead, because we didn't have any more atomic bombs (though we'd lied and said we did at the time), and it would take months to build another one.
|
I am nowhere near your level of expertise on the subject so I won't argue with you. I've simply read otherwise.
A few questions though.... Why did they want to invade when they could simply suffocate the Japanese into surrender? Also... what was the problem with a negotiated cessation of hostilities? Why was a complete, unconditional surrender the goal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai007
Frankly, I think it does a disservice to the indomitable will of the Japanese people to say they would have surrendered anyway, without any additional provocation or bombing. They were willing to fight to pretty much the last man (and woman) to protect their homeland and Emperor, and massive defensive efforts had been underway for months to defend the islands. They would not have gone to all that effort of arming civilians, training them, building fortifications, etc if they were planning to surrender soon anyway. That just doesn't make sense
|
I'm not interested in stroking cultural egos. I'm not really into Nationalism or imagined identities either. In my opinion the Japanese are as human as the rest of us. Whether or not they would've fought to the last man... they would've either surrendered, or fought and lost. It's simply history to me... When it comes to WW2 I've as much emotional investment or consideration of sensitivities as I do when it comes to the adventures of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan or the conquest of India by the British Empire. I understand why some old people would... but really people need to get over it along with Nationalism and militarism altogether in my opinion.