| bazmeistergen said: A lot of you are presuming the idea that the war would have continued if not for nukes. The allies could have accepted a conditional surrender. That would have saved even more lives, but lives were not necessarily the priority. US 'national' interests were served by the bombs being dropped as it helped to bring about an unconditional surrender and thus an occupation. The US did give Marshall Aid to Europe whilst the Soviets drained resources from their areas. No surprises from both sides there really, given their respective experiences of war; both sides served their perceived 'national' interests from their own perceived world view. |
Most information available supports the idea that nukes were the only real way to end the war before the Soviets arrived. Information wasn't as easily available back then as it is now, and the Japanese leaders would not have been aware of what was actually happening to civillians in occupied Germany. I doubt they could have reached any kind of agreement before the Russians could get there. And with Soviet Russians, once they're in good luck getting them out.
Had the Russians invaded, it would have been far worse for this country than a few ancient nukes. This isn't Korea, Russians hated the Japanese and held a grudge almost as bad as they did against Germans. As bad as the bombs were, people should think about what could have happened if the country had been split in two and taken for a Cold-War ride like Germany, Vietnam and Korea.
