NotStan said:
Saved lives, mutilated thousands of people in the future generations and still has effects to this day - more to see what sort of effect nuclear weapon will have on humans rather than save lives unfortunately. It may have saved them in the short term, but most argue that blockade would have been as effective and nowhere as damaging as two nuclear devices. It was a test on humans, Japanese were used as guinea pigs, the whole "saving lives" is a bullshit aspect of it. |
No they don't. Most hisotrians argue that a blockaide would of killed WAY more people forcing Japan into mass starvation and killing millions who were only saved from starvation by the US rapidly putting together a systematic food distribution system in Japan.
Unless you mean to the buildings. There would of been less damage to the buildings.
They generally believe this, because... well right after the surrender the US rapidly put into place a MASSIVE food distribution system that saved millions of lives.
That and because Japan only surrendered AFTER the second bomb and after a tortured american pilot lied and told them the US had way more atomic bombs.
The leaders of the Japanese Cabinent that served in the military pretty much all wanted to keep fighting and there was an extreme deadlock preventing surrender until then.
This is generally backed up by eyewitness accounts and at least two members of the Japanese Peace Coalition saying "The atomic bombs were a gift from heaven".
Think how bad a situation is, that you not only accept the atomic bombings but are THANKFULL for them. That was the political and economic situatuion of Japan back then.
