Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
Interesting. The numbers are only 10% what they were previously at. Still, it was largely unnessisary.
As for Nagasaki.
The cabinent's decision on whether to surrender or not was deadlocked... this includes after Nagasaki it was 50-50.
The Empeoror forced a decision towards surrender, and even then there was a military uprising attempting to impose martial law and prevent all officials from trying to make peace.
Without Nagasaki isn't reasonable to think it wouldn't of been 50-50?
Keep in mind as well, that surrender was predicated on the condition that the empeoror be kept in place in Japan... a position the Russians, Chinese and others weren't willing to accept.
The emperor was walking a tightrope avoiding becoming a imprisoned figurehead who was replaced by a military coup.
Had Korechika Anami decided on a coup (which he considered) he would of been successful.
|
Yeah Dresden was largely overestimated. It was in fact not the worst firestorm the RAF created (I think Hamburg was worse?) but it was the least necessary as far as direct military consequences go - like Hiroshima it was a vulgar display of power, meant largely to show the Germans how complete their dominance over air was and the size of the bombing raids they could muster.
Also the Japanese were already close to capitulation before Nagasaki from what I understand. The thing about the Japanese of that era was that they were very very against surrendering, it was against their code of honour. The realists had already decided upon surrender after Hiroshima and the people who were against surrender after Hiroshima didn't have their minds changed by Nagasaki.
As far as I can see Nagasaki was little more than a further test of atomic weaponry.
|
They really weren't. I'd suggest going back and reading some on it, or even just the wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan
They really weren't willing to surrender, the generals themselves with any less more doubt in their defeat would of taken over and joined the coup. (or more likely staged their own.)
|
"The Supreme Council met at 10:30. Suzuki, who had just come from a meeting with the emperor, said it was impossible to continue the war. TÅÂÂÂÂÂgÅÂÂÂÂÂ Shigenori said that they could accept the terms of the Potsdam Declaration but needed a guarantee of the emperor's position. Navy Minister Yonai said that they had to make some diplomatic proposal—they could no longer afford to wait for better circumstances."
The three of the six major players in Japanese politics that agreed for surrender after Nagasaki already were leaning that way before it. Nagasaki did not change that.
Edit: Also I'm not saying that FDR didn't mean literally castrate (which is why it's repulsive) but I'm saying he never actually had any serious intention to follow through on those words.
|
In your haste I think you missed something in that paragraph. I bolded it for you.
Those three Japanese were only willing to accept the Potsdam Declaration if the emperor's position was guranteed.
They actually refused to surrender due to the Emperor's position not being secured as this was unacceptable to many of the allies... including China and Russia. Russia most of all who insisted on an unconditional surrender because he suspected the Japanese wouldn't surrender, even with atom bombs, if it meant the end of the emperor.
Furthermore, said group who disagreed had enough power to make the first 3 irrelevent if they so wished, since they were the 3 that controlled the army.
Amani had the power to take over the country if he wished... and without Nagasaki he very well might of, assuming the US only had one bomb.
Heck, even after Nagasaki they refused to surrender, until they thought the US had "100 nuclear bombs" and were going to target bigger cities.
