By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Article reasoning that what ended World War II was not the atom bomb

theprof00 on 01 June 2013
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
From what I've read, the Japanese were already ready to surrender and had begun talks up to a full year before the bombs were dropped. The only reason there had not been a surrender was because America demanded the unconditional surrender of Japan, but Japan was only 99.9% willing, with the exception that the emperor be left in power. America said "sorry, that's not your decision". After the bombs were dropped a year later, America accepted the same surrender terms given by the Japanese that full year before. The emperor was left on the throne. We did not get the unconditional surrender that we've been taught the a-bombs garnered.

That's not true actually.  Tied to this actually, most reports of negotiations of surrender come from Russian sources... because this information was delibritly linked to try and prevent russian invasion.

The few offers out there that were real basically involved Japan keeping full soverignty, no war crimes trials, some even asked for land.


In general, among Japan's "Big six" when the war turned there were 3 who wanted to go down fighting... and 3 who wanted to sue for peace.

 

I belielve the 3 who wanted to go down fighting uncoincidentally all would have been charged with war crimes. (Well those that didn't kill themselves.)

 

They wanted to grind out the war until they could get out scott free.

IV. The Japanese Search for Soviet Mediation 

 Document 29: "Magic" – Diplomatic Summary, War Department, Office of Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, No. 1204 – July 12, 1945, Top Secret Ultra
Source: Record Group 457, Records of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, "Magic" Diplomatic Summaries 1942-1945, box 18 

Since September 1940, under the covername "Magic," U.S. military intelligence had been routinely decrypting the intercepted cable traffic of the Japanese Foreign Ministry. The National Security Agency kept the 'Magic" diplomatic and military summaries classified for many years and did not release the series for 1942 through August 1945 in its entirety until the early 1990s. This summary includes a report on a cable from Japanese Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo to Ambassador Naotake Sato in Moscow concerning the emperor's decision to seek Soviet help in ending the war. Not knowing that the Soviets had already made a commitment to its Allies to declare war on Japan, Tokyo fruitlessly pursued this option for several weeks. The "Magic" intercepts from mid-July have figured in Gar Alperovitz's argument that Truman and his advisers recognized that the emperor was ready to capitulate if the Allies showed more flexibility on the demand for unconditional surrender. This point is central to Alperovitz's thesis that top U.S. officials recognized a "two-step logic" that moderating unconditional surrender and a Soviet declaration of war would have been enough to induce Japan's surrender without the use of the bomb.[22]

Document 32: Cable to Secretary of State from Acting Secretary Joseph Grew, July 16, 1945, Top Secret
Source: Record Group 59, Decimal Files 1945-1949, 740.0011 PW (PE)/7-1645 

The draft of the proclamation to Japan that reached Truman contained language that modified unconditional surrender by promising to retain the emperor.  When former Secretary of State Cordell Hull learned about that development he outlined his objections to Secretary of State Byrnes. The latter was already inclined to reject that part of the draft but Hull’s arguments may have reinforced his decision.

Document 33: "Magic" – Diplomatic Summary, War Department, Office of Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, No. 1210 – July 17, 1945, Top Secret Ultra
Source: Record Group 457, Records of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, "Magic" Diplomatic Summaries 1942-1945, box 18.

Another intercept of a cable from Togo to Sato shows that the Foreign Minister rejected unconditional surrender and that the emperor was not “asking the Russian’s mediation in anything like unconditional surrender.”  Incidentally, this “Magic’ Diplomatic Summary” indicates the broad scope and capabilities of the program; for example, it includes translations of intercepted French messages (see pages 8-9). [Page 14 missing from original]


Wrong?
Japan would have accepted unconditional surrender except for the removal of the emperor. I can repeat that again if you'd like.
We didn't get our information from Russia, we got it by intercepting cables TO Russia.

Just read the documents, every single time, the ONE argument that prevented negotiation was removal of the emperor.


Yes.  Wrong.  Again, those cables were sent BY japan TO russia, to PREVENT russia from invading while they stalled out the US and actually didn't want to surrender.  They weren't goint to sell Sato anything.  Though again... those cables show the exact opposite of what you think they do regardless.


If you read those cables.  You'll see SATO says to Togo that russia would require unconditional surrender EXCEPT for removal of the emperor.

While Tojo says they would accept NO unconditional surrender even if it protected the emperor.

 

"Tied to this actually, most reports of negotiations of surrender come from Russian sources... "

Not by Russian sources. By American sources.

 

If you understand this so well, what was the goal of stalling invasion? To give them time while they made Gundam?



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 01 June 2013
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
From what I've read, the Japanese were already ready to surrender and had begun talks up to a full year before the bombs were dropped. The only reason there had not been a surrender was because America demanded the unconditional surrender of Japan, but Japan was only 99.9% willing, with the exception that the emperor be left in power. America said "sorry, that's not your decision". After the bombs were dropped a year later, America accepted the same surrender terms given by the Japanese that full year before. The emperor was left on the throne. We did not get the unconditional surrender that we've been taught the a-bombs garnered.

That's not true actually.  Tied to this actually, most reports of negotiations of surrender come from Russian sources... because this information was delibritly linked to try and prevent russian invasion.

The few offers out there that were real basically involved Japan keeping full soverignty, no war crimes trials, some even asked for land.


In general, among Japan's "Big six" when the war turned there were 3 who wanted to go down fighting... and 3 who wanted to sue for peace.

 

I belielve the 3 who wanted to go down fighting uncoincidentally all would have been charged with war crimes. (Well those that didn't kill themselves.)

 

They wanted to grind out the war until they could get out scott free.

IV. The Japanese Search for Soviet Mediation 

 Document 29: "Magic" – Diplomatic Summary, War Department, Office of Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, No. 1204 – July 12, 1945, Top Secret Ultra
Source: Record Group 457, Records of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, "Magic" Diplomatic Summaries 1942-1945, box 18 

Since September 1940, under the covername "Magic," U.S. military intelligence had been routinely decrypting the intercepted cable traffic of the Japanese Foreign Ministry. The National Security Agency kept the 'Magic" diplomatic and military summaries classified for many years and did not release the series for 1942 through August 1945 in its entirety until the early 1990s. This summary includes a report on a cable from Japanese Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo to Ambassador Naotake Sato in Moscow concerning the emperor's decision to seek Soviet help in ending the war. Not knowing that the Soviets had already made a commitment to its Allies to declare war on Japan, Tokyo fruitlessly pursued this option for several weeks. The "Magic" intercepts from mid-July have figured in Gar Alperovitz's argument that Truman and his advisers recognized that the emperor was ready to capitulate if the Allies showed more flexibility on the demand for unconditional surrender. This point is central to Alperovitz's thesis that top U.S. officials recognized a "two-step logic" that moderating unconditional surrender and a Soviet declaration of war would have been enough to induce Japan's surrender without the use of the bomb.[22]

Document 32: Cable to Secretary of State from Acting Secretary Joseph Grew, July 16, 1945, Top Secret
Source: Record Group 59, Decimal Files 1945-1949, 740.0011 PW (PE)/7-1645 

The draft of the proclamation to Japan that reached Truman contained language that modified unconditional surrender by promising to retain the emperor.  When former Secretary of State Cordell Hull learned about that development he outlined his objections to Secretary of State Byrnes. The latter was already inclined to reject that part of the draft but Hull’s arguments may have reinforced his decision.

Document 33: "Magic" – Diplomatic Summary, War Department, Office of Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, No. 1210 – July 17, 1945, Top Secret Ultra
Source: Record Group 457, Records of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, "Magic" Diplomatic Summaries 1942-1945, box 18.

Another intercept of a cable from Togo to Sato shows that the Foreign Minister rejected unconditional surrender and that the emperor was not “asking the Russian’s mediation in anything like unconditional surrender.”  Incidentally, this “Magic’ Diplomatic Summary” indicates the broad scope and capabilities of the program; for example, it includes translations of intercepted French messages (see pages 8-9). [Page 14 missing from original]


Wrong?
Japan would have accepted unconditional surrender except for the removal of the emperor. I can repeat that again if you'd like.
We didn't get our information from Russia, we got it by intercepting cables TO Russia.

Just read the documents, every single time, the ONE argument that prevented negotiation was removal of the emperor.


Yes.  Wrong.  Again, those cables were sent BY japan TO russia, to PREVENT russia from invading while they stalled out the US and actually didn't want to surrender.  They weren't goint to sell Sato anything.  Though again... those cables show the exact opposite of what you think they do regardless.


If you read those cables.  You'll see SATO says to Togo that russia would require unconditional surrender EXCEPT for removal of the emperor.

While Tojo says they would accept NO unconditional surrender even if it protected the emperor.

 

"Tied to this actually, most reports of negotiations of surrender come from Russian sources... "

Not by Russian sources. By American sources.

 

If you understand this so well, what was the goal of stalling invasion? To give them time while they made Gundam?


The goal was, as long as Russia didn't invade, it was a one front war.  Japan could load all their troops into the invasion point, and eventually meatgrind their way into peace.

The specific sources you are talking about specifically talk about how Togo and the cabinenet WOULD NOT accept unconditional surrender, even if it protected the emperor.

I was talking about the actual russian sources behind those specific negotiations.

 

On the 17th, Sato the ambassador says to the japanese government "Keep in mind the unconditional surrender I propose only comes in the emperor is preserved.

On the 21st Togo replies back "The government will never allow unconditional surrender."

 

So unless you think he's like the average poster here... it's pretty obvious Togo was unwilling to allow unconditional surrender no matter what happened to the emperoer.

 

The Japanese ambassador is BEGGING For unconditional surrender on the basis that the Emperor remains safe... and the government says... "Not going to happen."

 

Edit: In fact.  If you just want to read directly...

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/40.pdf 



Kasz216 on 01 June 2013
Mr Khan said:
Kasz216 said:
bobgamez said:
why exactly did they need to hit defenseless citizens? why couldnt they just nail army bases, it would of had the same effect. Thats one of the things i hated about the bombing decision of the US then


1) Back then Total War was the definition of the day.  See for example the Nazi bombings of London.  Back then they figured bombing cities would cause a countries people to demand surrender quicker.

2) Army bases were generally based inside or near cities.  The cities they attacked actually did have military facilties that were the targets.  Hiroshima was home to a number of military camps and had a supply base.  

Nagasaki was a huge industrial city that produced a lot of war matierals.  90% of the cities workers built things for the war.

 

They were honestly probably the best military targets available, because all the other ones had already been bombed into dust.

An argument i've read is that the Germans would have won the air "Battle of Britain" if they had stayed focused on air-fields and military facilities, but the idea that terrorizing the populace would work better is what ultimately took the pressure off the RAF enough to allow them to regroup.

Really Germany's defeat in WWII was an object lesson in how going out of your way to be evil just hurts you yourself: they wasted a great lot of resources burning Jews (and even tried to up the timetable on the Holocaust as the war turned sour, when if they had just put it on hold and prioritized killing Soviet soldiers over Jewish civilians, they could have done something), or switching the focus of the battle of Britain to a civilian terror campaign, or their rotten treatment of Soviet civilians (could've gotten a lot more on their side than they did if they had gone out of their way to show that their enemy was Stalin and not the Slavic Peoples)

I never said it was a good idea.

Just simply they THOUGHT it was a good idea at the time.  Hence part of the decision making on why.  



theprof00 on 01 June 2013
Kasz216 said:


The goal was, as long as Russia didn't invade, it was a one front war.  Japan could load all their troops into the invasion point, and eventually meatgrind their way into peace.

The specific sources you are talking about specifically talk about how Togo and the cabinenet WOULD NOT accept unconditional surrender, even if it protected the emperor.

I was talking about the actual russian sources behind those specific negotiations.

 

On the 17th, Sato the ambassador says to the japanese government "Keep in mind the unconditional surrender I propose only comes in the emperor is preserved.

On the 21st Togo replies back "The government will never allow unconditional surrender."

 

So unless you think he's like the average poster here... it's pretty obvious Togo was unwilling to allow unconditional surrender no matter what happened to the emperoer.

 

The Japanese ambassador is BEGGING For unconditional surrender on the basis that the Emperor remains safe... and the government says... "Not going to happen."

 

Edit: In fact.  If you just want to read directly...

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/40.pdf 

Ah I see now.

Wow, well, in that case, Togo really really dropped the ball.



Turkish on 01 June 2013

interesting, reading later



Around the Network
KungKras on 01 June 2013
mai said:
enditall727 said:

And are you challenging Seth's WW2 knowledge? Lol

"Challenging" is not a word, I'll destroy him :D

Seriously though I do not want to be it like chit-chat, for that I have Kazs alerady.

Aren't you the guy that thought Stalin was a good guy?



I LOVE ICELAND!

NightDragon83 on 01 June 2013
Goatseye said:
enditall727 said:
sethnintendo said:
Kasz216 said:




Russia was no doubt a major fear and played a big part in it... but Nuclear weapons in the end seems like what forced their hand.


Funny that they would rather surrender to us than Russia.  With all their anti USA propaganda that led to citizens jumping off cliffs of Okinawa with their children in fear of surrender.  The higher ups obviously knew that USA would treat Japan better than Russia.  I'm actually more interested in the supposed war of USA vs Russia right after WW2 (aka what led to the Cold War).  The atomic bomb probably stopped Russia in its tracks (T-34 tracks to be precise).  Without it I believe Russia would have declared war on USA, England, and the rest of the Allies to control the rest of Europe.


Why exactly was there even a cold war? Didn't USSR and USA team up to stop the Nazi Germany?

Imagine you and your friend consider yourselves bff and you tell each other all your secrets. Days later you find out he was developing and used a Nuclear Weapon and god knows what else. Would you still trust him? He does everything to stop you from making friendships and launch global proxy wars in countries that are friend of yours.

LMAO!  When the hell did Russia / the USSR and the United States EVER consider each other to be "bffs"???  It just so happened that the US and Russia ended up having a mutual enemy during WWII in Nazi Germany, but for different reasons.  Germany attacked the US's allies in Western Europe, and they began extending their reach to Eastern Europe and parts of Russia as well, essentially making the same mistake as Napoleon did.

Ever since the revolution of 1917, Russia and the US had complete political and ideological differences with one another, and this came to a climax post-WWII when they were the only two "superpowers", and both tried to impose their will and vision on as much of the world as possible.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

Goatseye on 01 June 2013
NightDragon83 said:
Goatseye said:

Imagine you and your friend consider yourselves bff and you tell each other all your secrets. Days later you find out he was developing and used a Nuclear Weapon and god knows what else. Would you still trust him? He does everything to stop you from making friendships and launch global proxy wars in countries that are friend of yours.

LMAO!  When the hell did Russia / the USSR and the United States EVER consider each other to be "bffs"???  It just so happened that the US and Russia ended up having a mutual enemy during WWII in Nazi Germany, but for different reasons.  Germany attacked the US's allies in Western Europe, and they began extending their reach to Eastern Europe and parts of Russia as well, essentially making the same mistake as Napoleon did.

Ever since the revolution of 1917, Russia and the US had complete political and ideological differences with one another, and this came to a climax post-WWII when they were the only two "superpowers", and both tried to impose their will and vision on as much of the world as possible.

I said bff because they traded military secrets and other sensitive information that US wouldn't do with other enemy countries. Russia put everything into WW2, unlike US. They didn't hide anything maybe they're the ones that thought US was their bff.



mrstickball on 01 June 2013
sethnintendo said:
Kasz216 said:




Russia was no doubt a major fear and played a big part in it... but Nuclear weapons in the end seems like what forced their hand.


Funny that they would rather surrender to USA than Russia considering all their anti USA propaganda that led to citizens jumping off cliffs of Okinawa with their children in fear of surrender.  The higher ups obviously knew that USA would treat Japan better than Russia.  I'm actually more interested in the supposed war of USA vs Russia right after WW2 (aka what led to the Cold War).  The atomic bomb probably stopped Russia in its tracks (T-34 tracks to be precise).  Without it I believe Russia would have declared war on USA, England, and the rest of the Allies to control the rest of Europe.

Pretty sure that the Soviet leadership knew that continuing the war would be disasterous, as there weren't a lot of soldiers left in reserve after having fought one of if not the bloodiest wars in history (by a percentage of men lost during the war).



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

the2real4mafol on 01 June 2013
Kasz216 said:
the2real4mafol said:
Kasz216 said:

Oh, and it's also worth noting, The US wanted Russia to declare war on Japan... up until right before they dropped the bombs.

So whether it was a deciding factor or not, Truman thought it would be.

Arguably Russia only declared war to get their share of war spoils after the Nuclear Bombs were dropped.

 

In a way, you could argue the nuclear bombs caused the russian invasion.

The Russians certainly couldn't trust America after that, they were like close allies before the nuclear bombs were dropped

No they weren't.  Both the US and Russia considered fighting each other after the fall of Germany.

The drop of the nuclear bombs made Russia hate America more though. But they had to work together to defeat the nazis, but unfortunately both countries greed for land over Europe and later Asia due to ideology lead to tensions. It was probably inevitable as you said 



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018