General Discussion

Marrah_G

(28,581 posts)

64. Sorry 250,000, still to much

Reply to NuclearDem (Reply #34)

Tue Aug 6, 2013, 02:38 PM

Aug 2013

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

154 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Truman refused to use the atomic bomb on Japan, what should he have done instead? [View all] HardTimes99 Aug 2013 OP

Allow them to kill 15+ million more civilians. Allow tens of thousands US soldiers to die. The Link Aug 2013 #1

My father was in the army in Hawaii at that time, preparing for a land invasion. SharonAnn Aug 2013 #57

Arnaud Amalric (died 1225) Tagurrit Aug 2013 #136

Wasn't it estimated that a "conventional land invasion" would cost 500,000 American lives? KansDem Aug 2013 #2

Cuz ... Koios Aug 2013 #5

They knew the Uranium bomb would work. hunter Aug 2013 #60

You're confusing ... Koios Aug 2013 #62

We would have kept bombing Japan until they surrendered. hunter Aug 2013 #111

The Japanese government and its people would not have believed it Hekate Aug 2013 #98

Large cities were deliberately targeted for shock effect wercal Aug 2013 #105

And an estimated 10 million Japanese. lumberjack_jeff Aug 2013 #145

Eliminate the Project ... Koios Aug 2013 #3

Because 'American' lives are worth so much more? nt Mnemosyne Aug 2013 #24

Yes, at the time ... Koios Aug 2013 #26

In a tota war? Yes. Lives of your troops are worth any greater number of enemy, even civilians. N/T GreenStormCloud Aug 2013 #97

How about... Phillyindy Aug 2013 #4

That was discussed. The fear was of the possibility of a well publicized dud aka fizzle stevenleser Aug 2013 #12

Also LordGlenconner Aug 2013 #18

That was a viable alternative Bragi Aug 2013 #154

He should have anticipated all of the unjust wars we'd wage in the future Dreamer Tatum Aug 2013 #6

We didn't start WWII, but we sure ended it. Eff the haters. My grandfather kestrel91316 Aug 2013 #7

That doesn't make what we did right Marrah_G Aug 2013 #10

Millions? The Link Aug 2013 #13

Sorry 250,000, still to much Marrah_G Aug 2013 #65

I must disagree. My family was enslaved by the Japanese...some killed. The Link Aug 2013 #66

And what the Japanese did was a horrible thing Marrah_G Aug 2013 #69

Again, I disagree. For millions in China, Korea, etc.. The Link Aug 2013 #70

It looks like we will just have to agree to disagree. Marrah_G Aug 2013 #72

Agreed wercal Aug 2013 #106

The estimated deaths from a full invasion was as many as 10 million Japanese. n/t lumberjack_jeff Aug 2013 #146

I have a difference of opinion than you. tumtum Aug 2013 #14

I understand your point, but the death toll was, at the worst, 250k NuclearDem Aug 2013 #34

Sorry 250,000, still to much Marrah_G Aug 2013 #64

Seriously, that war was Hell on Earth. Ask the Chinese what they thought of the Rape of Nanking... Hekate Aug 2013 #107

Hekate I just see this differently then you do Marrah_G Aug 2013 #135

You must be talking of Dresden and Tokyo nadinbrzezinski Aug 2013 #46

Implicating ethics and morality into conflict is a rather diaphanous baseline LanternWaste Aug 2013 #49

Thank you for all the information Marrah_G Aug 2013 #71

I can't argue with that at all; and I've always had a difficult time rationalizing... LanternWaste Aug 2013 #81

What a magisterial post! Should be required reading, imho. Thank you for taking HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #99

This post should be bookmarked as a good historical source and commentary Hekate Aug 2013 #110

Well Written and Factual Account Tagurrit Aug 2013 #119

Well said. n/t lumberjack_jeff Aug 2013 #147

+1 DCBob Aug 2013 #148

135K in Hiroshima. Less than that in the second bombing. cthulu2016 Aug 2013 #59

Jesus Christ. STILL TOO MUCH!!! n/t Dawgs Aug 2013 #68

See my post #107 for civilian casualties in Asia and the Pacific Hekate Aug 2013 #113

Hiroshima was chosen because of it's strategic military value. tumtum Aug 2013 #114

My father might have been on the same troop transport tumtum Aug 2013 #108

I had a relative on one of islands that was to be used for the firebombing. roamer65 Aug 2013 #131

Fair questions JustAnotherGen Aug 2013 #8

So much ignorance of historical reality Hekate Aug 2013 #115

ITA JustAnotherGen Aug 2013 #124

Yours is a very wise and insightful post, and I thank you for it. Hekate Aug 2013 #130

Thanks JustAnotherGen Aug 2013 #133

What was Japan capable of doing at that point? jberryhill Aug 2013 #9

Rebuild its armed forces? geek tragedy Aug 2013 #15

News much? - Japan Unveils Biggest Warship Since WWII jberryhill Aug 2013 #121

68 years later. geek tragedy Aug 2013 #122

Patience is a virtue jberryhill Aug 2013 #123

Had Germany been forced to wait until 1986 to re-arm itself . . . nt geek tragedy Aug 2013 #127

Because their use became immediately controversial after WWII. Much like Chemical weapons after WWI stevenleser Aug 2013 #21

"And why did we not "end" the Korean and Vietnamese conflicts the same way?" Jenoch Aug 2013 #29

Kill, starve and abuse millions of civilians in the lands they had conquered? hack89 Aug 2013 #39

And in what lands were they by August 1945? jberryhill Aug 2013 #52

The Japanese murdered between 3 and 10 million civilians from 1937 to 1945 hack89 Aug 2013 #54

That wasn't the question, now was it? jberryhill Aug 2013 #61

The killing stopped when the war ended hack89 Aug 2013 #63

Not in Korea, Vietnam and other power vacuums jberryhill Aug 2013 #73

So because we can't stop all future killing hack89 Aug 2013 #74

I'm not the one arguing that it came to an "end" jberryhill Aug 2013 #78

The killing by the Japanese came to an end. hack89 Aug 2013 #86

Reason #75789 why I love DU jberryhill Aug 2013 #92

You are the one suggesting that continued Japanese occupation of all those lands hack89 Aug 2013 #93

And you are the one jberryhill Aug 2013 #94

Same reason we didn't cut a deal with the Confederates. geek tragedy Aug 2013 #79

This message was self-deleted by its author ieoeja Aug 2013 #83

Conventional land invasion. Rex Aug 2013 #11

I've read estimates that as many as 1 million American soldiers would have died HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #16

Well the OP says IF Truman refused to use The Bomb. Rex Aug 2013 #20

I'm the OP and I hastily posted rather than consider a more nuanced wording. Maybe I should have HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #38

I might get a lecture over my next statement and could be wrong Rex Aug 2013 #45

Good points. They were not ever going to surrender, and Truman knew it. Hekate Aug 2013 #116

I'm glad we agree on something. Rex Aug 2013 #139

Ask the Japanese nicely to "just stop it already." LordGlenconner Aug 2013 #17

Interesting responses given that many responding Gman Aug 2013 #19

3) Demonstrate the power of the weapon without killing thousands. Orsino Aug 2013 #22

Flattening an island Jenoch Aug 2013 #30

Yes. It argues against the idea of flattening things as a panacea. n/t Orsino Aug 2013 #144

I totally understand your position and point. I don't know enough of the history of the HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #32

I'm sure it was considered, but the Japanese would not have believed it Hekate Aug 2013 #118

We didn't understand it, but half of the Japanese government was looking for a face saving way to stevenleser Aug 2013 #23

Thanks for the links. Will try to get to them later today. Half of the Japanese HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #36

Times that try mens souls alan_phillips Aug 2013 #25

What would you rather happen? sgsmith Aug 2013 #27

I think you are correct and your argument is one that opponents of the use of HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #33

Options- sarisataka Aug 2013 #28

I agree with your analysis. It's why I say that Truman chose the 'least-bad' alternative among HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #41

It is easy to second guess with years of history to look back on sarisataka Aug 2013 #50

The Second Bomb Was Totally Unnecessary: Translation Error Caused It vinny9698 Aug 2013 #31

Written a VERY strongly worded letter! zappaman Aug 2013 #35

Bad bad bad!!! Rex Aug 2013 #47

I'm no fan of having to have dropped them NuclearDem Aug 2013 #37

I'm with you, ND, for the most part. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #42

3. Blaspherian Aug 2013 #40

Wow! Your flippancy around such a somber anniversary is HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #43

Wow, really don't know what to say to that. NuclearDem Aug 2013 #48

Less casualties Blaspherian Aug 2013 #80

Explained to them very calmly using "I statements" distantearlywarning Aug 2013 #44

3. He would have kept his powder dry. madinmaryland Aug 2013 #51

What would the American people have done to Truman if he hadn't used the bomb, and..... LongTomH Aug 2013 #53

I find myself also tearing up, although I was born long after the events HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #102

Battle of Okinawa, April 1 to June 22, 1945 BlueCheese Aug 2013 #55

This should be considered Exhibit A for this thread. Hekate Aug 2013 #126

Read Tears in Darkness before answering elfin Aug 2013 #56

This is all anyone needs to know Catherina Aug 2013 #58

The Russians forced his hand by declaring war on Japan Aug 8th KurtNYC Aug 2013 #67

Russia was obligated to declare war against Japan sgsmith Aug 2013 #77

The Russian did not have any ability to invade Japan. GreenStormCloud Aug 2013 #109

Promised the safety of the Emperor and his family, promised an honorable surrender, and a peaceful msanthrope Aug 2013 #75

Neither. Blockade them until the Russians invaded or a revolution took down the militarists. Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2013 #76

I get where you're coming from and there's a part of me that wants to agree. But (and HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #87

Why is a slow death due to starvation and disease more humane than an atomic bomb? hack89 Aug 2013 #91

If there's any good that came out of this, it's that no one dared ever do it again. leveymg Aug 2013 #82

I think I remember reading Ellsberg speculating that one reason why Vietnam HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #89

Views of Navy Admirals Leahy, Nimitz & Halsey, AF commanding Gen. Hap Arnold, Gen. LeMay.... Faryn Balyncd Aug 2013 #84

What other wars should have been ended with nukes, then? DirkGently Aug 2013 #85

This is an eloquent statement of the counter-argument to my OP and I thank HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #88

I wonder if anyone here would prefer we had dropped them on Hitler's bunker, which was the intention leveymg Aug 2013 #90

"Perhaps it would have required time" = a lot of pointless deaths hack89 Aug 2013 #95

Reading all the responses to my OP, I'm reminded of something Robert E. Lee allegedly HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #96

Hmm. I remember that as being said while he was watching the Confederates march Benton D Struckcheon Aug 2013 #120

Purple Heart Medals used today were made in anticipation of the invasion of the Japanese Mainland egold2604 Aug 2013 #100

HOW ABOUT ACCEPTING THEIR TERMS OF SURRENDER? Th1onein Aug 2013 #101

Then why did they reject the Potsdam Declaration? N/T GreenStormCloud Aug 2013 #112

The Potsdam Declaration DCBob Aug 2013 #150

Imagine if they had not been ready in time or had not worked jberryhill Aug 2013 #103

I had an Uncle who was captured in the avebury Aug 2013 #104

War is terrible for everyone on both sides (except the mercenaries and war HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #129

His biggest guilt was watching his best friend die in avebury Aug 2013 #137

That is so sad. On one hand, just one more tragedy among many millions HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #141

Another hard incident occurred when the avebury Aug 2013 #149

Listened to LWolf Aug 2013 #117

He would have been impeached and removed from office. roamer65 Aug 2013 #125

Invasion was the only other alternative. nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #128

I think a naval and aerial blockade was another option, although the costs of HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #132

both optilns Niceguy1 Aug 2013 #134

We should have tried to negotiate a settlement whereby Japan gave up its conquered territories. Vattel Aug 2013 #138

I'm not enough of an expert in the time or the Japanese imperial mindset. Either in this HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #140

this? PowerToThePeople Aug 2013 #142

He should have given the Japanese more time to respond to the 1st one, before he used the second JPZenger Aug 2013 #143

I read in one of the threads here that the Japanese asked for more time time HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #151

Hiroshima was a city of both industrial and military significance hack89 Aug 2013 #153

the war was virtually over at that time larkrake Aug 2013 #152