Post

Conversation

Who Opposed Nuking Japan? “The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.” —Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower
Image
“In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. … The Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of ‘face.’ The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude.” —Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower “The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul.” —Herbert Hoover “[T]he Japanese were prepared to negotiate all the way from February 1945 … up to and before the time the atomic bombs were dropped; … [I]f such leads had been followed up, there would have been no occasion to drop the bombs.” —Herber Hoover “I told [Gen. Douglas] MacArthur of my memorandum of mid-May 1945 to Truman, that peace could be had with Japan by which our major objectives would be accomplished. MacArthur said that was correct and that we would have avoided all of the losses, the Atomic bomb, and the entry of Russia into Manchuria.” —Herbert Hoover “MacArthur’s views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed. When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor.” —Norman Cousins “General MacArthur definitely is appalled and depressed by this Frankenstein monster. I had a long talk with him today, necessitated by the impending trip to Okinawa. He wants time to think the thing out, so he has postponed the trip to some future date to be decided later.” —Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s pilot, Weldon E. Rhoades “[General Douglas] MacArthur once spoke to me very eloquently about it, pacing the floor of his apartment in the Waldorf. He thought it a tragedy that the bomb was ever exploded. MacArthur believed that the same restrictions ought to apply to atomic weapons as to conventional weapons, that the military objective should always be limited damage to noncombatants…MacArthur, you see, was a soldier. He believed in using force only against military targets, and that is why the nuclear thing turned him off…” —Richard Nixon “The Japanese were ready for peace, and they already had approached the Russians and the Swiss. And that suggestion of giving a warning of the atomic bomb was a face-saving proposition for them, and one that they could have readily accepted. In my opinion, the Japanese war was really won before we ever used the atom bomb.” —Under Secretary of the Navy, Ralph Bird “The Japanese position was hopeless even before the first atomic bomb fell, because the Japanese had lost control of their own air.” —General “Hap” Arnold “[Gen.] Arnold’s view was that the dropping of the atomic bomb was totally unnecessary. He said he knew the Japanese wanted peace. There were political implications in the decision, and Arnold did not feel it was the military’s job to question them. … [Arnold’s view was]: when the question comes up of whether we use the atomic bomb or not, my view is that the Air Force will not oppose the use of the bomb, and they will deliver it effectively if the Commander-in-Chief decides to use it. But it is not necessary to use it in order to conquer the Japanese without the necessity of a land invasion.” —General Ira Eaker, Deputy Commander of U.S. Army Air Forces “The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.” — Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet “The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima and before the Russian entry into the war.” Adm. Nimitz “The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons … The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.” —Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman “Truman told me it was agreed they would use it, after military men’s statements that it would save many, many American lives, by shortening the war, only to hit military objectives. Of course, then they went ahead and killed as many women and children as they could, which was just what they wanted all the time.” —Adm. Leahy “The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. … The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.” — Major General Curtis LeMay, XXI Bomber Command “[LeMay said] if we’d lost the war, we’d all have been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he’s right. He, and I’d say I, were behaving as war criminals. LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?” —Robert MacNamara “The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment … It was a mistake to ever drop it … [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it.” — Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr. “I concluded that even without the atomic bomb, Japan was likely to surrender in a matter of months. My own view was that Japan would capitulate by November 1945. Even without the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it seemed highly unlikely, given what we found to have been the mood of the Japanese government, that a U.S. invasion of the islands scheduled for 1 November 1945 would have been necessary.” —Paul Nitze, director and then Vice Chairman of the Strategic Bombing Survey “[E]ven without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” —U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, 1946 “Just when the Japanese were ready to capitulate, we went ahead and introduced to the world the most devastating weapon it had ever seen and, in effect, gave the go-ahead to Russia to swarm over Eastern Asia. Washington decided it was time to use the A-bomb. I submit that it was the wrong decision. It was wrong on strategic grounds. And it was wrong on humanitarian grounds.” —Ellis Zacharias Deputy Director of the Office of Naval Intelligence “When we didn’t need to do it, and we knew we didn’t need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn’t need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs. Many other high-level military officers concurred.” —Brigadier General Carter Clarke, the Military Intelligence officer in charge of preparing summaries of intercepted Japanese cables for President Truman and his advisors “The commander in chief of the U.S. Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations, Ernest J. King, stated that the naval blockade and prior bombing of Japan in March of 1945, had rendered the Japanese helpless and that the use of the atomic bomb was both unnecessary and immoral. —Carter Clarke “I proposed to Secretary Forrestal that the weapon should be demonstrated before it was used… the war was very nearly over. The Japanese were nearly ready to capitulate… My proposal… was that the weapon should be demonstrated over… a large forest of cryptomeria trees not far from Tokyo… Would lay the trees out in windrows from the center of the explosion in all directions as though they were matchsticks, and, of course, set them afire in the center. It seemed to me that a demonstration of this sort would prove to the Japanese that we could destroy any of their cities at will… Secretary Forrestal agreed wholeheartedly with the recommendation… It seemed to me that such a weapon was not necessary to bring the war to a successful conclusion, that once used it would find its way into the armaments of the world.” —Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy Lewis Strauss “In the light of available evidence I myself and others felt that if such a categorical statement about the retention of the dynasty had been issued in May 1945, the surrender-minded elements in the Japanese government might well have been afforded by such a statement a valid reason and the necessary strength to come to an early clear cut decision. If surrender could have been brought about in May 1945, or even in June, or July, before the entrance of Soviet Russia into the Pacific war and the use of the atomic bomb, the world would have been the gainer.” —Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew And for what it’s worth, then-Army Chief George Marshall wanted only to hit military facilities with it, not cities. “It will not be long before we are reduced to savagery. We are the barbarians within our own empire.” —Russell Kirk, author of The Conservative Mind “This doctrine of progress is a most interesting instance of the blind and foolish confidence of Americans in the God Progress. … Thus far, apparently, it has been progress toward annihilation, an end to be accomplished, perhaps, by the improved atomic bomb? We have dealt more death and destruction in the space of ten years than the men of the Middle Ages, with their Devil, were able to accomplish in a thousand.” —Russell Kirk “The atomic bomb was a final blow to the code of humanity. I cannot help thinking that we will suffer retribution for this. For a long time to come I believe my chief interest is going to be the restoration of civilization, of the distinctions that make life intelligible.” —Richard Weaver, author of Ideas Have Consequences
True Delta
Post your reply

They did it to demonstrate U.S. military supremacy and take over as the worlds empire. Darryl was right—Churchill was the chief villain, as the entire ordeal could have been avoided were it not for his actions.
Thank you for this. It’s insane that people rationalize, excuse, and even justify the nuking of Japan. You’d think the shadows of Hiroshima would be enough for people to take pause, but evidently not. Posts like this are extremely helpful though!
Atomic bombs dropped on Japan for 3 reasons: A. To test the uranium-234 bomb on Hiroshima & the plutonium-239 bomb on Nagasaki (2nd choice after Kokura) B. To preempt sharing the spoils of war with the Soviets who were to enter the theater on 9 Aug 1945 C. To show US power
A most vile and horrific enactment of mass violence by our criminal government.
Quote
Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons
@dbenner83
Today in 1945, the US government dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan. Combined with the detonation of another atomic bomb three days later in Nagasaki, Japan, the decision resulted in the death of 225,000 people—most of which were innocent civilians. It's a sad reminder
Show more
Image
Demands for surrender are always part of the pantomime of the aggressor We invented "unconditional" surrender in WWII so we could keep going We rejected the Taliban's surrender in late 2001 so we could keep going Israel would reject any Hamas surrender so they could keep going
Surrender is not unconditional surrender. Japan was given Potsdam. They rejected it. They were offered a surrender by the west. They refused. They wanted to fight for a more beneficial surrender. They were given the choice. They chose the emperor and status quo for their social
The atomic Bomb saved millions of lives including Japanese. Japanese military during World War II adhered to a strict code rooted in Bushido, the traditional samurai warrior ethos, which emphasized honor, loyalty, and sacrifice. Surrender was considered deeply dishonorable, not
The government wasn’t interested in a peaceful end. They wanted a new world order they could exploit for maximum benefit. And the nuke was the way to pin that in place for a while.
Indiscriminate, mass bombing of men, women and children was commonly committed by the Allies throughout World War II. The fire bombing of Tokyo killed 100,000 people. The firebombing of Dresden killed 35,000 people. The atom bomb condensed such hits into one strike with one
i don’t sit around judging my ancestors that had slaves. i’m not going to monday-morning QB this one either. Let’s talk about Epstein and why we continue to pay taxes.
I may be living in a bubble but it seems obvious and non-controversial to me that the nuking was unnecessary and evil and inexcusable.
I've wondered for years, when I've thought about it, why the bomb couldn't have first been dropped somewhere relatively harmless as a demonstration. Interesting to see that someone, Lewis Strauss, actually thought of that back then.
Grok: " . . .the majority of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Truman’s inner circle supported them, driven by estimates of high casualties from an invasion and the desire to avoid Soviet influence in Asia’s post-war order." Boots on the ground, those implementing the preceding
Yeah. This seems like rear view mirror crap. Japan wanted to maintain territory gains in a bunch of places. That's what they offered along with allowing themselves time to rearm.
Hiroshima. Dresden. Auschwitz. Indian Removal. Holodomor. Great Leap Forward. It’s happens when the state cuts itself off from the natural law and metaphysically rots.
Thank you for this compilation of definitive statements. At one time we had moral warriors who fought within the boundaries of civilized defense as they saw it. Now we are dragged down by military careerists savages with no moral compass. Only team Winning as the prize
This is the time of year when dudes who never wore the uniform, but live vicariously through the U.S. military, pretend to know better than all the generals and admirals who felt nuking Japan was unnecessary
Reminds me of what the Soviet forces did to women and children in East Germany. Many of the German victims escaped from that hell with their lives, although I'm not so sure that was a blessing. Somehow historians still say we (the allies) were the good guys.
This has been debated since it happened. The answer is easy and obvious. The nukes were dropped as a demonstration to Russia. We left virgin targets in Japan for this express purpose. There are hundreds of books on the subject. It isn’t a mystery.
If it is true that there was an agreement with Japan to drop the nuke on an non inhaibited island for their observation and then.... I would say the military industrial complex screwed us all again?
Why couldn't they just invite the Japanese to a demonstration? Or drop em in the middle of a Naval group?
Did Eisenhower resign his commission in a public protest? No. It's very easy to signal one's virtue after the fact, when nothing is on the line, especially when you plan to run for president.
All the major players that directed Japan's war effort were in Tokyo on March 9/10. They watch Tokyo be burnt to the ground with 100,000 of their subjects dead. Still, they could not accept that Japan had lost the war and was utterly defenseless. Every drop of blood after March
This is all very interesting, but the fact is that if the Japanese were so eager to negotiate their surrender, it wouldn't have been necessary to drop a second bomb.
How did racism against Japanese plaid a role in the Truman administration to nuke Japan? 🤔 Look for official reports and transcripts from this administration using terms like "yellow" and phrases like "yellow peril" or "enemy race" or "racial enemy"
Virtually every comment here with "well what about - " is answered in the first half of the quotes here. I only read through about half and was able to answer all these whatabouts just in the first half of the post.
I'd suggest in a bit of an ironic and bizarre way that the debunked idea that the bomb spared lives by stopping the need for a land invasion, is actually true, only because the same irrational logic employed to use the bomb would have been used to justify a land invasion.
MacArthur was ready to nuke China after North Korea “invaded” South Korea after South Korea invaded North Korea and occupied Haeju, which was conveniently omitted from most western news
Well look at the bright side- if we hadn’t dropped it on them we would have dropped it on someone else and now we know how destructive they are so we can “prevent” it from happening again.
I always heard that during the Korean War, McArthur was dismissed because he wanted to nuke all of China? Was that true? Did his opinion of the bomb change? Or was he specifically only for targeting military targets in China?
Read Richard B Frank’s book Downfall for the details of the deliberations based on our reading decrypted Japanese communications. The choice was the bomb or several hundred thousand US dead invading the Home islands. Japan was not ready to surrender. Note that Eisenhower and
If they were so close to surrendering they would have done so immediately after the first bomb. The hardliners were ready to fight to the last man.
I forgot it was August already. The neocons will come out to tell us that dropping nukes in August is perfectly justifiable even though we couldn't possibly invade until November.
I'm sorry, this is another example of AI being "correct " but not accurate. I defer to the boots on the ground at the time. None of them wanted the war to continue another day longer than necessary. "What ifs" are dumb exercise. Nobody needs to be strong at being dumb. Every
Russia had won the war for the Allies in Europe. And Russia (Soviet Union) was going to do the same in the East. America just wanted to display a show of force & simultaneously deny the USSR any credit. America's evil started some time ago.
All the comments are funny an avoid the real reason why. So every general, admiral and man of substance did not want to drop the bomb but yet somehow it happened anyways 🤔 Sounds familiar ... Sounds like all the Zionists around Truman and Churchill wanted it done so it was
GIF
Scott- (1) in the road to surrender, Evan Thomas shows that after the first bomb was dropped, Japan minsters voted to continue the war. In fact there was an attempted coup (that failed) in order to continue the war (which was thankfully stopped).
We killed hundreds of thousands of civilians to start the industrial war complex. No other nation has committed such a terrorist attack as we did.
The Abraham era was unlimited revenge. Moses was limited to an eye for an eye... Jeremiah and Isaiah era was no revenge. Jesus said will yourself to love your enemy, pray for them, and turn the other cheek. Netanyahu is the least civilized of these cultures. He's a barbarian.
It was so widely known that Japan was trying to surrender that the US minted EVERY purple heart that has been used in every war since then in anticipation of the inevitable land invasion.
(3) after Midway, Japan had no chance of winning. It was just about fighting to get the best settlement. But after Iwo Jima and Okinawa, US public opinion was exacerbated and a full scale invasion was something Truman wouldn’t do
Thank U. It’s been also documented by historians like Gar Alperovitz but far 2 few ppl know this historical fact. What you usually get is the knee jerk reaction of “Remember Pearl Harbor” and/or “it saved millions of American lives” or their kind when you try to debunk the myth.
Scott, you're wasting your time trying to convince hubristic Americans that the atomic bombs on Japan were unnecessary. The truth is, it was the Soviet invasion that forced Japan's surrender, not the bombs. Since 1945 , Americans have been duped by this myth.
so everybody was against it yet they still dropped one and then the other. hard to believe maccarthur and nitze had moral torments over the bomb considering maccarthur's eagerness to nuke china during korean war. also, app none of them objected to firebombing tokyo, dresden etc
“The atomic bomb was a final blow to the code of humanity.” What about the massacre of the Palestinian people in the Gaza concentration camp, completely obliterated by zionist Israël? Does that come close enough to it?
It wasn't the b0mbs that forced Japan's surrender. It was the threat of a Russian invasion from the north. Tokyo had been fire b0mbed worse than Hiroshima/Nagasaki.
idk i was watching etv last night they it said the Japanese refused the unconditional surrender and wanted to keep the emperor as well as no occupation and the Japanese would disarm themselves plus one more I couldn't remember.
The same could be said for the firebombing of Tokyo. So many people don't even realize or know that the attacks killed the same amount of people. I assume this is because of the "basic" nature of a fire bomb compared to the sensational "Nuke."
It was an experiment. Convened under the war act. It was a warning crime. It is pure evil incarnate, that applies to the B-29 crews also. Cheshire was an observer on B-29 Bockscar. It had a profound effect.
Japan was nuked to field test the weapons and send a message to the USSR. Ending the war was a secondary concern.
Hiroshima and Nagazaki were the only two cities in Japan with a large Christian population. Just a coincidence?
Thank you for sharing. It is repugnant that this weapon is unleashed upon the world and used so cavalierly, with no regard for human life. May cooler heads prevail!
Can anyone let me know what benefit the Americans gained by dropping the bomb in the country that was negotiating peace?
Three of the top six people credited with developing and overseeing the deployment of the atomic bomb all share one thing in common: Oppenheimer, Szilard and Teller And it's not being from Hungary.
Thank you Scott, warmongers will still defend dropping of the bomb though just like the defense of Dresden being made to justify Gaza. Demons going to be demons.
What a post! Growing up, it was always the story that Ike and others were all about using the nukes. Makes one wonder what Truman was told , or personally believed, that would make him use the A-bomb.
Thank you for the resource, Scott. And thank you for all you do. Whether you recognize it or not, you're doing the LORD's work. Keep it up!
It was literally Jews who forced America to unnecessarily drop a nuclear bomb on Christian civilians in the Christian epicenter of Japan. Just like it was Jews who forced America to invade Iraq and kill some of the oldest Christian communities in ME. It’s always the same people
So well sourced. Going to take me a minute or six to get through this and try to make it make sense in my head. I'd wondered this. I have my answer it seems.
I'm actually quite curious how the Japan Question [re atomic bombing] related or factored into, if at all, vis-a-vis earlier US/Allied discussions of a post-war Germany re support & opposition to the Morgenthau Plan.
Then why the delay n surrendering? That’s why 2 were dropped.
It's very easy to play monday morning quarterback about the losing sides of history, but it's very tiresome to see people trying poorly to signal their virtue with it- and most of their allegations seem made up for and by idiots, and read as "MY side should be the evil winners!"

Live on X

Trending now

What’s happening

Yankees at Rangers
LIVE
Politics · Trending
Poilievre
8,743 posts
Trending
#Chengdu
Politics · Trending
#TrumpEpsteinFiles
7,828 posts
Sports · Trending
Ty France