Atomic bombing of Japan was NOT necessary to end WWII. US gov't documents admit it - eviltoast

‘US government documents admit that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not necessary to end WWII. Japan was on the verge of surrendering. The nuclear attack was the first strike in Washington’s Cold War on the Soviet Union. Ben Norton reviews the historical record.’

    • Addfwyn@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      As soon as the soviet invasion of Manchuria started they met to discuss surrender.

      Which was, incidentally, before the second bomb dropped.

      • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        they were already attempting to surrender before that. they just had one single term - that the emperor would be allowed to live. the Americans stalled them, holding out for an unconditional surrender (which they didn’t stick to after the bombs were dropped), and when they went to the Soviets after, they were ignored because Stalin wanted to remain on good terms with the US / wanted favorable terms at Malta.

    • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      the US refused to accept the terms, which were that the emperor would be allowed to live. they subsequently accepted the same terms after the bombs were dropped. US diplomatic cables suggest that the real reason the bombs were dropped were 1. to test their effectiveness and 2. to send a message to the Soviets.

      they also attempted to surrender to the Soviets, desperately, once they realized the US was stalling them. the Soviets ignored their attempts to surrender because they wanted to remain on good terms with the US and the talks at Malta, to broker the new world order post WWII, had yet to happen.