Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 6:55:06 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
Correct. Which is why AFTER the war was over the concept that civilians were not to be military targets. Again we are using this concept that killing civilians in today's conflicts is 'bad' no matter what. In WWII this concept was not that defined.

You still have not answered any of my questions that I posed and I am interested how you would resolve them.
a) you have a nation that is killing/abusing civilian populations wherever they have troops, regardless if they are cut off from supplies or not
b) A blockade will prolong these civilians in their suffering yet spare Japanese civilians and allow Japan to continue to be a threat, not to mention Russian antics.
c) An invasion of Japan would expend more Allied lives. Along with civilians that would attack alongside military personal

Or you can drop two bombs and end the war in a few weeks.

You say killing Japanese civilians by dropping the bomb is unacceptable. Fine. How do you reconcile Japan's continued killing of non-Japanese civilians for months while other solutions are considered? I know you are not saying that Japanese civilians matter more that other civilians. But I just do not see how allowing Japan to continue its occupation activities is 'better' than dropping the bomb so other countries civilians can stop being killed and abused a lot sooner.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 151
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 6:55:41 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Even if someone wanted to pursue this in court I do not think that there is any court that has jurisdiction to do so.

Only the Axis countries could be persecuted for war crimes during WWII. I also suspect that US has not agreed to give any international court jurisdiction on this matter since then.

I would be pleased to know if anyone has information if it could be legally tried in a court somewhere? Anywhere?

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 152
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 7:42:43 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Correct. Which is why AFTER the war was over the concept that civilians were not to be military targets. Again we are using this concept that killing civilians in today's conflicts is 'bad' no matter what. In WWII this concept was not that defined.

You still have not answered any of my questions that I posed and I am interested how you would resolve them.
a) you have a nation that is killing/abusing civilian populations wherever they have troops, regardless if they are cut off from supplies or not
b) A blockade will prolong these civilians in their suffering yet spare Japanese civilians and allow Japan to continue to be a threat, not to mention Russian antics.
c) An invasion of Japan would expend more Allied lives. Along with civilians that would attack alongside military personal

You say killing Japanese civilians by dropping the bomb is unacceptable. Fine. How do you reconcile Japan's continued killing of non-Japanese civilians for months while other solutions are considered? I know you are not saying that Japanese civilians matter more that other civilians. But I just do not see how allowing Japan to continue its occupation activities is 'better' than dropping the bomb so other countries civilians can stop being killed and abused a lot sooner.


My view is that the bombs were unneeded. The Japanese will to fight went after the news of the Soviet invasion.

Looking at your questions from a strictly utilitarian view:

A) It depends on the scale. What option kills less?
B) How? A blockade would only apply the pressure to Japanese civilians - China and the rest of the Empire were food exporters. Russian involvement is a bonus, as it gives the Japanese the shock needed to realize that it's the end of the line.
C) I've said again and again that a invasion wouldn't be needed, and the same would go for a blockade. The circles of power within Japan had been hanging their hopes on the Soviets serving as middle-men in a negotated settlement. Russian entry in to the war wrecked the last hope of the Japanese leadership at getting any sort of reasonable terms.

At the end of the day, you want the war to end with as few casualties as possible. If you don't drop the bombs, there's between 129,000 to a quarter million off the death toll. That might mean the war lasts another two to three months. If, at the wars end, you've "saved" (for want of better word) more from the bombings than die over the following three months, then you made the right call.

For what it's worth, my back-of-an-evenlope caluculations with unclear stats show that the bombs killed less than would have died over 3 months by a very significant margin.

As a side note, there are some in this thread that seem to think the Japanese leadership was this homogenous body that was populated by completely soul-less individuals was universally determined to fight to the last. Yes, there were elements like that within the Japanese leadership, but we seem to be forgetting that they represented one end of the spectrum.


(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 153
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 7:57:50 PM   
Bo Rearguard


Posts: 492
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Even if someone wanted to pursue this in court I do not think that there is any court that has jurisdiction to do so.

Only the Axis countries could be persecuted for war crimes during WWII. I also suspect that US has not agreed to give any international court jurisdiction on this matter since then.

I would be pleased to know if anyone has information if it could be legally tried in a court somewhere? Anywhere?


Who would be tried in court? Pretty much everyone connected with the Truman administration and the Manhattan Project is long dead and gone. Would simply we try the U.S. as a bad-boy political entity that unleashed a horrible weapon on the world? Not hard to see this as just a cynical ploy for attention from a Duma politician.

Speaking of horrible weapons unleashed on the world, I would be curious to know if Russia would be willing to tried for the invention and cheap dissemination of the AK-47. It's the most effective killing machine in human history. A weapon that almost seventy years on is still killing as many as a quarter of a million people every year, in every corner of the globe. The death totals from Hiroshima and Nagasaki pale in comparison.



_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 154
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 8:04:31 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Even if someone wanted to pursue this in court I do not think that there is any court that has jurisdiction to do so.

Only the Axis countries could be persecuted for war crimes during WWII. I also suspect that US has not agreed to give any international court jurisdiction on this matter since then.

I would be pleased to know if anyone has information if it could be legally tried in a court somewhere? Anywhere?


Who would be tried in court? Pretty much everyone connected with the Truman administration and the Manhattan Project is long dead and gone. Would simply we try the U.S. as a bad-boy political entity that unleashed a horrible weapon on the world? Not hard to see this as just a cynical ploy for attention from a Duma politician.

Speaking of horrible weapons unleashed on the world
warspite1

So when does Canada get hauled before the courts? They unleashed Justin Bieber on an unsuspecting world......


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 12/28/2014 9:04:49 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Bo Rearguard)
Post #: 155
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 8:12:47 PM   
Bo Rearguard


Posts: 492
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


So when does Canada get hauled before the courts? They unleashed Justin Bieber on an unsuspecting world......



I'm still not over blaming them for William Shatner, the Mackenzie Brothers, Ed the Sock, and Rush!

(Seriously, I can't find it my heart to blame Canada for much. In my experience, the Eagle Scout of nations.)


_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 156
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 8:18:46 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Can't get them on anything!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Bo Rearguard)
Post #: 157
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 8:21:21 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
We love ya really - er Canada that is.. NOT Justin Bieber.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 158
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 8:36:35 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Even if someone wanted to pursue this in court I do not think that there is any court that has jurisdiction to do so.

Only the Axis countries could be persecuted for war crimes during WWII. I also suspect that US has not agreed to give any international court jurisdiction on this matter since then.

I would be pleased to know if anyone has information if it could be legally tried in a court somewhere? Anywhere?


Who would be tried in court? Pretty much everyone connected with the Truman administration and the Manhattan Project is long dead and gone. Would simply we try the U.S. as a bad-boy political entity that unleashed a horrible weapon on the world? Not hard to see this as just a cynical ploy for attention from a Duma politician.

Speaking of horrible weapons unleashed on the world, I would be curious to know if Russia would be willing to tried for the invention and cheap dissemination of the AK-47. It's the most effective killing machine in human history. A weapon that almost seventy years on is still killing as many as a quarter of a million people every year, in every corner of the globe. The death totals from Hiroshima and Nagasaki pale in comparison.



Maybe I should have bolded the word "could".

Personally I do not think it could, nor should, be tried today. But I am interested in what the law and treaties say on the matter.

I think it would have made an interesting case if a court without bias would have handled it. With that said I think a court without bias is (and was) a impossibility in this matter.

I also want to make clear that I do understand why Russia brings this up now. It has nothing to do with WWII and it has all to do with current events. But that cannot be discussed here because of the forum rules.

This thread has made me revaluate my position somewhat, or even more than that, so I want to tank you all for this spirited and polite debate.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Bo Rearguard)
Post #: 159
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 8:55:44 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


So when does Canada get hauled before the courts? They unleashed Justin Bieber on an unsuspecting world......



I'm still not over blaming them for William Shatner, the Mackenzie Brothers, Ed the Sock, and Rush!

(Seriously, I can't find it my heart to blame Canada for much. In my experience, the Eagle Scout of nations.)



And Celine Dion!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Bo Rearguard)
Post #: 160
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 9:33:07 PM   
msieving1


Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

I do not understand why it is relevant if the bombs were necessary or not. Neither do I understand the relevance of the argument that the bomb saved lives, or not.

To me it depends on how war crimes are, or were, defined.


Whether or not an action constitutes a war crime is very dependent on the military necessity of the action and whether the action causes more or fewer deaths than alternatives.

quote:

That Russia brings this up now has more to do with the current political situation and the possibility of NATO expanding.


Well, yeah. Obviously.

_____________________________

-- Mark Sieving

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 161
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/28/2014 9:37:15 PM   
msieving1


Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reaper

But to witp-ae:
How many people on the allied side have used the bombs to gain victory here and how many have not --- I wonder if modern perspectives on what is considered a war crime actually changes the way we play the end game.



In the games, the atomic bombs simply aren't very effective, and using them shifts the level of victory in Japan's favor. The design of the game makes using atomic bombs a questionable decision. That has nothing to do with reality.


_____________________________

-- Mark Sieving

(in reply to adek670)
Post #: 162
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/29/2014 1:17:35 AM   
BattleMoose

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 2/17/2014
Status: offline
The legality of actions in war time stem from International Treaties that belligerent nations may have signed. For the USA it includes the Geneva Conventions. While there is no court with jurisdiction, the voluntary agreements that the USA has signed in International Law serves the basis for the determination of whether actions or either legal or illegal.

(in reply to msieving1)
Post #: 163
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/29/2014 10:25:20 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
Trials are all well and good when there is a cop in the room. When there is no cop the judge(s) can judge whatever he(they) like and the judgement is simply a piece of paper. There is(are) no cops with universal jurisdiction. The UN can play at it but there are 5 potential vetoes to it taking any action of consequence. So if the issue is more involved than declaring it to be sunny or cloudy on any particular day in any particular place the UN doesn't count for much.

The best that one can hope for in a war is that both(all) of the combatants will show some restraint.

BTW it is a pretty short list of Japanese examples of restrain during WW2 or the "China Incident".

(in reply to BattleMoose)
Post #: 164
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/29/2014 11:26:05 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


My view is that the bombs were unneeded. The Japanese will to fight went after the news of the Soviet invasion.



You know that and historians believe that. Did HST know that at Potsdam? If so, how?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 165
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 12:11:02 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


My view is that the bombs were unneeded. The Japanese will to fight went after the news of the Soviet invasion.



You know that and historians believe that. Did HST know that at Potsdam? If so, how?


MAGIC - the Americans had been reading the Japanese diplomatic code since before the war started.

My google-fu turned up this website. I can't vouch for the accuracy of any of it, but the author does at least provide references, which I'll chase up if I can.

http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm

The quote in question

quote:



July 11: "make clear to Russia... We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying as a result of the war; we hope to terminate the war".

July 12: "it is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war".

July 13: "I sent Ando, Director of the Bureau of Political Affairs to communicate to the [Soviet] Ambassador that His Majesty desired to dispatch Prince Konoye as special envoy, carrying with him the personal letter of His Majesty stating the Imperial wish to end the war" (for above items, see: U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 1, pg. 873-879).

July 18: "Negotiations... necessary... for soliciting Russia's good offices in concluding the war and also in improving the basis for negotiations with England and America." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/18/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 22: "Special Envoy Konoye's mission will be in obedience to the Imperial Will. He will request assistance in bringing about an end to the war through the good offices of the Soviet Government." The July 21st communication from Togo also noted that a conference between the Emperor's emissary, Prince Konoye, and the Soviet Union, was sought, in preparation for contacting the U.S. and Great Britain (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/22/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 25: "it is impossible to accept unconditional surrender under any circumstances, but we should like to communicate to the other party through appropriate channels that we have no objection to a peace based on the Atlantic Charter." (U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 2, pg. 1260 - 1261).

July 26: Japan's Ambassador to Moscow, Sato, to the Soviet Acting Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Lozovsky: "The aim of the Japanese Government with regard to Prince Konoye's mission is to enlist the good offices of the Soviet Government in order to end the war." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/26/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

President Truman knew of the messages' content, noting, for instance, in his diary on July 18, "Stalin had told P.M. [Prime Minister Churchill] of telegram from Jap [sic] Emperor asking for peace" (Robert Ferrell, ed., Off the Record - the Private Papers of Harry S. Truman, pg. 53).



(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 166
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 12:57:30 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


My view is that the bombs were unneeded. The Japanese will to fight went after the news of the Soviet invasion.



You know that and historians believe that. Did HST know that at Potsdam? If so, how?


MAGIC - the Americans had been reading the Japanese diplomatic code since before the war started.

My google-fu turned up this website. I can't vouch for the accuracy of any of it, but the author does at least provide references, which I'll chase up if I can.

http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm

The quote in question

quote:



July 11: "make clear to Russia... We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying as a result of the war; we hope to terminate the war".

July 12: "it is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war".

July 13: "I sent Ando, Director of the Bureau of Political Affairs to communicate to the [Soviet] Ambassador that His Majesty desired to dispatch Prince Konoye as special envoy, carrying with him the personal letter of His Majesty stating the Imperial wish to end the war" (for above items, see: U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 1, pg. 873-879).

July 18: "Negotiations... necessary... for soliciting Russia's good offices in concluding the war and also in improving the basis for negotiations with England and America." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/18/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 22: "Special Envoy Konoye's mission will be in obedience to the Imperial Will. He will request assistance in bringing about an end to the war through the good offices of the Soviet Government." The July 21st communication from Togo also noted that a conference between the Emperor's emissary, Prince Konoye, and the Soviet Union, was sought, in preparation for contacting the U.S. and Great Britain (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/22/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 25: "it is impossible to accept unconditional surrender under any circumstances, but we should like to communicate to the other party through appropriate channels that we have no objection to a peace based on the Atlantic Charter." (U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 2, pg. 1260 - 1261).

July 26: Japan's Ambassador to Moscow, Sato, to the Soviet Acting Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Lozovsky: "The aim of the Japanese Government with regard to Prince Konoye's mission is to enlist the good offices of the Soviet Government in order to end the war." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/26/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

President Truman knew of the messages' content, noting, for instance, in his diary on July 18, "Stalin had told P.M. [Prime Minister Churchill] of telegram from Jap [sic] Emperor asking for peace" (Robert Ferrell, ed., Off the Record - the Private Papers of Harry S. Truman, pg. 53).




HST knew about the Sato cable and the others, yes. But their content was not the same as an open declaration that Japan was going to unconditionally surrender. This is the crux. The July 25 content above shows their position had not really changed in years.

McCullough, in "Truman", relates the Potsdam conference in great detail. On the evening (Europe time) the Trinity success was top-lined to HST, Stalin had reiterated that the USSR would enter against Japan as agreed at Yalta. He named a mid-August date. The next day a more complete secret cable offered more details of the test. After the formal session that day Truman spoke alone to Churchill. McCullough writes:

"They talked of the war in the Pacific and Churchill pondered whether new wording might be devised so that the Japanese could surrender and yet salvage some sense of their military honor. Truman countered by saying he did not think the Japanese had any military honor, not after Pearl Harbor. Churchill said that 'at any rate they had something for which they were ready to face certain death in very large numbers, and this might not be so important to us as it was to them.' At this Truman turned 'quite sympathetic,' as Churchill recounted, and began talking of 'the terrible responsibilities upon him in regard to unlimited effusion of American blood.' 'He invited personal friendship and comradeship,' Churchill wrote. 'He seems a man of exceptional character . . .'"

After this meeting Truman called alone on Stalin, accompanied by Byrnes and Bohlen. At that meeting Stalin showed the Sato cable, which Truman already had read. Still, he was impressed with Stalin's openness. "It might be best, said Stalin, to 'lull the Japanese to sleep.'" Truman said he would leave the response to the Sato cable up to Stalin. Thus indicating he had already most likely made a decision on Manhattan.

The conference continued with Churchill making increasingly long-winded speeches and Truman growing exasperated. He wanted decisions, not speeches. Most of the content of the conference dealt with Germany, Italy, the zones inherent in Europe, and other non-Japanese issues. To the Soviets and UK the war was essentially already over. After the Battle of Berlin Stalin seemed to view the coming war in the east as a minor operation more or less. The British really had no part to play with the Home Islands.

Truman wrote "I'm not going to stay around this terrible place all summer just to listen to speeches." In a letter to Bess he said Stalin's agreement to join against Japan was what he had come for, and he had it. But in his diary he wrote "Believe Japs will fold up before Russia comes in. I am sure they will when Manhattan appears over their homeland."

The issue was decided as far as Truman was concerned. And his vote was the only one that mattered.

Again, the cable stack you posted above shows that Japan well-understood the terms available. They didn't like them. They were looking for a way to weasel out of the situation they had placed themselves in. But Truman was far more worried about what Stalin could and would do in the east than Japan's problems. In some ways he was an excellent leader because he didn't complicate uncomplicated things. Japan could have avoided the Bomb by surrendering, before July, in July, or in the time between Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Anything else is just a waste of logic.



< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 12/30/2014 2:01:05 AM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 167
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 1:15:08 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
So, it's agreed then, Justin Bieber should be our guest at Guantanamo. Unless Canada will accept him back. I think there's a black site in Windsor where they could put him, and tickle his feet or something like that.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 168
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 1:22:59 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

So, it's agreed then, Justin Bieber should be our guest at Guantanamo. Unless Canada will accept him back. I think there's a black site in Windsor where they could put him, and tickle his feet or something like that.

Sure you jest - Bieber would ruin Guantanamo's reputation!

_____________________________


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 169
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 1:43:55 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Well, look at the up side. He might convert all those terrorists there to merely be hooligans, though I doubt they could hold their own against British soccer hooligans.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 170
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 1:51:54 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


My view is that the bombs were unneeded. The Japanese will to fight went after the news of the Soviet invasion.



You know that and historians believe that. Did HST know that at Potsdam? If so, how?


MAGIC - the Americans had been reading the Japanese diplomatic code since before the war started.

My google-fu turned up this website. I can't vouch for the accuracy of any of it, but the author does at least provide references, which I'll chase up if I can.

http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm

The quote in question

quote:



July 11: "make clear to Russia... We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying as a result of the war; we hope to terminate the war".

July 12: "it is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war".

July 13: "I sent Ando, Director of the Bureau of Political Affairs to communicate to the [Soviet] Ambassador that His Majesty desired to dispatch Prince Konoye as special envoy, carrying with him the personal letter of His Majesty stating the Imperial wish to end the war" (for above items, see: U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 1, pg. 873-879).

July 18: "Negotiations... necessary... for soliciting Russia's good offices in concluding the war and also in improving the basis for negotiations with England and America." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/18/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 22: "Special Envoy Konoye's mission will be in obedience to the Imperial Will. He will request assistance in bringing about an end to the war through the good offices of the Soviet Government." The July 21st communication from Togo also noted that a conference between the Emperor's emissary, Prince Konoye, and the Soviet Union, was sought, in preparation for contacting the U.S. and Great Britain (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/22/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 25: "it is impossible to accept unconditional surrender under any circumstances, but we should like to communicate to the other party through appropriate channels that we have no objection to a peace based on the Atlantic Charter." (U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 2, pg. 1260 - 1261).

July 26: Japan's Ambassador to Moscow, Sato, to the Soviet Acting Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Lozovsky: "The aim of the Japanese Government with regard to Prince Konoye's mission is to enlist the good offices of the Soviet Government in order to end the war." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/26/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

President Truman knew of the messages' content, noting, for instance, in his diary on July 18, "Stalin had told P.M. [Prime Minister Churchill] of telegram from Jap [sic] Emperor asking for peace" (Robert Ferrell, ed., Off the Record - the Private Papers of Harry S. Truman, pg. 53).




Again, the cable stack you posted above shows that Japan well-understood the terms available. They didn't like them. They were looking for a way to weasel out of the situation they had placed themselves in. But Truman was far more worried about what Stalin could and would do in the east than Japan's problems. In some ways he was an excellent leader because he didn't complicate uncomplicated things. Japan could have avoided the Bomb by surrendering, before July, in July, or in the time between Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Anything else is just a waste of logic.




That's the crux. The American insistence on no surrender other than unconditional surrender was demanding for the Japanese, and they weren't going to consider it as an option so long as the possibility existed that the Soviets could get them a better deal.

The role of the USSR is confounded by the self-serving role their diplomacy played in giving the Japanese false hope. Would a simple statement that the USSR wouldn't be interested in helping Japan with negotations have a strong enough effect, or would an all-out declaration of war be required? I'd tend to think the latter - which would have more of an impact in the IJA officer corps - the group that had the most sway over the Japanese government.

Excuse the short post: I had a big long reply, but the fourm ate it.


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 171
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 4:00:36 AM   
Bo Rearguard


Posts: 492
Joined: 4/7/2008
From: Basement of the Alamo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

The role of the USSR is confounded by the self-serving role their diplomacy played in giving the Japanese false hope. Would a simple statement that the USSR wouldn't be interested in helping Japan with negotations have a strong enough effect, or would an all-out declaration of war be required? I'd tend to think the latter - which would have more of an impact in the IJA officer corps - the group that had the most sway over the Japanese government.




I don't see why they would. Ambassador Sato in Moscow was repeatedly assured by the Soviet Foreign Minister, Molotov that Russo-Japanese relations and the future of the two countries' neutrality pact, had nothing to do with the Western Allies. This deceit was eagerly swallowed by Tokyo. Japan sought Russian goodwill to prop up its creaking empire at exactly the moment that Stalin secretly committed himself to kicking those ramshackle props away. The Russians were quite conscious of the growing American ambivalence toward their participation in the Pacific War and therefore possessed the strongest interest in ensuring that Japan kept fighting by keeping the door cracked open and offering some crumbs of hope. If Tokyo somehow made peace with Washington before Stalin shifted his armies to the Manchurian border and was ready to declare war, the Americans might back out on the rewards promised at Yalta. So, to play for time, Russian diplomats kept telling the Japanese fairy tales, and in their impossible position the Japanese kept believing them.


_____________________________

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist ...." Union General John Sedgwick, 1864

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 172
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 8:43:22 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1673
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
At the time (June/July '45) the IJ 'war cabinet' was composed of the PM, the Foreign Minister, the Army & Navy ministers, & the Army & Navy Chiefs-of-Staff. Of these 6, 4 were serving officers, & only the FM could credibly be described as 'pro-peace'. The military members were all committed to a last-ditch defense of the Home Islands, desiring to prove to the US that military conquest of Japan would prove unacceptably costly to the US.

The IJ had essentially decided to defend southern Kyushu as a huge Okinawa-style battle, whose success would be measured by the casualties inflicted on the invading US forces, regardless of the cost. I don't think that anyone in this discussion would disagree that the Olympic invasion of Kyushu would have been horrific. Kyushu was loaded for bear, & the US was bringing its A-game.

Amb. Sato was probably more aware of Russian intentions than his superiors at the IJ FM. Russia had already notified Japan that their neutrality pact would not be renewed, IJ Army commanders could not have been unaware of their weak position in Manchukuo, given that they'd spent the last 3 years drawing down their forces there in order to reinforce their defenses against the US' Pacific-theater advance. Surely some few IJ Army planners were aware of the Soviet Army's combat power in 1945, & could recall the 'pre-war' debacle of Nomonhan. Japanese diplomats were still active in Russia, and sent reports of streams of military trains traveling east along the trans-Siberian railroad (see Frank, 'Downfall').

While the Allies were conferring at Potsdam, Amb. Sato repeatedly advised his government that its ill-defined plan to send an Imperial diplomatic mission to Moscow would have no influence on Soviet intentions. He knew that Japan had neither the economic concessions nor diplomatic geld to influence the Soviet government. Sato knew his job & was probably the least surprised of anyone, when he rec'd the Russian declaration of war.

As far as anyone believing what they'd heard from Molotov, well, by 1945 that was an 'orrid thin straw to grasp. One might almost feel sorry for those who'd believed that his diplomacy was anything other than warfare by other means. Those who had were already mostly dead, or marked for death.

It'd be almost amusing, if it wasn't so depressing, to read statements like m_m's plaint, "The role of the USSR is confounded by the self-serving role their diplomacy played in giving the Japanese false hope. Would a simple statement that the USSR wouldn't be interested in helping Japan with negotations have a strong enough effect, or would an all-out declaration of war be required?"

In what world are diplomatic communications meant to be other than self-serving? The world under discussion is 1945, & the communicants are both major combatants, Russia is poised to do serious dirt to Japan. Are they gonna telegraph their intentions, or are they gonna pretend that they're not getting ever closer to knocking you over?

In addition, there's nothing I've read that indicates the USSR was willing to accept the IJ diplomatic initiative. Soviet diplomatic response was solely passive, at most it requested clarification of the IJ representative's ability to make a deal. Given the US' proven ability to read coded Japanese diplomatic communications (MAGIC) in near real-time, & probable ability to read Soviet comms, nothing I've read gives any indication that the USSR gave IJ any reason to speculate that their 'iniative' would have resulted in any diplomatic activity towards ending the war. Any 'hope' involved was purely of the IJ's imagination.

On the other hand, we have the Potsdam Declaration of 26 July 45, promising "The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction." I will note that the Soviet declaration of war, & subsequent invasions, began on 8-9 Aug 45, concurrent w/ the atom-bombing of Nagasaki, after the previous atom-bombing of Hiroshima. Frank states that Stalin personally ordered his armies to attack Japan 1 week in advance of their planned dates, reacting to the attack on Hiroshima.

I'd like to note that the Potsdam Declaration was not an 'unconditional' surrender, but defined the Allied (US, British & Chinese) terms for Japan's surrender. The only subsequent notable change in the surrender documents signed in Tokyo Bay, was that the Imperial system could continue to exist under the governance of SCAP (MacArthur's military occupation), & that its continued existence would be subject to a popular referendum.

I don't see exactly how this discussion devolved from the OP's link to a 'US should be charged w/ war-crimes for atom-bombing Japan' moan from from the Speaker of the Russian Duma, a politico whose main objective is to get in the way of Ukraine's effort to defend itself from Russian separatism & annexation. 'S true, that the end of WWII involved some prompt & utter destruction that continues to disturb our minds to this day.

Yet lately, the most recent posts here posit the idea that the Russians should've been more up-front w/ the Japanese wrt the Soviet military threat, suddenly it's the Sov's fault that IJ command didn't see the writing on the wall.

I sign on to the revulsion against nuclear warfare, and support the various START treaties that resulted, in no small part, from the European protests against the Reaganite deployment of the Pershing II missiles.

But it's damn' amusing to read here, the insinuation that IJ could've avoided nuclear attack in August '45, if only the Sovs had been more honest. That's quite a turnaround from the OP's link!

(in reply to Bo Rearguard)
Post #: 173
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 9:12:43 AM   
BattleMoose

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 2/17/2014
Status: offline
quote:

Yet lately, the most recent posts here posit the idea that the Russians should've been more up-front w/ the Japanese wrt the Soviet military threat, suddenly it's the Sov's fault that IJ command didn't see the writing on the wall.


I don't think anyone has posited that the Russians should have behaved anyway other than they did. But rather have argued that the Soviet promise of a negotiated peace was in fact, keeping Japan in the war.

We have two incredibly impactful events happening days before their surrender, Soviet invasion and Atomic bombs dropping. In truth the, damage the atomic bombs caused was very comparable to conventional bombing raids.

But it was the Soviet invasion that finally made it clear that there was no other option for Japan but unconditional surrender.

Maybe the USA just had to wait for the Soviet invasion, not drop the bombs, and see Japan capitulate. Or even combined with some blockade. Speculation.

< Message edited by BattleMoose -- 12/30/2014 10:13:54 AM >

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 174
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 2:20:42 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
quote:

Yet lately, the most recent posts here posit the idea that the Russians should've been more up-front w/ the Japanese wrt the Soviet military threat, suddenly it's the Sov's fault that IJ command didn't see the writing on the wall.

But it's damn' amusing to read here, the insinuation that IJ could've avoided nuclear attack in August '45, if only the Sovs had been more honest. That's quite a turnaround from the OP's link!


I had written a nice long post on the Soviet role in prolonging the Japanese surrender, but it was swallowed by the forum.

Yes, diplomacy is self-serving. The Russians were quite happy to entertain notions of Japanese negotations in order to keep them in the war and to let Stalin get a slice of the cake in Asia.

I wasn't being critical of Russian diplomacy: Molotov had the interests of his own nation as first priority, and he furthered them to a great degree in his dealings with the Japanese.

There are three facts regarding Japanese diplomacy prior to the atomic bombs being dropped:

1. The government was willing to surrender on negotated terms.
2. The Americans were only going to accept unconditional surrender.
3. The Soviets acting as intermediates represented the last chance they had of surrendering under terms.


quote:

ORIGINAL: BattleMoose

quote:

Yet lately, the most recent posts here posit the idea that the Russians should've been more up-front w/ the Japanese wrt the Soviet military threat, suddenly it's the Sov's fault that IJ command didn't see the writing on the wall.


I don't think anyone has posited that the Russians should have behaved anyway other than they did. But rather have argued that the Soviet promise of a negotiated peace was in fact, keeping Japan in the war.

We have two incredibly impactful events happening days before their surrender, Soviet invasion and Atomic bombs dropping. In truth the, damage the atomic bombs caused was very comparable to conventional bombing raids.

But it was the Soviet invasion that finally made it clear that there was no other option for Japan but unconditional surrender.

Maybe the USA just had to wait for the Soviet invasion, not drop the bombs, and see Japan capitulate. Or even combined with some blockade. Speculation.


Yes, this is a clearer articulation of my thoughts.

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 175
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 4:02:39 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

There are three facts regarding Japanese diplomacy prior to the atomic bombs being dropped:

1. The government was willing to surrender on negotated terms.
2. The Americans were only going to accept unconditional surrender.
3. The Soviets acting as intermediates represented the last chance they had of surrendering under terms.



That is an acceptable distillation of the situation so long as one understands the importance of the three is not 33% each. #2 is more like 99.9%. HST had no duty to Soviet territorial aims nor did he have a duty to the Japanese people. He, like Lincoln, was elected on a wartime ticket, and after the Casablanca conference. The American people knew what they were doing. And it is clear from the sources I quoted, primarily Truman and Churchill's diaries, that they saw the surrender in quite different terms. (As did Stalin.) As I said up-thread, Europeans at the time did not understand the effect of Pearl Harbor on the diplomatic system in play in 1945. Not even the PM who should have known better.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 176
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 8:35:44 PM   
Amoral

 

Posts: 378
Joined: 7/28/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

There are three facts regarding Japanese diplomacy prior to the atomic bombs being dropped:

1. The government was willing to surrender on negotated terms.
2. The Americans were only going to accept unconditional surrender.
3. The Soviets acting as intermediates represented the last chance they had of surrendering under terms.



That is an acceptable distillation of the situation so long as one understands the importance of the three is not 33% each. #2 is more like 99.9%. HST had no duty to Soviet territorial aims nor did he have a duty to the Japanese people. He, like Lincoln, was elected on a wartime ticket, and after the Casablanca conference. The American people knew what they were doing. And it is clear from the sources I quoted, primarily Truman and Churchill's diaries, that they saw the surrender in quite different terms. (As did Stalin.) As I said up-thread, Europeans at the time did not understand the effect of Pearl Harbor on the diplomatic system in play in 1945. Not even the PM who should have known better.



If there was a moral obligation to avoid the bombings by negotiating a peace, the Allies can't get out of that obligation by saying "I don't want to and I don't have to". The mood of the nation does not alter what is and what is not moral.

That's a big if, though.






< Message edited by Amoral -- 12/30/2014 9:40:10 PM >

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 177
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 8:38:30 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline
Up on the hill; They’ve got time to burn;
There’s no return;
Double helix in the sky tonight;
Throw out the hardware, let’s do it right;
Aja;
When all my dime dancing is through:
I run to you..”mu”

Up on the hill; They think I’m ok;
Or so they say;
Chinese music always sets me free;
Angular banjoes; Sound good to me;
Aja;
When all my dime dancing is through:
I run to you..”mu”


< Message edited by Symon -- 12/30/2014 9:40:04 PM >


_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 178
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 8:51:45 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
He's finally cracked

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 179
RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary - 12/30/2014 8:52:41 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
Finally????

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: We're the atomic bombs necessary Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.328