Wednesday, December 17, 2014

The Mushroom Cloud Romance

According to researcher, Ward Wilson (senior fellow at the British American Security Information Council), the Japanese surrender in 1945 had virtually nothing to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki and everything to do with the fact that the Soviet Union had just declared war on Japan and were rapidly preparing for an invasion (they had already invaded Manchuria and several islands to the north of Japan).........................................................................................And the fellow makes a very persuasive case. a) The timing is much more proximate to the Soviet actions (a full 72 hours had passed since Hiroshima and it wasn't until the Soviet invasion of Manchuria that the Japanese council finally met). b) The U.S. had already destroyed over six dozen Japanese cities via conventional methods and so what was one more, really? And c) the Soviet declaration and invasion represented a much more strategic change in the course of the war and it is that which generally moves the needle and not a change in the method of carnage....I mean, I know that the U.S. has this visceral (not to mention, perverse) hubris that it was us who won the war in the Pacific (through our ingenuity, technology, etc.) and that the other countries were simply along for the ride but maybe this is a myth as well.

3 comments:

BB-Idaho said...

This appears to relate to your previous post; the USSR was not interested in the war in the Pacific by any altruistic motivation, it was simply an
easy way for them to gain more territory. IMO, the VJ hinged
very much on the Emperor, who had up to that point been a political
hostage of the Japanese militarists (who would have fought to the last civilian- a la
Hitler)

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

There is great debate as to whether the Japanese were willing to accept a conditional surrender (one in which the Emperor - who they considered to be a God - was spared from prosecution being one of those conditions). But even if they weren't, we had them totally surrounded via a submarine blockade and were essentially blowing up anything that moved. I really don't think that an atomic bomb was necessary and the second one on Nagasaki was pure, unadulterated murder.

Rational Nation USA said...

I agree with you BB Idaho. The Emperor played a pivotal and important role in Japan laying down its arms.