Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken
I just can't think of any other good reason to actually drop it on actual people other than to scare the **** out of Russia.
Why do the reasons need to be good? Loads of decisions are made for bad reasons. Are we discussing why Truman dropped the bomb, or what he should have done?
You are weighing Japanese civilian lives against alternatives to the two bombings that would appear to accomplish American goals. But that's your mindset and we should not assume Washington attached the same value to Japanese civilians.
Here's two free facts that reinforce the Russian factor in American decisions. US policy was to bring the USSR into the war as soon as possible to avoid an assault on the main islands and offered significant concessions to Moscow. As soon as the bomb worked, Russia was no longer needed. So, 1) Washington canceled the planned shared occupation of Japan and 2) insisted on a joint occupation of Korea. (Bad move, that.)
There's no question the Soviets were much in mind in American decisions. But that doesn't mean it was "primary" or the bomb display would have been different. There were plenty of Japanese reasons for using the bomb. In terms of historical causality, it's use was over-determined.
Without the USSR, there might have been more nuclear attacks -- just as soon as more bombs were finished -- because without the USSR, the first two might not have been sufficient.
One thing we haven't discussed is the belated concession to allow the emperor to remain. Conceivably, the US continued insisting on removing the emperor so that Japan would not surrender until the bomb display. That would certainly reinforce the Soviet factor argument, but I don't know that there's anything to it. Someone read Hasegawa, I have grading to do.