American Goverment

For those of you who think it is OK to unleash nuclear bombs on civilian cities, think about this:

Would it be fair if Nazi Germany unleashed a German nuclear bomb on New York City? Would it be fair if the Nazi politician who gave the order to drop that nuclear bomb on New York City simply said that he did it to "try and end WWII and save American lives"?

Don't be such hypocrites, people.

Using weapons of mass destruction on civilian cities is never right, no matter what the political goal may be. Everyone here speaks as if unleashing nuclear weapons on civilian cities was a necessary act of war and it was the difference between winning or losing WWII. Look at it from this perspective: With no navy, no air force, their armies losing in China, their people at home starving to death, American bombers ruling their skies, an effective American sea blockade in place, the Soviet Union having just declared war on them, and with martial law imposed, Japan was essentially defeated by August 1945. America had air superiority over Japanese skies and sea superiority in Japanese waters. Japan didn't even have the ability to shoot down the lone unguarded bombers that carried the atomic bombs. Whether the US invaded it or not, Japan's surrender would've been inevitable.

Some of you speak as if it was either the nuclear bomb or an invasion. This is not the case.

Truman could've:

1. Waited until the Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 9

- Because of the close proximity of the Soviet Union's entry into the Pacific War and the nuclear bombings, it is unclear over which one of these had the biggest impact to Japan's surrender. It is quite possible that it was purely the Soviet Union's entrance into the Pacific War that got the Japanese surrender when you look at the date Japan surrendered (August 15) to the date the second atomic bomb was dropped (August 9). This may suggest atomic bombs did not play a key role in the surrender. By contrast, the Soviets invaded Manchuria from August 9, and by August 15, occupied it and threatened the Japanese home islands.

2. Waited for the US sea blockade to end the war

- A sea blockade was more effective than a US invasion to end WWII. The Japanese military were eagerly anticipating a US invasion so they could inflict American casualties. If the USA publicly denied an invasion of Japan it would mean no American casualties and would signal to Japan that it would slowly starve and be defeated with no "honour". The US Navy was against an invasion and strongly backed a sea blockade for this very reason. Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz and Gen. Carl Spaatz believed that in