Japanese man survives 2 atomic bombs!

[Frame57]

Personally I would like tohave seen the war prolonged so that I could play more missions in SH4. (Just yoking....) Just curious though, does anyone here have any insight as to why Nagasaki and Hiroshima was targeted from a tactical standpoint?

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Frame57

Personally I would like tohave seen the war prolonged so that I could play more missions in SH4. (Just yoking....) Just curious though, does anyone here have any insight as to why Nagasaki and Hiroshima was targeted from a tactical standpoint?

IIRC, Hiroshima was targeted because it was supposed to be a major assembly and communication hub for Japanese troops in the invasion (It was also left completely unscathed by the firebombing campaign)

Nagasaki, which was a major port and industrial center (also rather untouched by firebombing), was actually the secondary target of Bockscar. Kokura, the primary target, was obscured by clouds on that morning

There were plans to drop several more nukes after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.

Interestingly Hiroshima was not bombed with traditional bombing so it was in pristine condition giving the Americans a chance to test the effects of the bomb. So in part the bombing of Hiroshima was just a test with real people.

Also it's good to know that allied P.O.W's also died in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_...a_and_Nagasaki

One rationale for the dropping of the bombs was that there was supposed to be a fierce resistance on the Japanese mainland. However, by that point the Japanese airforce with the last ditch weapons such as the Kamikaze-attacks had pretty much seized to exist. So it was just a fight between the remaining Japanese land troops on the continent against the allied air-, sea- and landpower.

Were there any fixed resistance points such as bunkers etc. on the Japanese mainland? Were the Japanese land forces in a state to continue fighting at that point? I've never seen any reliable info on these types of issues.

[TFatseas]

I'm just going to throw this in here.

http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburne...ic_Bombs/1808/

It was meant as a rebuttal against Jon Stewart for calling Harry Truman a war criminal, but for just over 15min it is about as comprehensive as you can get.

[Torplexed]

Japanese leaders didn't stumble through 1945 in a blind trance. They devised a shrewd military and political strategy called Ketsu Go (Operation Decisive) It's premise was that American morale was brittle and could be broken by inflicting an enormous bloodletting in the initial invasion of Japan. Even if that invasion succeeded, Japanese leaders believed that American politicians would would recoil from the causalities and give up the effort to continue the conquest of Japan.

Imperial Headquarters embarked on a huge program of homeland reinforcement. From Manchuria came four divisions (2 armored and 2 infantry) But far and away the largest increase in strength came from a February 26th, 1945 order for a gigantic three-phase mobilization program. Once it was complete the homeland's defenders would muster 60 divisions. (36 field and counterattack) 22 coastal combat, two armored and 34 brigades (27 infantry and 7 tank) The combined strength of the homeland armies would reach 2,903,000 men, 292,000 horse, and 27,500 motor vehicles.

In addition under the "National Resistance Program" all able-bodied civilians regardless of age were called up for possible combat. This involved all males ages 15 to 60 and all females ages 17 to 40. The Japanese also had around 10,700 aircraft hoarded for homeland defense.

Japan was far from just a burnt-out shell that would have crumbled when the first American troops stepped ashore. While I think American troops would have gotten ashore eventually with the aid of a massive naval bombardment the fight inland would have been prolonged and bloody. Japan is a mountainous country, perfect for the defensive and guerrilla operations. Like Raptor 1 said above, the question would have been why didn't we just drop the bomb and be done with it?

[SteamWake]

On a side note, my late father in law as a naval officer visited Hiroshima shortly after the bombing.

He passed away from cancer.

I don't think the Japanese moral was very high at that point anymore. And the airforce wouldn't have had much of an effect after a while, if at all. It's a question of who has the air superiority and once that has been established the planes on the ground don't really matter that much.

It's also a question of civilian lives vs. soldiers. 200 000 or so civilian casualties or possibly even more over time is big prize to pay. It is on par with what went on in German concentration camps.

The traditional bombing of Japan had already accounted for 1,5 - 2 million civilian deaths including the firebombing of Tokyo so on the other hand it's not like civilian deaths were a new thing. The nuclear bombings will still remain an issue especially for the Japanese who will not forget them, or forgive them. Had the US lost they would have been charged with war crimes and people like Curtis Le May have acknowledged this.

[Platapus]

War crimes are often a tool used by the winners as justification to hang the losers.

[FIREWALL]

I think in this discussion we're forgetting something.

Japan did a sneak attack on the US FIRST.

They brought our fighting forces INTO the war.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

I don't think the Japanese moral was very high at that point anymore. And the airforce wouldn't have had much of an effect after a while, if at all. It's a question of who has the air superiority and once that has been established the planes on the ground don't really matter that much.

Tell that to any American soldier who fought on Okinawa. We had complete control of the air and the sea and it was still a difficult drawn-out fight in which Japanese forces didn't meekly surrender despite their hopeless situation. And Okinawa is only a fraction of the size of Kyushu which would have been the first of the Japanese Islands invaded.

[Raptor1]

Don't forget that Japan's oil situation was hopeless at that point, so those 10,700 planes would have to be used in kamikaze attacks (More than 5 times as many as had been used in Okinawa) on US forces, which would probably have effected the invasion and Allied morale a great deal

The fact remains that far more of the people that were classified as civilians in August would have died had the invasion taken place

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

Consider this, the japanese lost 300,000 civilians during the course of WW2. But a country that was only partly under japanese control, China lost 10,000,000 civilians. It is known that during the invasion of China appart from allowing their armys to rape and pillage, the japanese used chemical weapons against chinese civilians. Don't forget that China was this allies with the US. As for the "kill em all" mentaity of the time was because the US government was worried that the civilian populas of Japan would start a restance movment if the US invaded Japan, simular ideas where used on the civilians of Germany as well. The terror bombing tactics used by the USAAF against Japan and Germany and by the RAF in europe where founded on only one thing, fear.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Kptlt. Hellmut Neuerburg

the japanese lost 300,000 civilians

Sorry, where did that number come from?

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the March Tokyo raid must reach over 200,000 dead by themselves, so I would expect there to be more than 300,000...

[Torplexed]

For what it's worth Wikipedia lists Japanese wartime civilian dead at 580,000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Sorry, where did that number come from?

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the March Tokyo raid must reach over 200,000 dead by themselves, so I would expect there to be more than 300,000...

It is estimated Japan lost 580,000 civilian and 2.12 million military....3.78% of her 1939 population.