did we actually need to nuke japan? what would history have been like if we didn't nuke them?
>>16547572The atomic bombings killed less than air raids did. They were devastating relative to the size of their payloads, meaning the US had the capability to push further if and only if Japan didn't surrender. Consider it this way, it was either 2 nukes, or a several month bombing campaign. Pick your poison
>>16547572how many times do we need to have this thread?
>>16547579what about the argument that japan was already looking for an out and planning on surrendering before the nukes were dropped?
>>16547582But they didn't. That's the problem
>>16547580Not enough
>>16547585they were in the process.
>>16547588Its easy to say this in retrospect, but in reality, nobody actually knew what Japans motivations were behind closed doors. The bottom line is that they failed to negotiate with the US on articles of surrender before it was too late, despite being given ample warnings.
>>16547590if they were in the process of surrendering then an invasion wouldn't have been bloody. the nukes were not needed.
>>16547594If you don't order your army to stand down, then there is no way an invasion cannot be bloody. It doesn't matter what they were in the process of doing behind closed doors.
go back to 9gag you ahistorical filth
>>16547579>drop nukes on civilians>not military nor even political institutions.it was a genocidal attack
>>16547603Wrong. They were specifically targeting Hiroshima and Nagasaki because they housed military headquarters and munitionns factories and were major port cities. The civillians were just collateral.
>>16547572you are being nuked by niggers right nowatleast japs didn't have their gene pools destroyed
>>16547634they had their gene pool mutated instead by the radiation. replaced the samurai spirit with aids.
Absolutely. In terms of ending the war as fast as possible, this was the way to go (along with modifying the terms of surrender). Both a conventional bombing campaign or a land invasion would have cost both sides dearly
>>16547590>in reality, nobody actually knew what Japans motivations were behind closed doors. The bottom line is that they failed to negotiate with the US on articles of surrender before it was too late, despite being given ample warningsWell, its easy to say this in retrospect, but in reality, there was intel about surrender. The bottom line is that the US wanted to flex and ended up killing thousands of civilians >but muh housed military HQs, who cares about civilians?I bet you cried during the 9/11, stupid fuck
>>16547649Nigger, the war WAS ending either way.
>>16547655The Japanese were pretty adamant on not surrendering. It's obviously going to end in an American victory, but the question is how long are we going to drag it out for
Japan was hoping for a brokered peace through the Soviets. Which is why the US pressured the Soviets into declaring war on Japan even with the nukes despite that basically guaranteeing more trouble in the future with Communism in east Asia
>>16547572The atom bombs were meant to scare the Soviets, not the Japs.
>>16547735If that were true and it was just a flex against the Soviets, the US wouldn't have begged them to take Manchuria before nuking japan>>16547733
It isn't your choice to make.Brain hack
>>16547572We would have nuked the North Koreans if we didn't nuke the Japanese, because doing so was a learning experience.
