The Truth About Why America Dropped Atomic Bombs on Japan

The atomic bomb proved to be the most devastating weapon used in any war, past or present, but was the United States justified in dropping two nuclear warheads on Japan for their unconditional surrender? Check out today's insane new video and maybe your opinion will change on whether or not the US should have nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
🔔 SUBSCRIBE TO THE INFOGRAPHICS SHOW ► kzbin.info...
🔖 MY SOCIAL PAGES
TikTok ► / theinfographicsshow
Discord ► / discord
Facebook ► / theinfographicsshow
Twitter ► / theinfoshow
💭 Find more interesting stuff on:
www.theinfographicsshow.com
📝 SOURCES:pastebin.com/rWMesD6N
All videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise noted.

[@joshbeasley9089]

I think that one thing that gets overlooked in this debate a lot is the fact that at the time the after effects of radiation exposure was not fully understood. The US sent in 250k troops to occupy the bombed cities, with a great number of them suffering the rest or their lives or even dying prematurely. A vast amount of the citizens were killed not from the initial explosion, but from radiation afterwards. Now knowing the effects 80 years later, it changes how we view the decision vs how it would have been viewed and justified back then. I think with history we look at it from our standpoint too much, and don't consider the views, culture, and morals at the time enough.

[@50megatondiplomat28]

I agree, looking at everything through a modern lens of values and expectations with the benefit of perfect hindsight is both unfair and ridiculous.

[@peterwarner553]

Allied troops were sent as well, my uncle was sent to Hiroshima, suffered the effects for the rest of his life.

[@50megatondiplomat28]

@@peterwarner553 Yes, and there would have been more than just Americans killed in Operation Downfall as well. BTW, which nation was your uncle serving with?

[@peterwarner553]

@@50megatondiplomat28 Australia, several of my family fought in WWII both in the Pacific and against the Nazis.

[@peterwarner553]

@@50megatondiplomat28 my uncle fought from New Guinea to Japan and having experienced years of the sheer brutality and savagery of the Pacific war he always maintained that the use of nuclear weapons was justified.

[@ltensail]

It was not mentioned in this video but I can confirm Wolverine survived the bombing.

[@jiernade4585]

I'm the Japanese soldier he saved I can confirm.

[@kevinmalone3210]

It was at Nagasaki where Wolverine survived the bombing. I can attest to this, I saw the movie.

[@dakota8189]

​@Jiernade you die to wolverine, fyi

[@saopaolodelacruz1007]

@@kevinmalone3210 you mean the documentary right???

[@eliasmelendrez39]

@@kevinmalone3210 how u still alive 😱I saw that he trew u off that cliff after stabbing u 😱

[@user-dk5vu7ps7i]

I am Japanese, and there is one thing I want to say to the people of America. My grandfather worked in an ammunition factory in Nagasaki when he was in his teens, and he was exposed to radiation at that time. It seems that his friends have passed away, but my grandfather is still healthy, even in his 90s. What I want to say is that, although I have lived in Japan for more than 30 years, I have never met a single person who harbors resentment towards Americans, including my grandfather. This is because the current generation is not responsible for what happened. Personally, I think America is now the best friend of Japan. I believe many Japanese people feel the same way. I don't want this to be misunderstood, but I am not trying to justify the cruel acts that Japan committed against America, Asia, and the surrounding countries in Oceania in the past. It is absolutely unforgivable, and it must never happen again. Personally, I always carry a sense of apology towards America and other countries. However, what's important is the future, and I believe that we need to continue to convey the horrors of war and the fear of nuclear weapons to future generations. I am not sure if I can confidently say that Japan is doing this, but personally, I am determined to pass this message on to future generations. It is sad that wars are still happening right now, but I sincerely hope and pray that one day, we will have a truly peaceful world. Please forgive me if my English is strange since this is a machine translation.

[@nonenone2622]

俺は浦上でじいちゃんが被曝して死んだがアメリカよりヒロヒトを憎んでるからな

[@JonAfek]

This is beautiful, thank you my friend!

[@quanlamtruong5870]

together we fight China.

[@Cyphre21]

@@quanlamtruong5870 OP shared the most beautiful anti-war message and here we have your comment. SMH

[@edwardkim8972]

You ever think if America didn't use nuclear weapons and invaded Japan like it invaded Okinawa that it would have actually costed the Japanese more lives? Both more civilian AND military lives? Okinawa got a lot of civilians killed too, although I know that you Japanese barely consider the Okinawans as Japanese (which is why you want them to house most of the American troops).

[@USSENTERPRISE-D]

I think it should be mentioned that there has not been a single Purple Heart medal created since WW2. The military had stockpiled hundreds of thousands of them in preparation for all the US casualties expected when invading the mainland. Every single Purple Heart that has been awarded from Korea through today has been pulled from that stockpile.

[@bobsmith-wg9fz]

funny my brother worked for the company making them only a FEW years ago....they still make them, as most of the old stock was sold off to medal shops over the last 70 years

[@jimdavison4077]

How could they have been ment of an invasion never authorized?

[@BradSchmor]

It's really easy to sit here with 75 years of hindsight and judge a decision that was made in order to bring a war that had killed 80 million people to a swift end. The horrors of WW2 are beyond the scope of most people alive today. We would have done practically anything to bring that train wreck to a stop.

[@bryanjordan1165]

Of course... but like.. that's the whole point of this episode, right? Not to condemn every decision that was made, but to ask "could a better decision have been made?

[@gregs9210]

this has nothing to do with hindsight, did you miss the part where Truman's initial committee advised against it? that's not hindsight, that's ignoring people who actually knew what the consequences of using such device were.

[@bigtimepimpin666]

The war had already ended elsewhere. You need to read up on the specifics of Japan.

[@xxwarghostzxx6440]

They sure would do practically anything to end that war…. Besides just accept a non-unconditional surrender and negotiate.

[@FatRescueSwimmer04]

@@xxwarghostzxx6440 Yeah then Japan just re-attacks us 10 years later... they ended the problem once and for all.

[@josephvanucchi5249]

Well, if they still wanted to fight AFTER the first was dropped, why would they have stopped the war from a simple demonstration? Kinda kills the argument 🤔

[@gregbits6109]

I agree with this somewhat, but by your logic ANY immoral act of war is fine if the other side continues fighting…

[@vincentvalentine4401]

@@gregbits6109 why commit many small war crimes when I can make 2 big ones.

[@robertbones326]

They didn't know the first bomb was dropped. Communication was cut off and they didn't know why. Whwn the 2nd bomb was dropped, they concluded it was carried out by the whales and dolphins, and have been getting revenge ever since.

[@toml9736]

That’s what i was thinking. And taking out 1 military city and still not giving up defeats the argument is just going a military base. The emperor wasn’t the one fighting he didn’t care until he realized we would keep doing it and eventually he would be in the blast. That emperor was terrible. Unfortunately civilians had to die but if we would of invaded and they attacked us they would have died anyways.

[@jaydencrawford7054]

The atomic bomb during this era was not possible or comprehensive. It was thought such a 'mega bomb' was impossible.

[@PJthePlayer]

One thing the video left out and not a lot of people realize is the fact that the US didn't have an unlimited supply of bombs. In fact it was said at the time that they had enough material for only one more bomb after Nagasaki and after that the time required for building more was significant. That's a solid argument for why a "demonstration" bomb wasn't considered viable.

[@ibrahimtariq8625]

No, it really isn't. The first bomb could have been directed at a military base. The second could have been kept as the hanging knife, but Americans wanted blood for their own losses.

[@scottbrower9052]

Were you dropped on your head as an infant?

[@ibrahimtariq8625]

@@scottbrower9052 No, just seem to value human life more than you it seems.

[@nonegivendontask]

@ibrahimtariq8625 so, then you agree with the choice to drop the bomb -- end the war w/o invasion of the Japanese mainland Dropping a "test bomb" would do nothing (as someone already pointed out... THEY KEPT FIGHTING AFTER THE FIRST BOMB ANYWAY)

[@darby5987]

Its true that the supply was not unlimited. The US had one additional bomb ready to go after Nagasaki. However Hanford had told the Pentagon that they could have another dozen bomb cores available by December 1945. Once the theoretical physics research was sufficiently completed, the experimental physicists had verified the concept and the Manhattan Program went into high gear engineering the rate of production quickly became no problem.

[@PR-qp8iz]

The bombs were dropped basically for two reasons: 1. To test both an uranium bomb (Hiroshima) and a plutonium bomb (Nagasaki) on cities that were mostly untouched by airplane bombings. 2. As a warning to the USSR as both the Americans and the rest of the Allies already knew the Soviets would be their next enemy. Japan did not surrender because of the bombs but because they knew what a Soviet occupation of Japan would mean for the japanese people.

[@he_is_a_GOOBER_dont_disrespect]

Nothing to do with the 1.2 trillion looted in gold bullion?

[@crystalratclffe3258]

My grandfather was a GI engineer at Whitesands making the atomic bomb. They had no idea of the effect of nuclear at the time. He lowered the nuclear payload into the bomb with his BARE HANDS I saw it in the film Fat Man and Little Boy I believe the title was called. He survived a few years later having the largest cancerous tumor removed from that side of his rib cage. When he died at age 72 in 1970, he had 5 different forms of cancer in his body.

[@irytal3429]

Rest in peace

[@jamesdillworth6293]

Still Greatful!

[@artmanrom]

Unfortunately, most of us are just pawns obeying the decisions of the very few. We aren't free until we are disobeying them and listening to our consciousness. At the Nuremberg trial "I was just obeying orders" wasn't an excuse for the atrocities done by the Nazis.

[@Remix2366]

@@irytal3429 rip bozo,never drop a bomb you don't know about.

[@robd1329]

Woww

[@ihaveshellytricks6934]

While you mention that together the US and Soviet Union could have invaded Japan without the bombs, however the Soviet’s declaring war was actually another reason for the bombs. The USSR was quickly spreading through northeast China and towards the Korean Peninsula, and the Americans were looking for a quick end to the war to stop a joint occupation of Japanese territory and the spread of communism. While the USA and USSR were allied, their relationship was tenuous at best, and the Cold War was already starting when WW2 ended in Europe.

[@AutismfamilyJC]

🇳🇪🔥⚡️🔥⚡️🔥⚡️🔥⚡️💥🔫🤖👱🏼 the roBot is actually armor of which i am in it’s heaD as there is a control center insiDe of it’s heaD anD my enemy is a mechanical clone anD my frienDly clones are maDe out of lasers But has real human pieces anD parts anD Bits But can Be programmeD with a computer at my Base of operations anD it is a terminal type of computer of which looks like a vantage computer anD is a antique anD there is also a tuBe BesiDe of the Base connecteD to a titanium machine that is useD to clone myself anD haD a conveyor Belt insiDe it anD a titanium tunnel that a orange laser goes into anD it is similar to that of alien proBing But isn’t it is axially a cloning machine anD in the tuBe a cross lasers that makes the shape of little triangles goes up anD Down forming a person anD the lasers are purple anD my faBric color of my new nation that i will create on earth 4 that comes after this earth i will start that new nation anD only in that time anD i’ll lanD on the new earth in a space rocket ship

[@user-tn2mp9qr6q]

We had the same thought

[@AFlyingCookieLOL]

US red scare while the American themselves bomb 3rd world countries that don't align with their interest.

[@jasonjacksn]

Estimated death toll from an invasion is 3 million Japanese civilians dead. But sure we shouldn't invaded

[@jaystrickland4151]

The Soviets didn't have a navy capable of making a landing on Japan. The Soviets would have had to use the American Navy or swim to land on Japan.

[@mixedbytc]

I think it's important to note that the two bombs set a precedent for future wars and contributed to the concept of deterrence. If the USA hadn't used the bombs in Japan, the Cold War might have been a lot hotter, and nuclear warfare might have even become normalized. Not a justification by any means, just an observation.

[@lalkumarsinha6423]

RIGHT BUT QUESTION IS THAT IS USA NUKED JAPAN TO MAKE PEACE IN THE WORLD OR TO SHOWCASE THEIR POWER... I MEAN INTENSION MATTERS MOST...

[@dogetaxes8893]

Very interesting point, likely during the Korean War the US could’ve easily used nuked. Without the real life example of the horror maybe those during the Cold War might’ve been abit more trigger happy.

[@sorat99]

One of the 2 main things that justifies the nukes to me

[@sarge12212]

I have to agree. Along with the fact that an untold number of Japanese lives would have been lost as the whole island was reduced to a Dresden-like infurno.

[@johnwoodrow8598]

This documentary does not mention that the Japanese military and political leadership were not united as one body. In fact, even AFTER the atomic bombing, some Japanese military leaders were still determined to keep fighting against the Emperor’s order. The coup didn’t have enough support to succeed but if the bomb was dropped on a military target, the hawkish generals would likely have had the Emperor’s backing to keep fighting.

[@trostorff1]

My grandfather was a US Army paratrooper, with the 11th Airborne. Among other fights, he fought at Okinawa. I asked him when I was younger what he thought about the A Bombs vs continuing to fight and occupy the Japanese home islands. He very briefly described the brutality of the fighting at Okinawa and how he and the rest of the allied forces weren't just fighting the Japanese military...but the entirety of the Japanese populace. He could only speculate, but he figured that fighting to occupy would've extended the war another 2 to 3 years.

[@janbadinski7126]

It was also what a friend, WWII vet, told me. It would have been slaughter if conventional means had been used. If Allied forces had pursued a ground invasion another slaughter would have been enormous. America didn't know about the problems that nuclear weapons until after the war. Blame the war, not the USA.

[@shades9723]

Thank you for sharing this. Saying he talked about it briefly rings true, the soldiers who have been there talk sparingly about their experiences in that type of combat.

[@trostorff1]

@@shades9723 I know he was also involved in the Los Banos prison raid. Like I said, he was a paratrooper. On his dog tags were stamped his name, service number and US Army Intelligence. We still, years after his death, have no idea exactly the extent of what all he did in the Pacific theater. As for Okinawa, he entered the fight via landing craft, and said it was the only time he wished he would have jumped instead. I asked how the landing at Okinawa differed from Normandy. He said a lot of good people died, and the beach and ocean was red...there was no difference between them other than geography.

[@tomloft2000]

my father was in the 1st Marine division and would have been one of the first to be deployed. had we not dropped the bomb, I might not be here.

[@trostorff1]

@@tomloft2000 Grandad tried to join the Marines two different times. His mom stopped him the first time, and the second time he got there a little too late, as the recruiter had just met his quota for the day. After that, it was between the Navy and the Army, and he laughed as he said he can run better than he can swim, so Army it was.

[@MrDanielvass]

This is one of the most fascinating channels on KZbin. Often the topics are grim, but very educational and I can’t stop watching.

[@Insick_]

Unfortunately, this channel is biased in favor of the US.

[@Cg23sailor]

It's not educational at all. it is filled with false facts and revisionist BS.

[@zacharyjones7948]

It should also be mentioned that warning pamphlets were dropped all over the city first. I don’t think it makes much difference either way, but it’s probably worth noting

[@Freesoler01]

Likewise, on the other side. It should be noted the civilians in Hiroshima before they okayed the bombing. Multiple survivors have stated they saw a B-29 fly over about an hour before the bombing. The Enola Gay was actually sighted on it way to the target by a child who says it flew directly over his school while the children were gathering. The warning pamphlets were a side note, but ultimately, US Intelligence knew the majority of people there at the time were civilians, not military.

[@marcd2743]

A Personal Story: My great uncle was merchant marine in WWII and was part of a flotilla sent to prepare for the mainland invasion. He was in a very large cargo vessel and had no idea what they were carrying. So one night he snuck down into the cargo hold of the ship and saw in the moonlight that it was filled only with thousands and thousands of white crosses for burials. They were for all of the dead that they expected amongst allied forces in the invasion.

[@EugeneStClair-tv7dr]

Do you know your great uncles name? Or the ship that he was on?

[@osopapi6061]

case in point

[@causaestmalleus4605]

No, they werent. The idea of an invasion was abandoned by the US after it became clear that Japan was done. There was never any real planning for an invasion.

[@nannerrammer]

are you you sure your great uncle wasn't a christian missionary going to spread the word of God?

[@pat6280]

The dropping of the *First Atomic Bomb* was inevitable. Had it never been used in WWII on Japan then it would’ve been used else-where by the USA or a different country. This series of events ultimately caused the worldwide scare of the Atomic Bomb & having countries agreeing never to use one again.

[@77mpickett]

They were initially planning to use it on Germany but they surrendered before it was finished.

[@Essa87]

easy to say when it isn't your city someone is nuking.

[@mozzjones6943]

@@77mpickett Correct. In fact, It was the British who were planning to produce a super weapon to use on Germany.. They were already at the stage of splitting the Atom during their nuclear investigations. But resources were tight and time was not on their side, So in close talks with the US their findings were handed over and the Manhattan project was born.. Many great scientific minds came together and with the vast resources of the US this wonder weapon was fast tracked to reality. The target was still Germany all along, But that came to an end anyway and now the US were in control of this new destructive force. Then they decided to show Japan and the world who's boss lol

[@Chuida17]

@@mozzjones6943 well deserved too

[@Lukedalegendz]

@@77mpickett germany caused both world wars

[@gregkelly2145]

One other point not mentioned was the fear that if the war had continued, the Soviets would have invaded and occupied parts of the Japanese home islands (Kuril islands as an example). We would have ended up with a North and South Japan just like Korea. This was definitely not a desirable outcome and thus the US dropped the bombs to force immediate surrender. Keep in mind, the prevailing US view at the time was that the Japanese were irrational and might not surrender without the threat of complete and total annihilation. Regardless, the results were beyond tragic and we can only hope that it never happens again.

[@DonMeaker]

We had no appreciation at the time of what would later happen to Korea or even East-West Germany. We can only hope that an evil regime like that of Japan never takes power again.

[@amitpothare]

Yes...we know, American as world savior 😂😂😂

[@DonMeaker]

@@amitpothare Better US as world savior than Russia as murderer of the world.

[@seanw3792]

That is an assumption you do not know that for a fact. Let us stick to the facts

[@violetxmoonlight]

A thousand times this! America did not want Russia to have any parts of Japan. They were close to surrendering (just not unconditionally) as the USA was committing crimes against humanity and fire bombing cities, and with Russia closing in from the west. But Japan would not surrender unconditionally, until the USA dropped the cruel bombs. As someone who has stayed in Hiroshima before, we must make sure that this never happens again.

[@Super_Death]

My wife and i (Americans) visited Tokyo and Kyoto and it's a beautiful country and we loved it. Everyone was very polite and helpful towards us and we didn't feel any ill will towards us and neither we towards Japanese people. I feel like American and Japan are good friends and may that be the case for many many years.

[@SenneVorsselmans]

Calling the dropping of 2 massive nukes on 2 cities, should NEVER be called “humane”.

[@harleymccartney7339]

"War is cruelty, there's no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is the sooner it is over. Then generations will pass untill they again appeal to it." - William T. Sherman

[@buckhorncortez]

“Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments.” - Frederick the Great...

[@chello70]

@@buckhorncortez You war mongering imbecile!!! Nobody ever wins a war !!!!

[@heinzguderian628]

@@chello70 war is often considered the sharp tool of diplomacy

[@numbnumbjuice7296]

With dangerous technology and manipulation of mass populations by governments id thats a dangerous mindset and was probably faulty to begin with.

[@jasonchangdalekrule]

@@chello70 This is objectively false. The results of plenty of wars have positive effects on the attacking nation. The current Russo-Ukraine war would have ended in a massive windfall for Russia had their military logistics been competent, and thus been successful in their decapitation attack days 1-5

[@aum1040]

The arguments that the US could have forced Japan to surrender with less deadly attacks are greatly undermined by the fact that even the attack on Hiroshima was insufficient to convince the Japanese to end the war. It was reasonable for advisors at the time to have believed there was a better way. But given what we know now, there clearly was not.

[@ottomanpapyrus9365]

Japanaese Warrior Culture 😁

[@SifuJavis]

The counter to this seems to be the speed at which the second bomb was dropped. It's Japan a whole day to even send someone to Hiroshima to see what happened.tbey didn't even have but another day or two before the next bomb. But yea, if Hiroshima didn't convince them, than a demonstration seems unlikely to.

[@LoveBandit1000]

Bingo!

[@dinogt8477]

no one cares

[@georgearsu6030]

At the time they dropped those bombs Japan already capitulated .. but hey US ..!! Live by sword …

[@DinkyDingus]

I think in the debate we forget that we dropped one bomb on a city which did demonstrate our capabilities AND THEY STILL DIDNT SURRENDER. No demonstration less than that would have caused a surrender if that didn’t.

[@Lechef53]

Japan were going to surrender. The US crafted this narrative that Japan weren’t going to surrender so that they could find excuses to drop the bomb on Japan. The real reason why they dropped the bomb was because the USSR wanted to take Japan and the US wanted to limit the USSR’s growth in Asia.

[@dogetaxes8893]

It’s interesting to look back in hindsight and see the arguments for and against a historical event. I normally try to retain judgement because I guarantee you and I would’ve likely made worse decisions in the heat of the moment without hindsight. Also, it’s very possible that any of these other alternatives could’ve failed and caused more death or could’ve prevented more death. The butterfly effect is very real and many unintended consequences you couldn’t even think of could occur.

[@teddyhoffman8391]

I’m sorta surprised it wasn’t mentioned that Japan’s leaders voted on the option to surrender after the 2nd bomb and were still split on if they should surrender or not. It was only at the last minute that the Emperor stepped in himself and moved for surrender….which prompted a coup to try and prevent that surrender. (The video did cover the coup part, but I think the first part is also pretty important). I’m also sorta surprised Japan’s army in China was never mentioned except for when the USSR declared war. It might have been getting rolled over, but it was still very big and could cause a lot of harm

[@frankkooijman8902]

You are actually correct and there was even a mini coup attempt after the decision.

[@astefanik16]

One of the most prominent historians that said the bombs didn't end the war is still onrecord saying the bombs probably ayed a part in ending the war earlier. So unless you would have govern up your life to storm Japan instead of dropping the bomb, I feel like the point is moot. Me personally if I was a soldier In ww2 for America is rather drop the bomb than risk my life. People look back from their comfy couches and criticizes our decision, is so laughable

[@LittleMissV]

@@astefanik16 most people also don’t know that Japan was planning on dropping a plague bomb in CA, US. Had the US not forced Japan to surrender at that time, they were going to launch biological warfare, which could’ve possibly spread past the US and into other parts of the world. Look up “operation cherry blossoms at night.” The research Japan had done in their infamous Unit 731 was used for this.

[@ernestogastelum9123]

@@Tommy-bp7gs we nuked Japan because invading the Homeland was going to be devastating. the US already was having a hard time fighting the Japanese on tiny islands, so imagine fighting on the Homeland

[@williamalexander1863]

@@ernestogastelum9123 the Japanese knew they couldn't invade the US. So why start a war with them?

[@Phrancis5]

Another unmentioned factor is that the US only had enough fissile material for a few bombs. Japan couldn't have know that, but it might explain why the US wanted to create as much impact as possible with the few bombs they had.

[@alwinsoria97]

Umm, no. The fissile material didn't actually matter. There was a 3rd bomb scheduled on August 19. It was the technology that is so ahead of their time that made them concede.

[@davidford3115]

@@alwinsoria97 Indeed. Many folks are unaware that the infamous Demon Core that killed Louis Slotten was supposed to be used on Kokura.

[@alwinsoria97]

@@davidford3115 people fail to realize that EVEN IF the US stock pile of uranium is limited during that time. They are still the first to harness the atom bomb tech. The US may take weeks or months to gather the materials but Japan cannot develop that tech within the same span of time. Imagine what the world will be if it's the Germans or the Japanese that had it first. The world got lucky it was us and it was used to bring peace once and for all.

[@1pcfred]

@@alwinsoria97 Fat Man was a plutonium device. We made plutonium in the Hanford Site. We could make fissile material on an industrial scale. Within 3 years of the atomic strikes we had thousands of nuclear warheads.

[@abelabner]

@@davidford3115 Louis Slotin, totally awesome but sad history nugget my friend.

[@HB-C_U_L8R]

Infographics should have mentioned that Japan sent a team including a Nuclear Physicist who concluded that an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, that Japanese leadership decided that the US only had a few of the bombs and that they could endure them, that for the three days leading up to dropping the second bomb on Nagasaki, Japan was warned every 15 minutes via radio broadcast across the whole country that another bomb was going to drop a second bomb on Aug. 9th and civilians were warned to evacuate cities, and that the US had to threaten to drop more bombs to get Japan to surrender.

[@1joshjosh1]

True fact: My Grandpa was a chicken farmer from western Canada and had nothing to do with this. But hr really knew his chickens.

[@H_man..]

This type of videos are amazing it explains both ways like and it's really helpful as a student for studying this topic at a classroom level

[@TheNuclearGeek]

People that claim bombing an uninhabited island would have been enough to get Japan always seemed ridiculous to me. The still didn't surrender after dropping the bomb on a city. That is the only reason a second bomb was dropped. So, if a bomb on a city didn't get them to surrender, why would a demonstration bomb convince them to do anything? People also have to remember that there were no "smart weapons" at that time. There was no way to make a tactical nuke strike.

[@notagamer3776]

Bombing innocent civilians in Ukraine by Russia is not okay but nuclear bombs on two Japanese cities by the Americans is okay.. Nice logic

[@TheBestDog]

I believe you’re correct. Inviting the Imperial Japanese Forces to view a demonstration of a two-billion-dollar weapon vaporizing an uninhabited island would have them laughing at us. Though two atomic bombings had vaporized the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the IJF wanted to continue fighting to the end.

[@roshanchachane142]

Japan would have surrendered if the US would just obliterate their biggest military installations and soldiers. Bombing a city can never be justified.

[@Llew70]

Don't forget a third bomb was loaded and ready to be dropped if Japan didn't surrender. Even after 2 cities were hit.

[@TheBestDog]

@@roshanchachane142 *After the A-Bomb dropped on Nagasaki,* the Emperor's war council could not reach a consensus on the issue of surrender. Three civilian members chose to surrender, while the three military members chose to continue the war. In an unprecedented move, the new prime minister asked for the Emperor's opinion; he decided to surrender. *Fact: Hirohito never used the word surrender, or its synonyms, in his conciliation speech.*

[@beckyrivers1011]

We should have dropped it on Hirohito's head. But I don't think the Emperor was really in charge. I think the military was...

[@TomFynn]

Interesting question: If the third nuke had taken Hirohito out of the picture, would the Japanese soldiers fought on harder or less effectively since every branch and sub-branch of the Japanese Armed Forces hated each other?

[@jrwhisky]

Soviet union's declaration basically posed no threat to Japan. Furthermore welcomed by the US. They were extremely ill prepared to conduct naval attacks. The US leased 16 of their boats to the USSR only for them to lose those ships almost immediately. Hirohito stated he was willing to accept a least another 6 million Japanese lives, peace talks were at best, wishful thinking.

[@Fafne]

Hard to believe that my grandfather in the Navy was just 30 miles away from Nagasaki ready for Operation Downfall.

[@snaphookright4767]

This is truly an informative video that lays out an impossible, but necessary, decision. There is no right answer; only the best one that could be made with the information and insight that you have. The way it played out with the swift end and current relations between our two countries justifies it. It is no less horrifying, but it was needed to prove that war is not worth it. On an unrelated note, I’ve always thought that this example is what stopped the US and USSR during the Cold War - the first hand account of the potential devastation that weapons of mass destruction could do. In sober moments, both countries knew they didn’t want that; thereby saving humanity in the long run. I hope that lesson doesn’t fade.

[@Davide97x]

That’s just speculation regarding the Cold War, especially since it was only a proxy war. Justifying the obliteration of 100k+ civilians through nuclear warfare is never possible.

[@anna-flora999]

The best decision with the information available at the time would have been not to use them

[@devilhunterred]

US could have blockaded Japan, starve it and it would inevitably surrender.....

[@lopezvip]

I don't believe a bomb on some island would have brought a surrender. Proof of this is hiroshima.... they still didn't surrender. Only after Nagasaki did Japan realize they needed to surrender. Sad but true.

[@im1sickpup269]

@infographics_show - Watched this fantastic video after a year (and I am serious when I say that.) It is a fantastic video because it makes people think and hopefully realize how immoral ANY war is that involves the civillian population (Which, eventually....they all do, to one degree or another) But I have to ask - "Did you ever imagine that creating this video would be like kicking a hornet's nest? " Along with the video's content, this video has one of the best comments sections that I have ever seen on KZbin. Keep up the good work !!

[@bimboblacky]

Kyushu *was* actually considered as a target, briefly. We were already in Okinawa by that time & THAT conflict was absolutely *awful* .

[@alexvig2369]

One US military personnel said that conquering Japan would be a "one big Okinawa". Also, after Germany's surrender, the USSR declared war on Japan, and the Americans weren't in the mood to share the bounty which is Japan's home islands with them. The Soviets ended up capturing all of Japanese-held Manchuria and Russia still reaps the benefits of owning these lands to date.

[@damienbreslin5781]

@@alexvig2369 no one cares about russia tho

[@zelmo73]

@@damienbreslin5781 They should. Russia has nukes and are prepared to use them on Ukraine if necessary. NATO legally couldn’t do anything about it either because Ukraine is a non-NATO country.

[@weseethetruth158]

@@zelmo73 actually NATO can because Russia signed a no nuke clause post wwII.

[@MrHumpah12]

I once had a patient who had fought in Okinawa. He talked about the conditions being so awful. The water and natural resources were poisoned and the civilians were so dedicated to the emperor he saw women throwing their newborns off of cliffs and killing them in the name of the emperor because they didn’t want their kids to live under a new government. Had the bomb not been dropped the citizens still wouldn’t have had a good life with constant military presence and damage to resources. We had to defeat a culture rather than just a uniform.

[@anna-flora999]

If the bombs hadn't been dropped, nothing really would have changed, because the nukes weren't really that impressive. I mean they were in terms of what an individual bomb can do, but what's the difference if its one bomb, or a fleet of Bombers leveling an entire city, if you have no way to stop either of them?

[@oldaccount7885]

@@anna-flora999 well we can tell it was impressive to almost every other government as they immediately ramped up production since then..

[@anna-flora999]

@@oldaccount7885 it was impressive in regards to its eventual potential, and for different theatres. But being on the receiving end of either a nuke or a fire bomb raid... I mean, I'll be honest, I'd rather take the nuke. At least it'll be a quicker death

[@BlurryHoplite1444]

@@anna-flora999 so it was impressive???, you got me lost bruh

[@anna-flora999]

@@BlurryHoplite1444 Impressive as a scientific achievement and as a sort of "this isn't even my final form!" kind of thing, but in regards to its destructive capacity, it didn't cause any more destruction than a fire bombing raid, so unimpressive in that regard

[@drywallpuncher1882]

I’m just gonna say this whole video is hindsight is 20/20. It’s always easy to find alternative solutions after the event happened.

[@jamesplymire5342]

💯 Yup

[@emeraldtawiah9805]

The Chinese and Koreans were grateful. What Japan did to China and Korea was terrible.

[@ThatOneHacker305]

Unit 731

[@TomFynn]

I heard a joke from China. "Who was the best US president? Truman, since he nuked Japan twice. Who was the worst US president? Truman, since he nuked Japan only twice."

[@JCSolis_Lit]

In my opinion, there's nothing to discuss over what was done. With nuclear weapons so widespread in this current day and age, now we must discuss and make sure these weapons are never used again...

[@MrSergore]

Agreed. Those weapons shouldn't exist. Atleast in the perfect world

[@gardencraver7918]

It shouldn't be discussed we should all come together and force them to all be destroyed

[@kdo-double-g4269]

@@MrSergore It is easy for people who live comfortable lives far from war zones to say that weapons of mass destruction should not exist. Once you've been on the wrong side of an attack, you would likely disagree with your original comment.

[@EddyA1337]

@@MrSergore In a perfect world, or least let's say a "more perfect world". We would have waaaay cheaper energy and the environment would be better off from using nuclear power to power everything. But with this knowledge of energy obviously comes the knowledge of how to make a bomb with it. The perfect world you're describing CAN be the one we live in now. Implement nuclear power, use electric vehicles, and install people that want to get rid of nuclear weapons.

[@NRPBrute]

@@MrSergore Those weapons shouldn't exist? That's an incredibly shortsighted opinion to have. The existence of nuclear weapons has pretty much ended large scale world wars.

[@nme232]

I've done so much research on this but the way its presented here makes me feel like its the first time. I love the attention to detail

[@cotati76]

The real question is how many of the commentators on this video wouldn’t be here if their grandfathers were killed in a land invasion of Japan? Probably quite a few.

[@ThatOneHacker305]

Ikr not many people realize how bad it could have been if the US invaded on land

[@cotati76]

@@ThatOneHacker305 the US thought we would lose up to a million soldiers in a land invasion. That probably works out to tens of millions of people that wouldn’t have been born if you count all the generations of people that wouldn’t have been born and had more kids up until now. Yet we still have people on here acting like we shouldn’t have dropped those bombs. They aren’t exactly thinking things all the way through.

[@marcinroszkowski]

A Bomb was not only a message to Japan but to Stalin too. Stalin had entire army in the west of europe. He was more than happy to go after Lodon, Paris etc. The A bomb stoped him.

[@nicholasbullock1709]

“Prompt and utter destruction” Not knowing the method of destruction is not a good argument for not using unknown methods. In this case the atomic bomb. “Oh, you meant THAT utter destruction!” Telling them what the method would be would give away the strategy and they could prepare a defense for it. Which is not a good strategy, if you want their surrender.

[@thegreatsoutherntrendkill272]

If they would have told Japan they were going to bomb their cities, they would be prepared to shoot down the planes. It's common sense.

[@BlackPantherFTW]

The thing with the soviets is that relations were already becoming less friendly during that time as the soviets refused to relinquish territory won from the Germans. The Americans didn't want the soviets invading mainland Japan so they used the bomb to not only quickly end the war but try to deter the soviets into submission.

[@showsjohn]

The Soviets didnt have the capability of invading Japan, they struggled heavily with invading just the outer islands. In fact, the US was actively supplying the Soviets with landing craft to assist with the invasions. I dont know where people get this idea the nukes were to prevent from the Soviets from invading came from.

[@recifebra3]

the Soviets said they couldn't do war on 2 fronts, which is why they didn't want the US to land on their territory during the Dolittle raid so Japan wouldn't retaliate. So this is just not true - we helped the Russians as they already got beat by the Japanese Navy earlier. it is pretty simple. the Japanese would never have fought to the death in every single city most likely and the war would have gone on for years. I still don't think using an atomic bomb is ok though.

[@buckhorncortez]

The United States provided Russia with tanks, train locomotives, airplanes, trucks, ships, and trained Russian troops to help them with their participation in the Pacific war. The compensation for Soviet participation in the Pacific War was clearly defined in the Yalta Agreement signed by the United States, Britain, and Russia. The idea that Russia was operating on its own with no constraints is totally false. The idea that Russia could invade Honshu is also totally false. The Russians attempted to land on Hokkaido and lost 6 of the 16 U.S.-made landing craft before retreating. One of the Russian generals advising Stalin referred to Stalin's idea of invading Honshu as "an escapade" to Stalin's face as none of the military believed an invasion could be accomplished.

[@regularstan6212]

@@showsjohn exactly! Its amazing how people miss such things

[@regularstan6212]

@@buckhorncortez well said

[@red_chilli1751]

Japanese acted like how Chinese act now thats all

[@awjaaa]

Nah, the Japanese acted worse. The US *saved* China from them. Look for the "Nanjing Massacre".

[@elizamunk483]

The Japanese fought very cruelly throughout World War Two, smiling and waving from their cockpits in Pearl Harbor, shooting Prisoners of War during the Bataan Death March for no reason, in an unmistaken show of power and cruelty. The US did not intend to join the war before the bombing of Pearl Harbor, but desperately needed to control the pacific after a large portion of the US Pacific Fleet was destroyed. The US defended peace and freedom during World War Two, fighting against the nazis and the Japanese. I have read that the US Military warned the Japanese government about the effects of the atomic bomb. In addition, the US took control of the Japanese radio stations in Okinawa and sent out a warning to the citizens that was restated every fifteen minutes. If that’s not enough, the US Military dropped leaflets over the possible bombing targets, before and after the bombing of Hiroshima, warning citizens to evacuate. The estimated casualties of a land invasion were around one million for the US and ten million for the Japanese. Personally, I can only conclude that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the only way to promptly end World War Two. If anyone wants additional reading, my favorite book about this topic is called: All the Gallant Men by Donald Stratton who fought at Pearl Harbor and The Invasion of Okinawa.

[@alaskanoverwatch745]

Evan after the second bomb was dropped the War Hawks in Japan military wanted to continue. The army tried to capture the Emperor and prevent him from calling on the people to letdown their arms. Remember, we are still giving out Purple Hearts created in WWII in preparation for an invasion of the Japanese home island.

[@nicholasprzeslawski]

We actually ran out in 2006... But still, that is chilling

[@kingace6186]

So true. Even after the Emperor's "surrender" speech, many in the Imperial Military -- from high command to soldiers -- wanted to fight to the bitter end, despite knowing defeat was inevitable.

[@kingace6186]

And wow I didn't know that most Purple Hearts were made for that. I can only be thankful that they weren't needed for that purpose in the end, and that the invasion was canceled.

[@alaskanoverwatch745]

@@nicholasprzeslawski thanks for that, I did not know they finally ran out. Still, it took Korea, Viet Nam, Gulf War I, and part way through the Gulf War the sequel. Gives you an idea of what they were expecting.

[@alaskanoverwatch745]

Oh, and let’s not forget the Russians only entered the war when defeat was at hand, and that they did so to take advantage of some territory disputes

[@PETERLINNAH]

It's easy to look back on history and judge it. But if you weren't there and not gone through the hardship and horror of WWII then you can't fairly evaluate what should have been done at that time.

[@clientornaka4690]

Exactly this.

[@hggfu]

Facts

[@carlosdcpcg]

Agreed. But still it's good to hear how there would of been different outcomes if some decisions were made differently. History repeats itself so it's best to just learn from it

[@darkdraconis]

What about dropping the bombs on highly populated military targets? How are we not allowed to judge that? The FACT that there was an option which would have killed way more soldiers and way less civilians but they still dropped them on densely populated citys makes the whole discussion obsolete imo

[@popopop984]

So I’m not allowed to judge you for dropping nuclear bombs on civilian cities? Wow, I guess I can’t judge anything anymore. Maybe the Nazi’s air bombings of civilians were based as well?

[@Marzetty23]

I have read a few places what happened in Manchuria was one of, if not the worst attrocities in the entire war. Civilians dying like crazy, and horrific stories like japanese disecting citizens alive. Also interesting to see there are not a lot of movies about Japan from this time period, and the ones that are available are mostly produced from a foreign perspective.

[@rebecca24081]

The war crimes commited by the Imperial Military are almost impossible for me to grasp. I can't believe I wasn't aware of it until fairly recently.

[@LouisMcConnell-xm1ms]

The allies would have committed the same but they won.

[@skaraturbo]

Why would they do that to Manchuria they were allied on the Chinese they did though

[@taylemgames2652]

Japan was worse than the Germans IMO and that is saying a lot.

[@Alexis_Gz]

@@LouisMcConnell-xm1msThe allies have never planned or have never tried to invade the entire globe and slaughter everyone

[@grg242]

Well…they didn’t surrender after the first bomb. So clearly a demonstration was not going to work.

[@robertmurphree7210]

Top Japanese leaders were familiar with the atom bomb from japan’s bomb program. The first bomb didn’t phase them, the massive costs of making fissile materials lead the high command big six to not be impressed by the first bomb. The Americans don’t have any more bombs, they are bluffing! They had no plans to surrender after Hiroshima. Nagasaki gave them a better idea.

[@robertmurphree7210]

The imminent starvation of millions of Japanese civilians was scary to the top command. It might have lead to civil war inside Japan that toppled the home government. Loss of power not civilian casualties was what mattered. So defeating the militarists and mass murderers of east Asia was why the us fought.

[@stephenwright8824]

After Hiroshima, the Imperial Command HQ in Tokyo called one of the few native born nuclear physicists still living in Japan and asked him if a single bomb could have possibly caused that much destruction. He was able to fly over Hiroshima himself, viewing it all, and told them, yes it could. There was never an established Japanese atomic programme to create a bomb for themselves. That's a complete and total fiction.

[@spartanrobotgaming]

According to legend, Truman approached Stalin and told them that he had a secret weapon, that would end the war quickly. Stalin nodded and said, "Yes, I know." One of Oppenheimer's personal advisors was a soviet spy.

[@greatesteverog]

Top ten things that never happened

[@thelordofthelostbraincells]

Oversimplified said this in his ww2 video

[@davidford3115]

The Rosenbergs are who got Oppenheimer's weapon to Stalin. One has to wonder when they started leaking that information.

[@stephenforsberg4038]

One of the important positive things one could request another to do is to try/do their best. Due to the fact that we don't live in a perfect existence and that there is each a person's understanding of the unknown, a person should hope others did their best and said person should also try to learn to be better. Today's hindsight does lack some of yesterday's unknown and some of today's unknown will be missing in tomorrow's hindsight. As the saying goes: "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst."

[@bigchris145]

So a few things about this... 1. At this point of the war there is no real thing of demonstration of power. It was either you attack or you didn't. Not only that, there is an extreme supply issue throughout a lot of the war & it being extremely hard to create another bomb. But also the morale of a lot of American soldiers were lessening by the year. The war was taking a heavy toll on our country as well. Plus, the Soviet Union has already began the beginning processes of their stuff as well. 2. As a Afro-American in the war My great uncle dealt with a lot of Japanese POWs because white soldiers didn't want to deal with them And he learned just how vehement they were about not giving up. The bomb was kind of the only course of action and the smack in the face Japan needed to decide to give up. 3. The Soviet Union and the United States were already barely getting along and the last thing you wanted was for them to secure another territory in Japan. You didn't even want them to invade. That was not a good option for America or Japan.

[@scottwilson6744]

VJ Day, we do love our days off here in RI!

[@VintageNarwhal]

17:05 thank you for including this. I have brain damage and so my memory can be pretty problematic. But i saw a video once upon a time that went over this part you cover about The soviets getting involved and why that would have pushed Japan to have to pick the lesser of all evils n such. My wording is poor which doesn’t help either. But yeah I couldn’t find the video so I couldn’t just show people. So thank you for this.

[@peedrowchan-man102]

Thanks for laying out all of these perspectives. One thing not brought up and which still seems illustrative to me is why did Hirohito not respond or surrender quickly after Hiroshima? I mean, I have long wished the first bomb could have been dropped on an uninhabited island as mentioned. And yet, the fact that Japan did not surrender until two bombs were dropped seems to show their unwillingness to budge for anything less than what unfolded.

[@buckhorncortez]

That is because the government was controlled by the "Big 6." The Big 6 was made up of two army representatives, two navy representatives, the Premier, and the Foreign Minister. At that time, the army had more influence than the navy because the navy, at that point in the war, had few ships left and were the lesser military force. The army had a plan called "ketsu-go" (the final battle) in which the strategy was to cause the Allied forces as much loss of life as possible, forcing a negotiated peace with terms advantageous to Japan. Because of the way the government was structured, any decision had to be unanimous and as long as one of the Big 6 objected - no decision would be brought to the remainder of the Japanese government or Emperor for approval. The Big 6 were split three to three and until the Emperor broke the stalemate with a meeting on August 10, 1945, and a subsequent meeting on August 14, 1945 - three of the Big 6 who were pro-war, would not give up.

[@TheResilient5689]

Because at the time, the peace faction didn’t have enough clout to convince the war faction to surrender. Plus, it would’ve been kind of easy to write off the first bombing as a bluff or one-off weapon. By targeting Nagasaki, the Allies had proven that the atomic bombs were neither.

[@nightshade71986]

3 days is not a long time for a war zone where communication is limited. The bombs destroyed radios and phone lines so intelligence of had to come from personel driving through a bombed out warzone to report on the attack. Essentially japanese leadership learned about the attack about the same time as the second bomb dropped.

[@astraea092]

The japanese thought it was a one off thing, and thier logic was "even if it wasnt a one off, they were fine with Tokyo getting firebombed, how was this any different."

[@elgusaniiiodeljuego6823]

didnt the Americans show them photos of the New Mexico

[@truthseeker9692]

I went to Hiroshima yesterday, and today, I just left Nagasaki... It's sad to see what happened to so many children.

[@fioletskye1950]

What happened to them?

[@truthseeker9692]

@@fioletskye1950 horrible things that words can't describe.

[@RS-fe1dk]

These are 100% the best scenes ever created in the history of cinema. Shame you couldnt fully upload the last scene. Trouly haunting..

[@kickinghorse2405]

To my understanding, this here little cartoon is one of the more accurate and surprisingly comprehensive summaries offered to a mass English-speaking audience on KZbin. Well done!

[@jasonwiley798]

Can you imagine the repercussions iwhen it became known as hat we had a weapon that could have saved million america lives.

[@1988rastafari]

Maybe one possibility that I missed: The US could have reasons to prevent the Soviet in sharing the spoils after a Japanese surrender. In other words; US officials might have forseen some clash between themselves and Russia and wanted more control of a post-war east Asia.

[@DonMeaker]

The Soviets got substantial spoils: they occupied Manchuria, North Korea, and the Sakhalin islands.

[@itsmarvin6999]

@@DonMeaker You can never get enough.

[@RandyFortier]

I think that you are conflating motivation and justification. Just because the US wants to increase their spoils, does not ethically justify the action.

[@DonMeaker]

@@itsmarvin6999 There was a man who aspired to be a farmer. He said "I only want a small farm, and all the land next to it."

[@Joe--]

@@RandyFortier More than anything the US wanted to end the war quicker, save lives. Stop the Soviet Union from carving up Japan like Russia is doing now to Ukraine.

[@shungokusatsulol]

The "demo" bomb wouldn't work. Japan didn't even surrender after the 1st bomb, unfortunately the will of Japan was so strong nothing short of overwhelming and unyeliding power would stop the war.

[@he_is_a_GOOBER_dont_disrespect]

Honestly i appreciate the video our reality has many different versions and truths all happeneing at the same time for sure.

[@andrewchapman4313]

Not sure why anyone would assume that Japan would’ve caved if the first bomb was dropped just so they could ‘see’ the devastation they cause…they didn’t surrender after the first bomb was dropped and killed 70,000, so there’s NO WAY that just dropping one on an uninhabited island would’ve done anything at all.

[@marcelpoppe362]

You have to take into account, they had 3 DAYS to think about it. Something not mentioned here is the negotiator sent to the US by Japan telling them they'd surrender. He came a day to late. If the US has waited like two days, a devastating, long-term dangerous and destroying bomb would've been prevented.

[@WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq]

@@marcelpoppe362 It was a world war. If Japan didn't surrender immediately it could have prolonged the war years longer convincing countries like Italy to rejoin the Axis or change the ultimate outcome with the German-Soviet relationship

[@WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq]

@@marcelpoppe362 It could have been prevented, but they had absoutely no way to know it would have gone the way it was needed and we don't know if that would have worked out for everyone the better The bombs of WW2 made the whole world freeze and realize guns, tanks, or genocide can't win wars for dominion anymore. The also convinced us that we don't want to use them anymore as the devopement for weapons technology was developing back to the point where civilization won't be abke to develope faster then the weapons will

[@Alexanderthegreat159]

@@marcelpoppe362 yeah and all the countries doing horrible s*** would have kept on doing horrible s***. Especially Japan who was doing some heinous stuff that was close to being equivalent to what the Nazis were doing

[@americanpatriot4227]

You are correct. Revisionist - woke - history changes little, but it is dangerous.

[@untouchable360x]

They weren't atomic bombs. They were "special military projectiles."

[@theeagleman8975]

Imagine getting a letter telling you to "surrender or else" then it turns out the or else is wiping 2 cities off the face of the planet

[@ethanos5442]

No!!! America did it, not Russia

[@TheOnlyLux]

Not even that, it was stuffed animals and late/early Christmas gifts

[@Deadassbruhfrfr]

They were, "humanitarian peace bombs"

[@anonnimoose7987]

They were "campfires of friendship"

[@armoredcalvary1273]

The exact drop locations were influenced by weather, also consider a military target may have had a similar effect Pearl Harbor had for us and plunge Japan firmly into a total war scorched earth policy. I don't think debating whether it was justified or not will solve anything, but it is good to examine history so we can learn from it.

[@jackh4484]

Yeah they couldn’t wait a day or two for weather to clear. Please think about what you’re saying

[@foremanhaste5464]

Another part of the equation is "how much war was avoided AFTER WW2 because nuclear weapons were now on the table?" WW2, and The Bomb as part of it, quenched most of the world's willingness for war and then some. The use of The Bomb opened the world's eyes to just how much worse war could get. I haven't run the numbers, but I bet that world wide causality rate per capita from war tapered off sharply compared to the previous centuries before WW2 when one considers WW I&II as outliers. Humankind has always been a bloodthirsty beast, and only these horrible events seem to have calmed it some.

[@TheSylvreWolfe]

A few corrections. One, Japan knew all about atomic bombs. The Japanese Navy and Japanese Army were working on their own bombs. Two, letting Russia into Japan would have been untenable. Three, there was no guarantee the Japanese would have been willing to surrender at any time. That is pure speculation not based on information they had at the time. Fourth, the cities that were targeted had extensive military support capacity. Fifth, targeting uninhabited land or strictly military in the south would not have provided the same impact as hitting major manufacturing areas. The people just would not have believed it happened.

[@Butlerwilliamp1986]

And there was multiple leaflet campaigns over several days that let everyone know exactly what was going to happen and which targets we would choose so anyone who stayed in the strategic positions we might target knew that an atomic bomb might just come down on their heads. There were hundreds of thousands of leaflets dropped, it would of been impossible to escape the information conveyed there upon. This channel is full of falsehoods and over dramatization about most topics. The truth is enough to teach everyone that watches these, they don’t need the rampant falsehoods and speculation.

[@StickyMcBudNugget]

This guy historys

[@sekanikay5202]

Correction: Targeted extensive military support cities and ended up murdering huge number of civilians than military

[@MarvinTurner]

In point three you call speculation, just to speculate in point 5.

[@MatthewLawrence.]

I work at an assisted living home and we have a resident who served on the USS Saratoga. He firmly believes that the Atomic bombs saved the lives of himself, his remaining comrades, and much of the enemy. He even thanked Truman in person for his decision.

[@dinogt8477]

no one cares

[@Longboardguyy]

@@dinogt8477 Wow, you are so badass bro

[@MikeSmith-vl5em]

@@Longboardguyy I would of used another word

[@richardphillips1947]

Amen! I totally agree

[@bananian]

The only party to condemn is the Japanese leadership. They should have surrendered after millions were killed by the firebombing. It was clear at that point that they have lost, but they were in denial and simply did not care about their own people, prolonging their suffering for no reason.

[@nicholasmorsovillo2752]

If anyone knows this the city of Nagasaki wasn't the original target for the second Atomic bomb it was a different city but because of heavy cloud cover the target for the drop was completely obscured so Nagasaki was chosen as a secondary target and it was also known that if the Japanese didn't surrender the U.S. was planning to drop a 3rd Atomic bomb and the target was gonna be Tokyo itself and the planned target for the third bomb was gonna be the Imperial palace.

[@waynepatterson5843]

@nicholasmorsovillo2752 --- If anyone knows this the city of Nagasaki wasn't the original target for the second Atomic bomb it was a different city but because of heavy cloud cover the target for the drop was completely obscured so Nagasaki was chosen as a secondary target and it was also known that if the Japanese didn't surrender the U.S. was planning to drop a 3rd Atomic bomb and the target was gonna be Tokyo itself and the planned target for the third bomb was gonna be the Imperial palace. Wayne Paterson --- That is simply not true. The Mitsubishi Arsenals, other arsenals, and Nagasaki Fortress located in Nagasaki were already in third position on the Interim Committee's targets list. The Kokura Arsenal was the second target on the Interim Committee's target list due to its importance for the arming of the regular Japanese troops, the arming of the Japanese conscript troops, and the use of the Kokura arsenal in producing the FU-GO balloon bombardment campaign. The FU-GO balloon bombing campaign had the potential to attack the United States, Canada, and Mexico with biological weapons of mass destruction that threatened hundreds of thousands to hundreds of millions of lives in North America and beyond. When Bock's Car was unable to execute its attack against the Kokura Arsenal, it was already briefed to attack the third priority targets located within Nagasaki. The results of the attack against the military targets in Nagasaki neutralized most the the war production necessary to support the Japanese OPERATION KETSU-GO during the future combat operations in Kyushu. The proposals to strike the Imperial Palace in Tokyo with an atomic bomb were never a serious proposal, because the killing of the Emperor would have resulted in the war continuing in to 1946 and beyond with the millions of Japanese soldiers fighting in the overseas Japanese occupied territories. It was necessary to keep the Emperor alive and able to command a Japanese surrender to avoid the consequences of a further protracted war killing tens of millions more people.

[@ArcherBowman]

I recall "war" being full of challenging choices. Hind sight is so smart.

[@raw6668]

I am surprised no one brought up four other factors: 1) Japan's whole strategy of using the entire population to repeal attacks was on the thought process that the Americans would not stomach a war to commit genocide and would capitulate. The US dropping the bombs on heavily industrial civilian targets showed they could if it meant to end the war. 2) Japan planned to rebuild its military for another round with the USA. A similar tactic was tried on the Germans and it still lead to another war so the Allies at the time felt the only way to prevent another war was to ensure the Axis would be broken completely. 3) The Japan of now is very different from Japan during WWII. People do not realize it, but they thought fighting and dying for the nation was valued higher than anything else, including lives and the rule of law. Leading up to WWII, many Japanese soldiers killed several of the moderate Japanese officers and politicians with claims they did it for a strong of Japan was let go after a few days in house arrest by an applauding population while those who committed suicide after the crime were considered heroes. Heck, low-ranking officers were given an ovation for disobeying orders to set up a war between Japan and China and were not punished. Soldiers dying for Japan would be looked on as martyrs rather than fearful of the bomb. 4) The US only had two bombs at the time. While a show of force would be ideal, it would require maybe three bombs if not more to get Japan to surrender. One to hit an island to show its destructive capability, two or more military bases, and maybe a city if they had not surrendered by then. The US only had two and would take time to build even more, so they needed to make them have the highest impact before they run out to get Japan to surrender.

[@YonkoBlackbeard]

Idk they were planning on dropping a third one until Japan surrendered. Wish we would’ve dropped a even bigger one on their biggest military base

[@oliviertostevin2144]

Actually the most important thing was that even after both bombs dropped, the emperor was barely able to surrender. There was even an attempted coup by the military to stop the emperor from surrendering. There’s actually a great documentary on this bc Hirohito recorded what happened. When they said that Japan may have surrendered when Russia declared war, or with just a bomb drop on a uninhabited island, they were dead wrong. Japan I’m the 1940 did not surrender at all, they considered it a great disgrace, and they fought by the Bushido code. No surrender, fight to the last man standing. I’m Okinawa and across the pacific Japanese soldiers use civilians as human shields, rigged them up with suicide vests, used a dying civilian to lure US marines into a trap. I guarantee that if the US had invaded Japan, which is would have had to, there would have been far more deaths than the result of the bomb. Kids would be shooting at soldiers, Japanese soldiers would be using women and children as body shields, it would be brutal gorilla warfare and the whole country would have been ravaged. There would be suffering on a entirely new level than ever before. What the bombs did was terrible awful thing. The US did a terrible thing dropping those bombs, but it was necessary. The ends justified the means. If the bombs had not been dropped, a brutal invasion would have taken place killing millions on both sides, and completely destroyed the country of Japan. Two leveled cities is a lot easier to rebuild than an entire country. And yes the Japanese military, and many of the people, were incredibly brainwashed and would have never stopped fighting till they were all killed. The effect of those bombs is still felt 80 years later. The decision of dropping them on heavily civilian populated areas is very debatable, but the reason Hirohito surrendered is because too many of his people, civilians were being killed. The military did not care and wanted to keep fighting. If they were dropped on targets consisting of mainly military, the outcome may have been different. Hirohito may not have cared, he did send hundreds of thousands of young men off to their deaths in suicide attacks. But my guess is that the massive deaths of civilians is what turned him around. But then again those civilians should not have to suffer for the actions of their leaders, and oh did they suffer. The radiation caused more damage than the bombs, parents watched their children slowly die or radiation poisoning, and vice versa. Birth defects, deadly ones, were very common. The area will never truly recover, at least not for another 50 years at least. The bombs were not justified, but they were necessary, Japan would not have surrendered without them, and many more would have died, all across Japan, including many US marines and soldiers. The culture and attitude Japan had made it necessary. It was not “payback for Pearl Harbor”. It was the massive blow the scare the emperor into surrendering, and even that barely worked as many tried to stop him. War is awful. Bad Japan needed to be stopped. And that was the best way. It was horrible, awful, killed so many, and led to so much suffering, especially for civilians.

[@Nenshokaze]

@@oliviertostevin2144 So basically justified? No. Necessary? Yes. What you say is possible. That only killing civilians too would have changed the emperor’s mind. Regardless as another person said in another comment or comment thread people nowadays look on the event with hindsight the people alive at the time did not have. The decision was made for better or worse. It was perhaps the best option out of a series of bad ones.

[@abimaellopezmaylord27lopez7]

@Adept Mage the USA warned the Japanese people and there was flyers everywhere

[@Nenshokaze]

@@abimaellopezmaylord27lopez7 Yeah but as the infographics show said they weren’t specific enough with what was coming so nobody understood nor believed it thoroughly on the Japanese side.

[@TheFinalChapters]

To decide whether the choice was justified, you must consider only the information that was available at the time of the decision. It's absurd to use modern knowledge of the full effects of atomic bombs, Japanese and Russian plans, or anything else that we only learned after the fact. The US had exactly two nuclear bombs, so they couldn't just throw one as a demonstration. This is a critical detail completely overlooked in the video, and changes the equation dramatically. The decision was made to use the existing atomic bombs to scare the Japanese into surrendering, as no other realistic options that we know of today were known back then. To this end, the US military determined the most likely locations to succeed in causing a surrender. Whether they were correct or not, their experience and knowledge in the art of war here makes it fully justified to go with their plan. It was a devastating decision that perhaps could have been avoided if things were slightly different, but they weren't.

[@davidanderson2357]

Absolutely true. A detail I forgot to mention in my main comment.

[@egth1300]

Bombing civilians with the biggest never existed bomb is effective indeed.

[@robert-joshuamcfaddin7041]

The US had more than two atomic bombs, we had hopped they'd surrender without the use of qny.

[@markspott1741]

That's what the "woke" generation do. They can only think linearly. Abstract thinking isn't an ability they have.

[@davidsalazarii1]

@@robert-joshuamcfaddin7041 The US had three bombs ready and that was it.

[@chaedi8457]

One thing that is incorrect in this video is in regards to Okinawa. The video states the landing troops immediately came under heavy fire, but they actually didn't. The Japanese strategy was to not defend against the landing and instead defend inland. It was a huge surprise for American troops that the beachfront was not defended as they were expecting heavy losses.

[@jhonklan3794]

You ignoring the historical consensus here: That dropping the bomb 100% prevented a mainland invasion. Even if Japan were to surrender eventually, it would require a mainland invasion to do it without the bomb.

[@mitchellhoward3580]

The US had literally not only blown a Japanese base off the face of the planet but also the entire island the base was on and it had no effect on enemy morale. Clearly dropping an atomic bomb as a demonstration or on a pure military base would have had little effect.

[@FloridaHockeyFan]

@Raji Saleh The Plane was named Enola Gay but the Pilots were male.

[@lylyart]

@Raji Saleh no, they just should not have dropped a bomb on anything. sadistic mfs

[@DanMcD80]

And would have been kept classified from its people

[@Christmas-dg5xc]

"dropping an atomic bomb as a demonstration or on a pure military base would have had little effect." Wow, what a rationale. Would targeting civilians also be morally right if the other guys had had the means and were thinking the same thing?

[@FloridaHockeyFan]

@@Christmas-dg5xc They didnt target civilians. They targeted major military industry...

[@confusedcaveman6611]

Imagine looking into the eyes of the family of servicemen who died in the invasion and telling them that you had a superweapon that you didn't use because it would have been too mean to the enemy

[@SuperTonydd]

Imagine killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in retaliation for an action decided by politicians. Can never forgive the USA for using that weapon

[@cammontreuil7509]

Nuke should have been used on Iwo.

[@frankierzucekjr]

Well said

[@jackh4484]

I LOVE MINIMIZATION

[@johngee1723]

If we wouldn't have used it to end a war, what are the chances other nations would've used them in the future, possibly on us? We showed the world how destructive and horrific they are. Since then they have not been used in war anywhere. A demonstration blast might've worked on Japan, but might not have. It would not have had nearly the impact on other nations around the world, which eventually did develop their own nuclear bombs. By using it when we did, it's possible we prevented a far more devastating future nuclear exchange. In the end it's all Monday morning quarterbacking. Nothing to feel sick about but war in general.

[@korieharris4086]

I was awarded best presentation in the class for my national history day project on the Manhattan project, and have remained fascinated with the topic as an adult, it's insulting for you're channel to get so many facts wrong, but that's typical for infographics

[@jc2delaga]

Great video! It gives me a better understanding of why the atomic bombs were dropped. Thank you 👍

[@jamesknoll2424]

One thing I think is missed in the argument for dropping the bomb a city vs the military base is that ww2 was a war of manufacturing. Nagasaki was one of the last few manufacturing strong holds in the country with no means to produce weapons of war they would be knocked out of the war.

[@jamesknoll2424]

As a counter it was later found that Russia had considered continuing their invasion of Europe until reaching Paris believing the other allied powers wouldn’t be able to stop them. It’s un-clear if the dropping of the nuclear bombs on Japan played a roll in the decision not to continue but there is significant evidence to suggest it.

[@ivanwigmore]

The cities that were bomber were military targets Only people would rather report or put in there video that the cities were only full of civilians Each city was chosen because of none or little previous bomb damage This would allow for accurate assessment of the bomb damage, from each atomic bomb dropped But not being Military targets So Not true & a simple Google search will tell Report is nothing but more attempt at changing the real history of our past , which is under constant assault 😎🇨🇦

[@davidford3115]

Indeed. Nearly all of the torpedoes and bombs used by the Japanese in WW2 came from Nagasaki.

[@ThatGuy-bz2in]

@@jamesknoll2424 Stalin was well aware of the Manhattan project. He knew about it long before Truman did. The americans might reasonably thought that demonstrating it would have an effect on the Soviets. But it didn't.

[@comacollosasa6282]

I think it may have been because most targets had already been firebombed in oblivion. I feel like this isn’t mentioned enough. We did a lot of terrible damage before we ever dropped the nukes. However imperial Japan was unlike almost any force in history.

[@MrDaneis]

Surprised you didn't mention Nagasaki wasn't the initial target. Due to cloudy conditions it was switched the last minute from Kokura to Nagasaki

[@danielharlan3617]

What most people fail to realize is that it was not the Emperor who instigated the attack on Pear Harbor, but his military commanders. It was his commanders who refused surrender. The emperor wanted a end to the war, but his military commanders refused to listen to him.

[@diegoquezada3193]

Pretty much, the Emperor was a puppet used by the military to control the civilian populace.

[@cynic5581]

The first bomb was used on a populated area and it didn’t cause the surrender of Japan, how would a demonstration have worked? The US exhausted their entire nuclear stockpile at the time. It’s been stated that if the Japanese would have known that they would not have surrendered. This was one of the reason they didn’t surrender after the first bomb was dropped thinking the US couldn’t be in possession of more than one. Plus while not trying to down play the innocent lives lost due to the nuclear bombs they represent about 10% of all the innocent Japanese lives lost. While significant if the war would have continued for just a couple more months on the Japanese mainland many more innocent Japanese lives would have been lost plus multitudes more of military personnel. As terrible as it sounds today I feel at the time it was the right choice and if we ignore all the fiction (what if the US did this or that) it can’t be argued of it’s effectiveness to ending the war. Was there a better way? We can only speculate from the facts we know today. Hindsight as usual is information unavailable to the people at the time of the event.

[@petrruzicka9815]

United. States of America Terrorists use bombs on civilian targets! War crime!

[@MonkeySwings]

the fire bombing alone killed more than one atomic bomb. If an atomic bomb was to drop in a military base, that would have a bigger impact in a way of how much military personnel/high-ranking officials and equipment they just lost in one bomb = less defense and control agaisnt the US arrival on the island. US knowing the soviets were invading and that the japanese would rather surrender to the US than soviets also gave US a bigger bargaining chip from the start.

[@CETGale]

To all the snoflake Millinials in the comment section, the funny thing is if they were around at the time and had to be in the invasion of Japan especially the first waves hitting the beach with a 80% causialty rate they would have been all over the atomic bomb dropping you can beleive that.....lol

[@alexandersampson6799]

@@YoungWildShottas oh a snow flake millennial says incorrect you must be right cause you were apart of it

[@scottt7371]

@@YoungWildShottas where’s your evidence 🤡

[@simonayers8033]

Great video. The details you put in is amazing. I just have to say hindsight is a great thing - could have, should have, would have.

[@rayspeakmon2954]

It's always easy to judge, condemn and second-guess with hindsight.

[@CMp38]

Gotta take into consideration the horrific war crimes of japan.

[@claywebo850]

My great grandmother was in Nagasaki when the bomb fell. She hid in a cave for 5 days.

[@newares8140]

I know it’s much to ask, but can you please tell more of that story!?

[@dakotabynum7192]

@@newares8140 if they was in the city I highly doubt they made it frfr

[@rjh6111]

7:55 all I can think about is two Japanese soldiers looking up at the B-29 like: "They only sent one plane?" Pretty sure that makes me a horrible person lol

[@davidford3115]

Naw, it means you have a gallows sense of humor.

[@1pcfred]

The bomb plane was accompanied by two other observation planes. So each nuke bomb run had 3 planes. Before the attacks we got the Japanese used to the configuration by flying many missions with the same profile. By the time it happened they thought nothing of it.

[@themikegarrett]

Thanks, Carlos haha

[@robvett8584]

Lol

[@Firecat7409]

Dark humor is like food. Not everyone gets it

[@atomicpunch723]

What’s done is done, fighting about it doesn’t un-erase what was erased

[@mikemoholland8675]

The best way to influence the thinking of an enemy soldier is to threaten his home, his parents, siblings, children, everything that he knows outside of the military. As a soldier I would have no problem threatening or killing them. However when the war ends, so does the killing.

[@Jameswebbtelescope7484]

Whenever I’m bored I’m always looking out for newer infographic show videos

[@TerermateTrades]

Fax

[@alm5992]

Just to find out it's the same video they did 2-3 weeks ago.

[@daytonduck]

The folks who produced this episode researched their material quite well, and made very compelling arguments, as well as helping to enlighten us as to another potential timeline--one in which the Soviets annexed Japan. By extension, another potential outcome of the war, which is almost never considered, is also revealed. That is, one in which the United States receives its surrender from Japan without using its bombs, and the USSR, in anger over Japan apparently "switching sides" for no reason that they can perceive, begins to engage the rest of the Allies. In that narrowly possible situation, the US would have two (and soon, three) weapons to use against the USSR, who has already demonstrated their willingness to throw hordes of bodies at "the problem". Whether the Soviet leadership would cave against such apparently unstoppable firepower is, of course, academic. It is, however, quite an interesting subject. Thank you for your presentation.

[@irpwellyn]

Switching sides?

[@OldSoulNewLife]

We would have beat them easily . Nukes weren’t needed. We don’t even know the truth of why we were at war. They told you a story. That’s not the truth 🤣 They will never tell you the real truth, you have to walk the planes to figure that out . Why haven’t they done it again? Because they care about people? Why didn’t they care about the Japanese. Why didn’t they drop it on the nazis? Do they even have more? People are so small minded.

[@markadams5823]

Yes but I still can't believe the United States ignored the warning from China that the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl harbor. That is pretty arrogant

[@antcantcook960]

Utterly nonsensical scenario

[@antcantcook960]

@@irpwellyn it’s a childlike analysis

[@jesusgaston3457]

At the end that demonstration of the nuclear bomb change the world for the better because without that nobody would have known of the devastation of the nuclear bombs which would have made the cold war a lot different and that one would have cost us the world at the end

[@tomshady3530]

The reason civilians were also targeted comes down to this: there was only enough nuclear material for 2 bombs in 1945. And one was plutonium and one was uranium, because it was too hard to make enough for 2 devices of the same fuel at the time. Each bomb HAD to have MAXIMUM impact, or it could be YEARS until they had enough fuel to make more, it was thought at the time. They made the right decision. 2 in the bush, or one in the hand. They chose the sure thing: maximum... damage.

[@imathreat209]

Short answer: delivering democracy

[@Phoenix411th]

This was a war crime

[@morningstar6562]

@@Phoenix411th ....prevented the deaths of MANY American lives. This is what happens when your Nation commits an act like what happened at Pearl Harbor. This forced our hand to do very bad things to put an end to it. NOT a war crime!... SMH..idiots

[@blackstyxx]

@@Phoenix411th History is written by victors

[@abderahmanelaib7363]

And it was a war crime .

[@morningstar6562]

@@abderahmanelaib7363 nope

[@95rav]

The bombs were new and difficult (time, material and expense) to make. It wasn't as if the US had a pocket full of bombs to run around doing demonstrations with. And with each passing day, thousands of casualties (including civilians) were occuring anyway. These bombs 'only' killed the equivalent of a few days worth of continued fighting.

[@mjhp2]

Interesting way of justifying this lol

[@bigz4302]

@@mjhp2 the people needed to be broken of their will to fight too, it's a nasty choice with alot of gray. Just be glad we weren't the ones who had to make the call

[@theonesithtorulethemall]

@@bigz4302 they say after they (amarica) started the war

[@bigz4302]

@@theonesithtorulethemall now that's the Hot Take to rule them all.

[@wolverines5279]

@@theonesithtorulethemall i would like to see how you justify your claim on how we started the war when we in fact and the political sphere wanted nothing to do with the war

[@geoffreyblankenmeyer9888]

So many things wrong here.Two important points. First, Hirohito was not the head of Japan's government. He could overrule decisions or proactively make them but for the most part, steered clear of that. Second, there is a record of the Japanese government's discussions on the course of the war. Multiple governments formed, were disbanded and replaced. Some were Hawks and some were Doves. In any event, no proactive surrender was proferred nor accepted by Japan until Hirohito broke tradition and decide to accept American terms to end the war after Nagasaki. He had the opportunity to do so after Hiroshima, but did not. Had the bomb not been dropped twice, fire bombing of Japan would have continued apace. Which would have been worse?

[@seanwallace89]

The OG "F around and find out"