The Truth About Why America Dropped Atomic Bombs on Japan

[@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 😱

[@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.

[@藤原不二雄-s3g]

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).

[@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

[@ΠαναγιώτηςΑλεξανδρόπουλος-β1γ]

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.

[@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.

[@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?

[@jonfoulkes3160]

I'm sorry sir, one more time? What did you say??

[@ravell2854]

Hard to believe, because the vietnam war most likely used that stockpile well even before that war ended.

[@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.

[@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.

[@3PostmanPat]

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

[@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.

[@ravell2854]

Well, Japan was americanized after the war, so that is expected. Even today, japan is controlled very closely by the usa at the point that 80 years after ww2 japan isnt allowed to have an standing army anymore. Just defense forces. So yes, Japan and america will be very good "friends" for years to come, their freedom is controlled very close.

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@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

[@DanDog91]

Modern filtering of the unethical justification of dropping the bombs (from the anti-nuke revisionists) tend to overlook several things like the determination of the Japanese people, the aftermath of having a Soviet outpost in the pacific (to this day they have limited navy bases), almost zero radiation studies had been completed (and actually avoided before Trinity so not to impede progress). That said, I would have opted for the Kyushu option as the first target. They had a 2nd plutonium core (aka the Demon Core) available to make a 3rd bomb if necessary.

[@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.

[@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.

[@sleepnaught]

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]

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

[@regularstan6212]

@@buckhorncortez well said

[@Fafne]

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

[@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."

[@davegaetano7118]

What Mao did the China was far far worse.

[@Keita-j4y]

So ?? Nothing can be worse than American atomic people .

[@here_bedragons]

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?

[@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.

[@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?

[@KosherGasChamber]

@@EugeneStClair-tv7dr its a lie. Moonlight in a cargo hold of a large or even small cargo vessel of that time isnt a thing

[@Summerland357]

History is written by the winner.

[@kyero8724]

Japanese professors and war analysts agree it was best.

[@Singledream-q8p]

Civilians on war disagree

[@lynntress891]

NO ONE WON

[@ZaOnly420]

Most stories are 2 sided . What ever history you are reading can be different depending on who writes it

[@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 …

[@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?

[@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.

[@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.*

[@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.

[@davidanderson_surrey_bc]

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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@JadianRadiator]

13:46 I am of the opinion that public opinion/reaction of Japan's civilian population was a large and important part towards its ability to end the war. And thus dropping on a military facility away from civilians would be less effective.

[@dmo629]

I agree

[@jeffryfish7239]

so you're saying you support terror attacks?

[@dakotasir9849]

Still hurts nothing to try that first

[@autismman102]

Also the bombers had the risk of being shot down, or intercepted by Japanese forces if they flew over a heavily occupied Japanese base

[@DonMeaker]

@@dakotasir9849 it does hurt, as the number of atomic weapons was limited, and expensive.

[@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.

[@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?

[@ABlizzardIsClose]

There was also another reason, I forgot what is was about but it had something to do with getting Japan to surrender or something like that

[@johnpaulguevara3977]

False. The Japanese was ready to die to the last man. This would have dragged the war longer. This youtube channel is a little too self righteous. Why dont you mention how horrible the Japanese were at the time? Dont romanticise the japanese as victims. They were the aggressors then.

[@pieterveenders9793]

@@ABlizzardIsClose Minor reason, the 2 major reasons were already mentioned by the person you replied to.

[@ABlizzardIsClose]

@@pieterveenders9793 Those 2 reasons are just speculation and have not been confirmed by any reliable source GET SLAMMED!

[@truthseeker9692]

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

[@fioletskye]

What happened to them?

[@truthseeker9692]

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

[@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

[@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.

[@Doorkey14]

Nagasaki was a secondary target of opportunity. The bomber's pilot and logistical payload delivery was hindered by atmospheric unrest. Much cloud cover had settled over "Little Boy" "Fat Man" (also known as Mark III) is the codename for the type of nuclear bomb (plutonium) that was detonated over the Japanese city of Nagasaki by the United States on 9 August 1945. Despite the presence of military targets, Nagasaki was not selected as one of the U.S. target cities in May 1945. It had been on an earlier list in April but had been dropped. The city’s hilly geography and the presence of a POW camp made it a less than ideal target for the atomic bomb, and U.S. officials had four candidate cities that suited their purposes. It was officially added on July 25. The port city sat at the bottom of the list August 9, 1945 Atomic bombs needed to be sited visually rather than relying on radar, which made clear skies necessary. After the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, the United States planned to drop the next atomic weapon on August 10, but an extended cloudy forecast meant they had to move more quickly. They switched the attack to August 9, hastily assembled the egg-shaped plutonium bomb “Fat Man,” and loaded it into the B-29 bomber Bockscar. The mission took off from Tinian Island at 3:47 A.M. and flew toward Kokura, the intended target. Also located on the island of Kyushu, Kokura had been selected because the Japanese Imperial Army’s massive arsenal was there. It was 10:00 AM when the bomber arrived at Kokura, Japan, but visibility over the city was poor. Searching for a window in the clouds, the bomber circled the city three times, but Kokura never clearly came into view. Around 10:45, the team abandoned Kokura and flew south toward Nagasaki. RHP

[@kevinbergin9971]

"...Nagasaki was a secondary target..." Thanks, mentioned that above.

[@carlsilverman754]

John Hersey "both cities legit military targets" dont re-write history...Japan the aggressor from 1941

[@letsgowinnietheflu5439]

@@carlsilverman754 You are correct both were legit but everything he sited is factually correct and he did not say that they weren't justified so no rewrite is occurring.

[@shahrulamar5358]

Plutonium was later used by Dr Emmet Brown to make Fluxs Capacitor which make time travel possible. ⏲️⏲️⏲️

[@shahrulamar5358]

@@carlsilverman754 Hiroshima. Headquarter of Mazda Motor. 🚗 🚗

[@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

[@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.

[@lybasily]

@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...

[@SunwardRanger83]

Here's something to consider. If the Japanese were already planning suicide attacks if Americans invaded, why would that change with the Soviets entering the war? Why would that suddenly compel a quick and complete surrender for a people who were willing to die as long as they took some of their enemies with them? Why would they have been worried about living under the Soviets if they thought they were going to die in the invasion? The second thing to consider. The Japanese did not surrender after an atomic bomb was dropped and destroyed a city. It took a second time and another city to convince them. Why would you assume that simply wiping out a military base, much less just demonstrating the bomb on an uninhabited piece of land would have done the job?

[@buckhorncortez]

The Japanese first heard of the Russians entering China through radio broadcasts. Many of the Japanese military thought the broadcasts could be war propaganda. The Japanese were not officially notified of the Russian entry into the war until the afternoon of August 10, 1945, when the Japanese Foreign Minister, Togo, met with the Russian Ambassador, Malik. By that time, the Japanese had already sent cables to their embassies in Sweden and Switzerland telling them to inform the British, American, and Chinese governments of their tentative acceptance of the Potsdam Proclamation with a clarification as to the status of the Emperor. The Russian entry into the war had been anticipated since February 1945 by the Japanese. The Russians declaring war terminated the Japanese government's fantasy that the Russians could be used to mediate an end to the war that would be favorable to the Japanese instead of the unconditional surrender terms contained in the Potsdam Proclamation. There is a lot of revisionist history that doesn't follow the actual events and timelines. The best researched book on the subject is "Japan’s Decision to Surrender," by Robert J.C. Butow. Butow researched the book from 1949-1952 and interviewed many of the Japanese government people involved in the decisions made by the Japanese government during 1945.

[@edwardmcwilliams8371]

even after 2 bombs. it was up to the emperor to break the tie. Half of the war cabinet still did not want to surrender after even having 2 bombs. the Japanese were going to fulfill their plan of the glorious death of the 100 million if mainland invasion happened

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@BoostedSpeedDemon]

A fun fact for those who do not know. Nagasaki almost survived the war. It was actually not the first choice for the bombing. Hiroshima was. But the second city was actually supposed to be Kokura. But it was obscured by cloud cover. So the bombing crew made the choice in the air to go to their backup target, which was nagasaki. A smaller and more industrial city, which is why it had a lower death count. Not to mention the terrain of the city was different. Hiroshima amplified the blast because of its geography. Nagasaki had the opposite effect.

[@minseolee4906]

the bombing in nagasaki was 10x greater than the bombing in hiroshima.

[@BoostedSpeedDemon]

@@minseolee4906 no it was not. Not even close. Hiroshima was 15 kilotons, Nagasaki was 21 kilotons. Not even double the power.

[@minseolee4906]

@@BoostedSpeedDemon wel it was a hyperbole but ok nice info. ty!

[@BoostedSpeedDemon]

@@minseolee4906 honestly, when you say it like the way you did, that's not a hyperbole. That's misinformation. If you do not word it in a way that makes it obvious that it is satire, it comes across as somebody trying to spread misinformation as fact. But you're welcome

[@minseolee4906]

@@BoostedSpeedDemon uhm...it was a hyperbole but mk go off i guess..

[@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.

[@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.

[@robbgamble4149]

One of the things no one realizes is that more people died in Tokyo than either city and it wasnt nuked. They used firebombs and killed between 80000 and 130000. Nagasaki 39000 to 80000. Hiroshima 70000 to 126000. They also didn't mention the Potsdam declaration.

[@luckyday465768]

16:20 There is one problem with this assumption, however. The Soviets had no intention of declaring war on Japan until mid-1946 or later when a hypothetical invasion of Japan had severely weakened American forces. Truman had been pressing Stalin to declare war on Japan, but to no avail. He bided his time. Stalin knew America had a nuclear bomb program but didn't think it was ready as soon as it was or that Truman was bluffing during the Yalta conference. Once Germany was defeated Stalin believed he had time enough to consolidate Communist control over the Eastern European countries and wanted to do the same with the Asian countries. Stalin wanted to wait until 1946 to declare war on Japan so that he can split up Japan between east and west like they did with Germany, and that America would be in no position to do anything about it because it suffered a heavy casualty rate during this invasion scenario. It was only after Truman dropped the atomic bomb is when he declared war on Japan because he saw that his dreams of a Soviet dominated Asia, and Japan started going up in flames. So, he declared war, and seized as much territory as possible before Japan's surrender.

[@davidford3115]

Indeed. People conveniently forget that Stalin declared war TWO DAYS after Hiroshima. As you point out, he knew the Pacific theater was about to close so he wanted to get in and claim some spoils before it was over.

[@DonMeaker]

You can't start a military operation with no notice, much less one as successful as that conducted by Soviet Union against Japanese forces in 1945. Stalin certainly intended to attack when he did, because he had agreed to it, because he prepared for it, because he did it, and because he did it so well.

[@buckhorncortez]

@@DonMeaker Stalin agreed to enter the Pacific War by mid-August 1945. The use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima caused him to call a meeting on August 7 with his military leaders when he asked them if they could mobilize the troops by August 9, 1945, and was told by the military they could do that. Stalin was promised compensation for entering the war through the Yalta Agreement. He could see that with the atomic bomb, the U.S. could likely win the war without Russian participation and he would have no claim for the promised compensation if Russia did not participate. It's not as simplistic and one-sided as many people try to reduce Russian entry into the war. Stalin's forces continued invading areas controlled by Japan even after Japan had surrendered with their last action on September 1, 1945 - one day before the surrender agreement was formally signed.

[@ChristopherMullen58]

They left out that we had enough material for 3 bombs it would have been months after Nagasaki before we had more bombs.

[@buckhorncortez]

Not true. The pit and initiator for a third bomb were in California for transport to Tinian for final assembly A third plutonium bomb would have been available after August 20, 1945. There was a bomb production schedule with one uranium bomb and two plutonium bombs to be available by the end of September. There were at least five bombs to be available by the end of October, and George Marshall, the Army Chief of Staff, was planning on redirecting the use of atomic bombs from strategic use to tactical use for the invasion of Kyushu. He planned on using 7-9 atomic bombs as part of the invasion strategy.

[@ChristopherMullen58]

@@buckhorncortez Thanks for the correction

[@TexasScratchMan]

They actually planned to use as much as 10 nukes if they had to, Japan emporer just wised up and decided to surrender against manys wishes in Japan at the time before we used a 3rd. They would have been used on the battlefield later as well.

[@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.

[@TXHEN1]

I think if everyone read up on the true numbers of the killed in WWll then you can't argue with if it was a better outcome to just drop the bombs in Japan preventing the war there and helping to end the main war, just reading on how many millions of its own civilians the Soviet Union willingly killed to come up on top makes me shiver to think of the staggering number of lives that would have died in Japan under all of this from all sides. And no they wouldn't of surrendered just because it was two fronts that they now had to fight, that's not how they lived back then. Unless they had 100% certainty that they had no chance(as from seeing the bombs effect) they would have kept fighting till the end for their country and honor. Even after the bombs a lot of them still wanted to keep fighting... And the argument that maybe they would have surrendered with a bomb on only a military target or with just show the impact of a test bomb is out of the window with the fact that they didn't even surrender after the first bomb drop but people aren't all there and make opinions without deep thinking. But let's all hope no country ever has to use one ever again for all our sake.

[@davidford3115]

Operation Downfall and Operation Ketsu-Go make it quite clear WHY those bombs had to be dropped.

[@Joe--]

Exactly this! Agreed, saving this thoughtful comment.

[@nickzz12]

Absolutely. The if of Japan's surrender after the horric deaths of 100k civilians was much better than the downside of Japan not surrendering. Millions of civilians dead. The country destroyed even more than it already was. It was truly a lesser of 2 evils. Still evil but the odds were good that the invasion and occupation of Japan by the USA and USSR would have been horrific for japan

[@slamyourheadin9449]

@@nickzz12 usa did occupy Japan what are you on about?

[@nickzz12]

@@slamyourheadin9449 yes they did for a long time. We basically still are

[@Ackbar117]

I took a US AP history class in high school and with one of the practice AP tests the prompt was about the planned attack on Japan. With the number of planes that they had and the fact they were training their entire population, it would have been a devastating slog for both sides. I think it was MacArthur who said it would take 1 million American lives to take mainland Japan. In college, in a WWII history class, I was a part of a group that did a visualization of the Japanese council at the endnof the war. They were defiant, even after the first bomb. The second one seemed to make them understand what the US could do. Even with all that, we were this close to Japan not surrendering and the army taking over the country by a coup. Its a harsh look at history, but it sadly was the only way to not only end the war, but also stop the Soviets Union from taking massive amounts of Asia.

[@aaronwilson1666]

Not only that, but until the Japanese leaders understand it was ONE bomb per city did they end the war

[@Sonyag1]

Containing communism was a factor for the Americans for sure. Dropping the bomb when they did was to beat the Soviet Union and make Japan surrender to America.

[@100millz4]

You can’t justify dropping a bomb on civilian population sometimes you have to let history take its turn. Power shouldn’t be maintained by one but shifted among the popo

[@jcook003]

I think you meant MacArthur not Macarthy, the general who predicted needing a million troops to invade.

[@richardevans5413]

given the lapanese psychological outlook on the code bushido thr bombs also gave them a way to surrender saying it wasn't the Armies fault that the enemy chose such a dis-honorable weapon. in russia the loyal ists know full well that the dificulties are caused by NATO and The U.S, so they have demonstrations calling for the use of nukes on Nato and the U.S.

[@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.....

[@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.

[@albertorodriguez8144]

These times are so scary.

[@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.

[@MawngSoulSong]

The fact that US had to use two nuclear bomb justify the question

[@abimaellopezmaylord27lopez7]

It was 3 but they didn’t drop it because Japanese surrendered

[@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?

[@colorin81colorado]

Perhaps one aspect not discussed on this video is that by dropping the atom bomb the USA also sent a warning shot to other countries (including China and Russia) who may desired to fill the vacuum left by the loss of so many soldiers and civilians across the war zones of WW2. If the USA was willing to drop two atomic bombs on civilian cities of an enemy country then no one was safe! As tragic as it was, I would say it was the best option available.

[@irpwellyn]

China wasn't even unified at the time

[@colorin81colorado]

@@irpwellyn yes, you are right that China was not unified at the time of WW2 and also Russia was very different to what Russia is today but the people who eventually gain control of both nations were around and would still now understand the influence the USA had or could have taken had they had chosen to do so.

[@BillsFan2024]

The fact that they didnt surrender after the first bomb is all the proof anyone should need to look at. They didn't surrender, so doing something less drastic would have obviosly failed. And as stated in the video, many of the japanese people still wanted the war to continue after the 2nd bomb.

[@DonMeaker]

The Japanese cities targeted were not civilian cities, but rather weapon production centers, occupied and defended by soldiers.

[@tomtobin2840]

@@DonMeaker Also, cities that had not been previously bombed.

[@raygomez2000]

"American" dropped bombs on Japan? That was a very naughty American!

[@justarandom9351]

yesss american

[@robert-joshuamcfaddin7041]

Florida man probably did it

[@zyzzbrah1312]

Well technically it was just one American who pulled the lever to open the bomb hatch on the plane.

[@ProductofNZ]

I met a Japanese man outside the Hiroshima Peace Museum. He said that his mother had survived the bombing and he was born several weeks after the event. His mother was still alive at that time (2011) although she had struggled with cancer. He was protesting the museum because he disagreed with the espoused narrative regarding the reasons for the bombing. (the accepted western position) He spoke english very well and we had a great conversation. I suspect he had many debates with people outside the Museum around the topic.

[@user_is_sasaxi_lalduhsaxi_O4]

nєхt tímє tєll hím tσ вlαmє thαt tσ thєír grєєdч ѕtuввσrn-fσσl єmpєrσr αnd híѕ fєllσw вrαín-wαѕhєd jαpαnєѕє.

[@ProductofNZ]

@@user_is_sasaxi_lalduhsaxi_O4 tell him yourself Amy

[@user_is_sasaxi_lalduhsaxi_O4]

@@ProductofNZ dudє,, ít'ѕ чσur fríєnd, nσt mínє 😄

[@ProductofNZ]

@@user_is_sasaxi_lalduhsaxi_O4 I had an interaction. By your metric, we're friends.

[@user_is_sasaxi_lalduhsaxi_O4]

@@ProductofNZ αnd í wαѕ hσpíng чσu guчѕ hαd αn íntєrαctíσn αgαín ѕσ чσu cσuld tєll hím whαt í'vє mєntíσnєd αвσvє.

[@ivanpkv]

Long story short, the US wanted to drop the atomic bomb on Japan simply because they could. They built and intended to detonate it, causing maximum destruction and loss of lives. It is an absurd argument that the entire population was prepared to fight until the last man, yet when the bombs were dropped, they completely abandoned that philosophy. The detonation of atomic bombs served as revenge for the attack on Pearl Harbor and a warning to the rest of the world not to provoke the US. The US was fortunate enough to complete the bombs before the war ended, but they regretted not finishing the Manhattan Project before WWII concluded in Europe, which would have allowed them to use one against Germany.

[@TomFynn]

They did not "abandon that philosophy" It just that their God-Emperor, who hitherto had signed off every Japanese aggression, finally saw the light. Even so, members of the Imperial familiy had to be sent to IJA/IJN command posts to convince them that yes, it was a surrender.

[@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."

[@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

[@arutka2000]

Ethics aside, my mother, I, and my children would not exist if the Japanese hadn't surrendered when they did. My grandfather was part of the 2nd Marine Division and would likely have been a part of Downfall if it had come to that. And that's after taking part in the battles of Tarawa, Saipan, and Tinian as both a machine gunner and flamethrower.

[@nicholasoh3980]

I salute ur grandpa and his service 🫡

[@NotShowingOff]

Well, invasion wasn’t necessary. It could have lasted many years just bombing Japanese cities. The casualties would have been nowhere as great

[@arutka2000]

@@NotShowingOff No American at the time would have accepted years of basically stalemate. We would have eventually stopped bombing and the Japanese would have started to rebuild. And that rebuilding would have been done with the absolute deepest hatred of the United States, guaranting that another conflict would happen some day.

[@davidford3115]

@@arutka2000 Indeed. People seem to forget how quickly the Japanese initially built up their military power. And the speed of the post war rebuilding further drives home your point.

[@markspott1741]

These ppl only know how to condemn everything and everyone that came before them!

[@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.

[@alanrobinson4318]

My father and uncles were in WWII. My dad was in the Pacific theater. He never outright stated the horrors he saw, but intimated at the inhuman things he saw. As the facts came out of the atrocities in China, the Philippines and other territories, it's no wonder an overwhelming response was needed. And, you must understand the mindset of the Japanese at that time. I've read treatises of studies done years after the surrender, that concluded that they never truly believed they were concurred. Simply because we never invaded and won on their homeland. It's a different kind of mindset from western thinking.

[@samhoyle9157]

That’s kinda goofy, “we surrendered before they invaded us so we never got conquered. Woooo go Japan!”

[@alanrobinson4318]

@@samhoyle9157 We're talking about an entirely different culture than ours. You can't expect them to carry the same mindset as us. In other parts of the world, our way of thinking, standards and mores seem as incomprehensible to them, as theirs does to us.

[@anna-flora999]

​@@alanrobinson4318 "entirely different culture" That is the exact same mindset that Germany had after ww1. But please, explain to me how Germany isn't a western culture.

[@alanrobinson4318]

@@anna-flora999 Apples and oranges. My grandmother, whose maiden name was Schrumph, visited Germany in between WW1 and WW2. She talked about how downtrodden the country was. How she saw a woman run to scoop a piece of bread, out of the gutter because she was starving. Read the history of that nation. And the eventual rise of the national socialist party because of it, that eventually led to the second world war. It's different than the Japanese Imperialism. Didn't you get this in your history classes in school ???

[@anna-flora999]

@@alanrobinson4318 you specifically talked about the aspect of "we weren't beaten because they didn't take the homeland". That was basically the same mindset. Never heard of the dolchstoßlegende?

[@bobhart677]

One important fact you "forgot" to mention was that the US only had the two bombs, and a big part of the reason Hirohito surrendered was the idea that the US had tens of thousands of more atomic bombs and would not hesitate to reduce the entire nation of Japan to dust if they did not surrender.

[@buckhorncortez]

The United States had two bombs that could be assembled - Little Boy and Fatman by early August. The initiator and pit for the third bomb had been sent to California for shipment to Tinian. The bomb casings, x-units, radars, and barometers needed for a third bomb were already on Tinian. A third bomb would have been ready for use by August 24, 1945. A uranium bomb and two more plutonium bombs would have been ready by the end of September. The projected production was five bombs per month for November and December. A pilot who had been captured by the Japanese was questioned as to how many atomic bombs the Americans had. He had no idea what they were talking about and made up a story that the U.S. had hundreds of bombs and Tokyo would be the next target.

[@chvfd687]

They started it,we finished it.

[@bankruptbillionaire3876]

Something like that

[@RedCommunistDragon]

The Soviets finished it.

[@omarionbayley9721]

@@RedCommunistDragon They didn't but where are them now🤣?

[@brandondavis7777]

@@RedCommunistDragon the soviets are irrelevant to the Pacific area.

[@Xyrel24]

@@omarionbayley9721 it evolved 1991 :(

[@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.

[@charlesrichardson8635]

Estimated US losses was just under 1M. Estimated Japanese losses, military and civilian, was 10M+. However the Japanese Emperor did want to surrender, but leader of the government would not allow it.

[@spanglish_official]

They would have capitulated without the nukes. They only wanted to keep Hirohito

[@spanglish_official]

@Phil Failla The USA were pushing for unconditional surrender

[@farguy2517]

Japan killed a lot of civilians in China (literally ate them )

[@ianschmutzler8177]

@@spanglish_official No. While there wasn't any consensus on surrender terms, many government officials wanted some combination of the right to disarm their own military, the right to try their own war criminals, a few occupied islands back, or Korea and Taiwan(at this point, both were still in Japanese hands). If the emperor hadn't ordered a surrender, they likely would have insisted on some combination of these terms. The military had representatives in key places in the government, and could stonewall any surrender talks if it wanted, and the military was staunchly opposed to surrender.

[@The_Honcho]

@@spanglish_official want to explain why the military attempted a coup against the Emperor after he demanded surrender? They would have rather died in arms reach of their enemy surrounded by a mountain of their dead than capitulate.

[@nickhanke1]

I love how you conveniently forget to talk about how they would make the civilians in Japan fanatical about their mistrust to US soldiers. They used to literally tell their civilians horror stories about them and their treatment to POW so that actual parents would throw their kids over cliffs just not to be captured. You can literally see whole family's jump to their deaths when they see Americans coming, it's awful.

[@PhatPhinx]

all while unit 731 was operating no doubt

[@Armand358]

I love how you forget to tell how Japaneses were more cruel then nazis with their experiments on China.

[@Woaaa8]

Why’d you say “conveniently forget” as if he has to know every single small detail 💀

[@ToreDL87]

@@Woaaa8 It's a pretty important fact pertaining to the topic, so yes, conveniently forget seems apt.

[@UnroyalYeet]

@@Woaaa8mothers throwing their children off of cliffs by the hundreds isn’t a small detail. it showed how they had become so hateful of americans and the horror stories they had been fed by their government. it would have played a massive part of a land invasion.

[@michaelsheeder148]

Hindsight is always 20/20.

[@asherwestcott9937]

If japan didn’t even respond to one bomb being dropped, they definitely wouldn’t have responded to a demonstration.

[@dero2209]

I disagree with the point of waiting for the Soviet because it could have led to basically the Soviets and the ally forces meeting and say all right now we have to split Japan because we both are conquering it which may have led to further conflict

[@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

[@tommyfunny8998]

Rip to the Pearl Harbor victims and the Japanese victims that died in the bomb attacks in Japan 🇯🇵 ❤️👍🏾🇺🇸

[@eliasmelendrez39]

Amen brother 🙏 😢

[@superaleksibros2]

War has no winners and will never have. I hope there will be a day we all finally understand that. R.I.P.

[@aroach7461]

Oh no. It's okay. Because the US did it. Didn't hear any of these kind words when war broke out in Syria or Afghanistan. Nah you don't care. Nobody does. Besides war is good.

[@BSpinoza210]

You know who doesn't care about the US atomic bombings? The victims of Nanking. There was no way to break the will of Japan to wage war other than an extreme and overwhelming show of force. There was some concern that the Japanese wouldn't relent, even after the first bomb, which is why the second one was deployed, however, even after that one there were concerns that the Japanese still wouldn't relent. If they hadn't then the plan was to engage in atomic warfare, dropping bombs all along the landing zones and over every major population center as a precursor to invasion.

[@jam7547]

We as A country should have waited until. We. Had 100. Bombs. And than dropped 50 on Japan.. the other 50 would have been a determent for others

[@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.

[@FFA441]

Absolutely mad to think alot of our grandfathers including mine, were in those boats on okinawa

[@EddyA1337]

My great uncle died at the Battle of Iwo Jima. My own grandfather was pushed out of the draft as he had been accepted to medical school, and the Navy didn't want to accidentally end a family line. My grandfather, who is 95 and still alive still mourns his brother. He ended up having 11 children. I now have 35+ cousins not including 2nd cousins.

[@jasperjordan6972]

@@EddyA1337 lost my grandfather last year he was a mechanic in WW2 and a dam good one. Taught my dad everything he knew. he taught me and I'll teach my boys. my advice to you is ask him about the good old days you'll never know how bad you want to when he's gone 🇺🇸

[@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

[@elterga6224]

As Teddy Roosevelt once said, “walk softly and pack a big stick”. Retaliation should be swift and violent, and leave your enemy either utterly destroyed or crippled beyond repair. You shouldn’t have to keep your foot on your enemy’s neck, you should be confident that they won’t get back up. As for the civilian casualties, it’s a much more painless way to go than what the Japanese inflicted on the Chinese.

[@benjamindeh873]

Some people would call that a coward's attitude.

[@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.

[@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.

[@TheBestDog]

*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.*

[@davidford3115]

I am glad you understand those nuances and details. I am amazed at how many people arguing against the use don't understand the critical details you point out.

[@questerperipatetic4861]

Quite right, your fact. And that still irritates to this day. But I believe he never said the word "surrender" because after all the years of indoctrination against it there would have been those who either wouldn't believe it was him, never having heard his voice before, or that he had lost his mind and couldn't really mean it. I'm sure he chose his words carefully to end his people from fighting and not as a big FU to the US. And it did work, after all.

[@mikej9470]

Always expect it to be perfect. As usual, it was!

[@DonMeaker]

Japan had no word for surrender. The idea didn't exist in their culture.

[@caramanico1]

Everybody seems to downplay the other massive bombings of Japan (or even the fire-bombing of Cologne, etc...). Probably because so many died or otherwise suffered because of one bomb. If a massive firebombing had the same results, nobody would have noticed. But look up Cologne, Germany sometime and the fire-bombing campaign against Japan. There was no way we would have ended up losing this campaign either way, but the result would have been hundreds of millions from both sides killed over another 2-3 years or so.

[@Stephenc35753]

Yeah, in a lot of ways the fire bombing of cities in ww2 was actually worse than the nukes.

[@CamAteUrKFC]

Everyone also seems to overlook the sheer attrocities commited by the japanese.

[@robp7652]

Everyone remember to overlook the brutality of the Allies as well. Many war crimes on both sides.

[@harrywalker968]

2-3 yrs,,??..isnt the u.s still at war,,it hasnt stoped since..$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$..oil..

[@Columbine-en3qc]

Hundreds of millions? What are you talking about?

[@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.

[@shades9723]

The Kyūjō incident is a eye opener for me, I had know idea that a coup happened after the bombs were dropped

[@El_Doño_Da_Word]

Hiro Hito wanted to surrender and wanted to discuss peace talks during the war. But he had opposition and there were assassination attempts.

[@royhorn2782]

This is old news. It is a good reason to believe that had to use the bombs in order to convince the never surrender factions of the Military as well as the general population that they literally were going to have no one or nothing left if they didn't give up. The Japanese are a very resilient people who had known no conqueror. They simply weren't going to give up. The threat of losing everything was the only real thing that could make them realize the futility of continuing the war. The fact that Tokyo was slated to be next on the primary target list, probably had a lot to do with calling it quits. Russia may have been able to muster enough boats and planes to make an invasion of the Japanese homeland possible, but it would have been a very slow and clumsy effort. They certainly wouldn't have the means to transport many if any tanks and artillery pieces. So they wou have been forced to rely on sheer manpower. The Russians truly would not have been effective enough to force surrender without the the bombs being used. The Japanese people didn't necessarily hate the Americans. They absolutely loathed Russians, however. So, surrender to Russia would have been inconceivable if they were attacking the homeland. Russian entry into the conflict with Japan might actually have caused more problems with seeking to get Japan to surrender. But, Russia was truly only interested in taking control of the areas in China and Mongolia that Japan had conquered. Resources and influence over that area meant more than engaging in a very costly Japanese homeland invasion. It's a very difficult mental exercise, when second guessing history as it was understood when it was being made. Hindsight can be 20/20 but hindsight has very little to do with the here and now when you are being forced to make decisions about life and death, as well as, seeking the best possible outcome in a given circumstance.

[@shellysmith4369]

Japan wouldn't surrender after Hiroshima and still planned to fight to the last man, woman and child. By what logic would the mere threat of some Soviet troops invading cause the Emperor Hirohito to surrender?

[@imrunningoutofnames2413]

They’ll threaten him with the power of communism

[@troydgwyn6146]

The fact that Japan had chemical & biological weapons wasn't mentioned. Also, Japan had previously displayed a willingness to use these weapons during their campaigns in China & Manchuria. Then there's also the fact that Japanese scientist performed testing on Chinese civilians to increase the lethality of their chemical & biological arsenal.

[@muslimchip5380]

Issue is the argument is did Japan citizens deserve it not the military. Personally one thing they missed out was the cities were warned they were going to be bomb and Japan didn’t allow their citizens to pay mind to the fliers sent out

[@troydgwyn6146]

@@muslimchip5380 My Aunt was a little girl when Okinawa was invaded. Toward the end of the war, the term "civilian" was misnomer in Japan. Even school children were being trained.

[@mtwata]

Then the USA proceeds to use agent orange in Vietnam. Lol

[@aycc-nbh7289]

@@muslimchip5380 The beginning of the video mentioned that the civilians and military may have essentially been one and the same, since guerillas would inevitably fight to defend the old ways or be called up to service through a draft given how large the support for the war effort was among the Japanese public.

[@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.

[@bayanimanansala5220]

I could be wrong, but I read somewhere while at Pearl Harbor tour that the US didn’t have a 3rd bomb. This could have meant that a demonstration was not an option because they just might not have enough just in case Japan didn’t surrender after the demonstration. I am also under the impression that the willingness to use the bombs played a big factor in Japan’s surrender.

[@protoculturejunkie]

We had the plutonium core for a third bomb. It wouldn't have been ready for use in a weapon until after the 16th tough. That core later became the "Demon Core" after it killed two scientists in Los Alamos.

[@Qfishtail]

Thats true

[@DonMeaker]

There is a difference between destruction of a city with 600 bombers, and 3 bombers. The Japanese noticed the difference.

[@iansneddon2956]

@@DonMeaker Not really. Or certainly not everyone on the council. The faction wanting to end the war in human wave attacks on the beachheads was aware after Hiroshima that it was an atomic bomb. They figured that USA would build more bombs but not many more (their own nuclear program indicated these weapons were very expensive with difficulties producing the needed isotopes in quantity). So they expected to shrug off a few more atomic bombs while waiting for the invasion. While devastating, the atomic bombings fell short of the destruction dealt months before in the bombing of Tokyo. The only reason there were cities the size of Hiroshima and Nagasaki untouched by this time was a policy of deliberately sparing a short list of cities as potential targets of the atomic bomb. The USAAF would soon be running out of population centers of over 30,000 people to bomb. Much of Japan was devastated and there was a massive homeless crisis. I think the leaders didn't care about the loss of life and figured cities could be rebuilt, but cared more about their status and the status of the Emperor. There is an argument that the Soviet declaration of war was more influential in the decision to surrender. Not in the defeat, Japan was defeated by USA in the summer of 1944. They had no hope of winning the war. There was a faction that wanted to get USA to sit down and negotiate an end to the war. They had tried other nations to help broker a peace and their last hope was persuading Stalin to help broker peace talks. The sudden Soviet declaration of war ended this hope and left this faction with no alternative to avoiding surrender. It was the leader of this faction (Suzuki Kantaro) who presented the argument that Japan must surrender and pushed for Hirohito to make a decision on this. (Suzuki Kantaro did not approach the emperor after the bombing of Hiroshima. He knew about the bombing but was waiting for news about whether Stalin would help). Basically, surrender was seen as the worst option so they would keep putting it off if there was another straw they could grasp at to end the war without surrender. If the Soviets had not invaded and did not for a few weeks, we might have had a third bombing and the leaders still waiting to see if there was an alternative to surrender.

[@DonMeaker]

@@iansneddon2956 the Japanese phycists knew the difficulty of separating U235/233 isotopes by density, and the relative ease of separating U from Pu chemically. They communicated that to the imperial cabinet, half of which voted to end the war, which threw the decision to Hirohito.

[@karlos1096]

I feel like the fact that the Japanese didn’t surrender immediately after the first bomb says a lot, like If it took us 2 bombs on 2 different cities you think they would have surrendered because of a show of force?

[@anna-flora999]

Two cities with nukes and many, many more with incendiary bombs before that already.

[@Newdivide]

Three notable survivors of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima survived to tell their tale: 1. Keiji Nakazawa, the manga artist behind barefoot gen. He was in the city when the bomb was dropped. Most of his family members who had not evacuated died as a result of the explosion after they became trapped under the debris of their house, except for his mother and an infant sister (who died several weeks later whether from malnutrition or radiation from her mother afterward) 2. Tsutomu Yamaguchi is best known for surviving two atomic bombs. He was in Hiroshima on a business trip when the first bomb detonated. After that, he went home to Nagasaki & survived once again, this time with injuries 3. Sadako Sasaki was two years old when the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. She, unfortunately, developed leukemia ten years after the bomb was dropped. While hospitalized, Sasaki's friend, Chizuko Hamamoto, told her the legend of the cranes and she set herself a goal of folding 1,000 of them, which was believed to grant the folder a wish. Although she had plenty of free time during her days in the hospital, Sasaki lacked paper, so she used medicine wrappings and whatever else she could scrounge; including going to other patients' rooms to ask for the paper from their get-well presents. Her best friend, Chizuko, also brought paper from school for Sasaki to use. Sadly, her condition progressively worsened and she died on October 25, 1955. A memorial called a children’s peace memorial was unveiled in 1958 in the Hiroshima peace memorial park to commemorate Sadako and the children affected by the bomb

[@DonMeaker]

There is no such memorial for the children of Nanking or Manilla, killed by atrocities committed by the Japanese, without any military justification.

[@Kynemon]

@@DonMeaker or the women and children in Vietnam killed by US Soldiers.

[@randomhiphop5055]

@@DonMeaker oh man here we go

[@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.