After visiting the WWII museum in New Orleans I have thought it was good the bomb was dropped because the plan was for many more D-Day invasions that would have made Omaha Beach and Normandy a warm up act.
With those types of war plans, dropping the bomb made more sense.
Although Truman may not have realized it, the choice of whether to use the atomic bomb was probably the most important decision any commander in chief ever had to make. I share the moral revulsion that many people of our time feel against atomic weaponry, but imagine the revulsion Americans would have felt against Truman if he had decided not to use the bomb and an invasion had cost the lives of a half million or more Americans and Japanese. The Americans were among the WWII veterans who returned home and created the greatest era of national prosperity the world has ever seen from 1950 to 1980. In August, 1945, my 98-year-old uncle was on a Navy ship poised off the coast of Japan, waiting for the order to invade which never came. He has been a highly productive and respected citizen ever since he returned home after the war. It would have been a shame to have lost his eighty years of contributions to American society (not to mention the lives of my cousins and their children and grandchildren) if he had been lost in an invasion that was no longer needed. And then multiply him by a couple of hundred thousands or more.
Truman had two choices: whether to drop the bomb or not. Horrible as it is to contemplate, Truman made the better choice.
From what I recall, based on the death toll of the battle for Okinawa, the US military determined that an invasion of the main islands would mean the loss of the entire Marine First Division on the first day- 22,000 men! "casualty estimates for an entire subjugation of the home islands for American forces ranged from 220,000 to several million, and estimates of Japanese military and civilian casualties ran from the millions to the tens of millions."
The firebombing of Dresden Germany killed nearly 25,000 people. The A bombs killed 3-12 times more people if one includes deaths later due to radiation (140,000 people in Hiroshima and 74,000 people in Nagasaki by the end of the year.)
The argument that using the bomb was morally wrong was due to the fact that Japan did offer to surrender as long as they were able to keep their emperor as head of state. If I am not mistaken these overtures were made through the Russians but the US and other allies were committed to unconditional surrender. And ultimately, under Supreme commander McArthur, the Japanese ended up with an emperor as head of state anyway.
Also argued was that deploying the bombs was a way to intimidate Stalin.
I still tend to lean toward the military argument- losing an entire Marine regiment in one day ? Intelligence reported steady build up of Japanese military on the home islands including moving troops from Manchuria back to Japan.
As bad as the atomic bombs were, Truman made the right decision.
After visiting the WWII museum in New Orleans I have thought it was good the bomb was dropped because the plan was for many more D-Day invasions that would have made Omaha Beach and Normandy a warm up act.
With those types of war plans, dropping the bomb made more sense.
Although Truman may not have realized it, the choice of whether to use the atomic bomb was probably the most important decision any commander in chief ever had to make. I share the moral revulsion that many people of our time feel against atomic weaponry, but imagine the revulsion Americans would have felt against Truman if he had decided not to use the bomb and an invasion had cost the lives of a half million or more Americans and Japanese. The Americans were among the WWII veterans who returned home and created the greatest era of national prosperity the world has ever seen from 1950 to 1980. In August, 1945, my 98-year-old uncle was on a Navy ship poised off the coast of Japan, waiting for the order to invade which never came. He has been a highly productive and respected citizen ever since he returned home after the war. It would have been a shame to have lost his eighty years of contributions to American society (not to mention the lives of my cousins and their children and grandchildren) if he had been lost in an invasion that was no longer needed. And then multiply him by a couple of hundred thousands or more.
Truman had two choices: whether to drop the bomb or not. Horrible as it is to contemplate, Truman made the better choice.
From what I recall, based on the death toll of the battle for Okinawa, the US military determined that an invasion of the main islands would mean the loss of the entire Marine First Division on the first day- 22,000 men! "casualty estimates for an entire subjugation of the home islands for American forces ranged from 220,000 to several million, and estimates of Japanese military and civilian casualties ran from the millions to the tens of millions."
The firebombing of Dresden Germany killed nearly 25,000 people. The A bombs killed 3-12 times more people if one includes deaths later due to radiation (140,000 people in Hiroshima and 74,000 people in Nagasaki by the end of the year.)
The argument that using the bomb was morally wrong was due to the fact that Japan did offer to surrender as long as they were able to keep their emperor as head of state. If I am not mistaken these overtures were made through the Russians but the US and other allies were committed to unconditional surrender. And ultimately, under Supreme commander McArthur, the Japanese ended up with an emperor as head of state anyway.
Also argued was that deploying the bombs was a way to intimidate Stalin.
I still tend to lean toward the military argument- losing an entire Marine regiment in one day ? Intelligence reported steady build up of Japanese military on the home islands including moving troops from Manchuria back to Japan.