At 04:36 AM 2/4/96 -0500, James M. Cobb wrote:
Neither dropping nuclear weapons on Japanese cities nor an invasion of Japan was necessary to secure surrender of the Japanese government.
After the first nuclear bomb was dropped, the Japanese government held a cabinet meeting in which they summoned Nishina, head of the atomic program, and asked him if he could duplicate atomic weapons within a few months. After two nuclear weapons had been dropped on Japan, the cabinet concluded that Japan faced utter destruction with nuclear weapons, and some advocated surrender. But according to emperor Hirohito "At the time of the surrender, there was no prospect of agreement" Even with two nuclear weapons, surrender was far from assured. It was touch and go: Had the coup succeeded, Japan would not have surrendered, and a considerably more nuclear bombing would have been necessary. The bullet holes in the imperial palace testify that even after two nuclear bombs, there was a substantial faction of the government determined not to surrender. It was certainly true that Japan was defeated, and reasonable people may disagree on justice of using nuclear weapons under these circumstances, but to claim, as Alperovitz claims, that Japan was on the verge of surrender, is not a mere difference of opinion on the interpretation of the facts, but a simple, crude, barefaced, blatant lie. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com