This video brings very little to the discussion.

First, he made some very big assumptions, the largest being that the Japanese would continue to have the will and resources to fight. Second is that the views of military leaders represent the views of the country. Third, while not an assumption, is never mentioning the fact that the Soviet Union would have an extraordinary effect on the Pacific Theater.


First, what evidence does the speaker bring to conclude that the Japanese would have kept on fighting? That death tolls were rising the closer the US forces got to Japan and a few specially selected quotes from hardcore military leaders?

First I will give a quote of my own by the Emperor after the battle of Okinawa,

"I was told that the iron from bomb fragments dropped by the enemy was being used to make shovels. This confirmed my opinion that we were no longer in a position to continue the war."

Second, here is a view of their economic standing at the time.

"The destruction of the Japanese merchant fleet, combined with the strategic bombing of Japanese industry, had wrecked Japan's war economy. Production of coal, iron, steel, rubber and other vital supplies were only a fraction of their pre-war levels."

Third, it is also documented that Stalin deceived the Japanese into believing that the Soviets would help a peace agreement so they could gain land. It is also documented that the Japanese looked to the Soviets for peace. Another quote from Japanese ambassador to Moscow.

"His Majesty the Emperor, mindful of the fact that the present war daily brings greater evil and sacrifice upon the peoples of all the belligerent powers, desires from his heart that it may be quickly terminated. But so long as England and the United States insist upon unconditional surrender, the Japanese Empire has no alternative but to fight on with all its strength for the honor and existence of the Motherland."

Fourth, it is finally documented that the Japanese even tried to reach a direct peace agreement with the United States.

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arch.../msg00120.html

(I'm not sure how reliable this source is but I have read this in books getting this information from first hand sources)

So basically, the idea that Japan would never have surrendered is complete bullshit. Japan was looking to surrender under the conditions that they could keep the monarchy while Truman and the allies would only accept unconditional surrender. This past argument was a while ago so I don't entirely remember what I believed at the time but I think it was the point that many lives could have been saved if conditional surrender was sought instead of unconditional. There was a large divide among the Japanese at the time, though saying that, it could have gone either way. But from the sources, it seems like at least some of the Japanese leadership were looking for surrender while it is also obvious that some were not as well.


To add some further information regarding the video. The atomic bomb was not the sole factor for the surrender either. As mentioned earlier, Japanese had very little resources. Two, the Soviets invaded around the same time as the atomic bomb droppings and that would have tremendous effects on the Japanese. Third, after the Japanese surrender, some of the military leaders that were obsessed with making sure that the emperor did not surrender attempted a military coup on August 12 to the 15.


That video is complete shit and only responded to elementary critiques of the atomic bomb dropping. To make it clear, I really don't have a strong opinion on this topic because I do realize the effects of the firebombing and it is extremely difficult to not go into that subject while talking about the atomic bomb but I do believe that Truman's pride and obsession with unconditional surrender led to the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. I also do not believe this is uncommon among leaders.



Uh huh. Well, as most teachers admit, Wikipedia is a great source to start researching for topics since many pages have very well documented sources. For example, if I did this topic for school I would read and document the sources that were cited in Wikipedia to get a start on my project. Also, I would actually do research because I have different standards on a graded assignment then an internet forum. This topic, link below, is very well cited and seems legitimate. If you disagree, show me how.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrend...an#cite_note-3

Sure well cited and seems legit. Wiki is a good place to start. Vetted sources are harder to find. I'm only saying that to put myself across as a well studied man only citing wiki and internet sources is not working for the crowd I hang out with, nor is it working for me.

Will? The army that would rather commit suicide than surrender? You don't have a clue about the Jap culture of the era.
You reaffirmed my first statement, the military was the country. There were no views other than the military.
C'mon, with what? We were running a two front war because we had a chance to build an unbeatable war machine while the Russians were getting beat the fuck up. They had all they could handle just getting to Berlin, plus a lot of new territory they desperately wanted to hang on to. Their ability to stage a major attack on Japan was severely limited.

Japanese culture has very little to do with this. The Japanese leadership knew they could not beat the United States from the beginning and after Okinawa, many saw the war as a lost cause. The general population would have kept on fighting, but the leadership, while making some really stupid decisions, for the most part did not believe they could hold off the United States and Soviet Union without any oil.

It is shown that the Japanese went to Soviet Union many times looking for peace and were extremely divided themselves on the issue. The point is that the Japanese would seem to accept conditional surrender but not unconditional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_War_Council_(Japan)

At the ending of the war, three wanted to surrender and three wanted to keep on fighting. Guess which ones were on which side.

To the general public, yes, the military had complete control but not in the government. Japanese leadership was extremely divided on the issue and many in the military did not want surrender even after the emperor changed his stance, hence the attempted coup.

Besides the million men they could have contributed to the front....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchur...ration#Soviets

The fuck it doesn't, it's got everything to do with it. It was a culture of followers, order takers, don't rock the boat, don't make waves. The Japs did what they were told without question. Leadership? The military was leading the country, you think they started a war they knew they could not win? For what purpose? It is shown the Japs were in Washington looking for peace when Pearl Harbor was bombed. The duplicity of the japs in morning coats is well know. They pulled the same shit destroying the Russian fleet in 1908.
Nice link.
Two atomic bombs and half wanted to keep fighting. I guess we forgot to say "Simon Says, give up".
When the teacher wants to do math, it doesn't fucking matter that the first graders want recess.

Wrong, they couldn't hold on to Manchuria if they moved those soldiers out, but it's a moot point because they didn't have the food or supplies to support them. The Russian soldiers have to live off the land like Sherman in GA.
It's a long swim to Japan, the only way the Russians could have gotten there is if we moved them and that wasn't going to happen. They might have been able to get something going in '47, maybe even late '46, but not '45.

End of the war.

That is true but I have never once focused on the Japanese population. I have only focused on the people giving the orders when I say "will to continue". I have given you many quotes of leaders who thought continuing the war was pointless. That supports my statement.

Unless you think that the leaders couldn't think from themselves. Which in case I must ask who was giving orders then? God?

Pearl Harbor was a gamble that ended badly for the Japanese. They knew they could never take the United States head on so they gambled pearl harbor for time and resources they did not get.

It is not hard to see why the United States overtook the Japanese. Our resources, manpower, and economy was tenhold theirs.

Good point but in both those situations (Pearl Harbor and Russian fleet), they Japanese made an offensive move. There was no possible way they could make an offensive move on the United States after Okinawa, not possible.

Saying I want peace has a much different effect when you are planning on blindsiding someone versus you are on your back get your face smashed into the ground. The second has a 95% chance of being more sincere.

Nice response....

Just because information came from wikipedia doesn't mean it is false. Plus, I have most of my information from books that I cannot link too so I am doing the best I can without putting in unneeded time providing more reliable sources.

Japanese leaders (generalization) made their own decisions, the population were the sheep.

Explain this. I don't know how that makes any sense to my quote.

The Soviets were already there. The mobilized right after they took over Berlin. They were in the Kuril Islands in 1945.