Slashdot Mirror

The comments by the above are often made decades after the war, one in particular admits "I arrived at this conclusion after talking with a number of Japanese officials who had been closely associated with the decision of the then Japanese government, to reject the ultimatum, as it was presented."

Yes, some of these quotes are evidence that hindsight is 20/20, but that still counters your claims in your previous post that the Japanese would have continued to fight on. And then there are the quotes like these:

When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb.

That's right, MacArthur said that if he was asked his opinion at that time he would not have seen a reason to use the bomb.

the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary

In this one Eisenhower said that he thought the dropping of the bomb was completely unnecessary as soon as he heard the news.

While the Emperor's safety and symbolic position was permitted to continue after occupation it was done so **after** an investigation into whether the Emperor was responsible for war crimes. We could not have determined the Emperor's status with respect to being a war criminal until after boots on the ground, i.e. after surrender.

The actual instrument of surrender said nothing about an investigation into war crimes. In fact, there was no mention of crimes at all. Regarding the Emperor, it said

We hereby undertake for the Emperor, the Japanese Government, and their successors to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration in good faith, and to issue whatever orders and take whatever action may be required by the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers or by any other designated representative of the Allied Powers for the purpose of giving effect to that declaration.

There was also a tacit agreement along with the final surrender that the Emperor would not under any circumstances be investigated for war crimes:
http://www.pacificwar.org.au/J...
http://www.japanfocus.org/-her...

Your reference suggests no such thing, unless you are making a very strange interpretation of Halsey's flippant comment about scientists and their toys. While the value of deterring possible Russian aggression was a consideration it was secondary, and as history shows not necessarily an unfounded fear.

No, this reference does not suggest it, but it is widely known that Hiroshima was spared conventional bombing so that if it was attacked with a nuclear device, it would be easier to analyze the effects. Since several generals from the previous source said was of limited strategic value, this seems to be the only reason for the bombing Hiroshima over a more militarily significant target, or (if demoralizing the Japanese was the only objective) an unpopulated area.

You've gone from strange interpretations to just plain making up nonsense. In the future you may want to restate your irrational belief that Truman considered them experimental subjects into perha

http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/top_e.html

Can't find online copies. Don't recall the name of the docs to search for. Copies of them are at the above museum. Definitely worth going if you're in Japan.

Meanwhile the fact that IBM machines were used in the development of a weapon that could kill about 140,000 people at once is uncontroversial.

Yeah, the fallout would render the areas as uninhabitable as Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Here, try the Hiroshima tourism and Nagasaki tourism sites.

Many people believe that any radioactive event will render an area lifeless for tens of thousands of years.

"Hiroshima is contaminated with radiation. It will be barren of life and nothing will grow for 75 years." These words were spoken in an interview with Dr. Harold Jacobsen, a scientist with the Manhattan Project (the A-bomb development project), and printed in the Washington Post on August 8, 1945.

In Hiroshima, they have that quote on a plaque at the foot of a tree, scorched from the bottom up to a point where it had been broken by the blast, and with the trunk having re-sprouted there and having grown into a full canopy since.

Scientists are sometimes wrong in their assumptions.

The weapons exist. Does everyone has to have one? Probably you just need one stupid with enough power to start such a stupid thing...

I do believe.. there are lots of stupids with power

Just in case.. I got this http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/peacesite/indexE. html, and you can check http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/peacesite/English /Stage2/S2-5E.html... is it true?

The weapons exist. Does everyone has to have one? Probably you just need one stupid with enough power to start such a stupid thing...

I do believe.. there are lots of stupids with power

Just in case.. I got this http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/peacesite/indexE. html, and you can check http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/peacesite/English /Stage2/S2-5E.html... is it true?

The link between radiation and cancer has much to do with the increased mutation rate of DNA caused by radiation, which is natural since most cancers are caused by changes in the DNA of a cell. I find it difficult to see why you try to deny this?

It is too bad, but I guess because of the Soviet Union and the turmul in the years after the Soviet Union disintegrated, there has not been done real studies on the wildlife of Chernobyl. (There has been done many studies on the radiaton effects on humans in Chernobyl.) But since all life is related to DNA, there is no doubt that the animals and plants in the area has been seriously affected. Can you show any scientific study that has shown no impact on nuclear radiation on wildlife, we would like to hear about it. And remember, radiation is one thing, but plutonium is one of the mosth leathal chemical poisons in its own right, so if the radiations doesn't get you, the radioactiv chemicals is there for you to worry about the. Again, it is quite natural that plutonium and other radioactive isotops made in a nuclear plant are poisonous, since because they don't excist naturally in nature, organisms have not evolved protections against them.

Actually no. I am wrong It was US.

And the largest thermonuclear device ever exploded in the atmosphere period was done by the Soviets in 1961 and was ~50MT.

There's a little problem with that. Total destruction means that not all the victims are known. In Vietnam, there were records of the U.S. soldiers which were sent there and who did not return.