The Bombing of Nagasaki August 9, 1945: The Untold Story

[Faryn Balyncd]

The Bombing of Nagasaki August 9, 1945: The Untold Story

by Gary G. Kohls, M.D.



. . . It had been only three (3) days since the first bomb, a uranium bomb, had decimated Hiroshima on August 6, with chaos and confusion in Tokyo, where the fascist military government and the Emperor had been searching for months for a way to an honorable end of the war which had exhausted the Japanese to virtually moribund status. (The only obstacle to surrender had been the Truman administration's insistence on unconditional surrender, which meant that the Emperor Hirohito, whom the Japanese regarded as a deity, would be removed from his figurehead position in Japan — an intolerable demand for the Japanese.)

The Russian army was advancing across Manchuria with the stated aim of entering the war against Japan on August 8, so there was an extra incentive to end the war quickly: the US military command did not want to divide any spoils or share power after Japan sued for peace.

The US bomber command had spared Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Kokura from the conventional bombing that had burned to the ground 60+ other major Japanese cities during the first half of 1945. One of the reasons for targeting relatively undamaged cities with these new weapons of mass destruction was scientific: to see what would happen to intact buildings — and their living inhabitants — when atomic weapons were exploded overhead. . . .





. . . With instructions to drop the bomb only on visual sighting, Bock's Car arrived at Kokura, which was clouded over. So after circling three times, looking for a break in the clouds, and using up a tremendous amount of valuable fuel in the process, it headed for its secondary target, Nagasaki.

Nagasaki is famous in the history of Japanese Christianity. Not only was it the site of the largest Christian church in the Orient, St. Mary's Cathedral, but it also had the largest concentration of baptized Christians in all of Japan. It was the city where the legendary Jesuit missionary, Francis Xavier, established a mission church in 1549, a Christian community which survived and prospered for several generations. However, soon after Xavier's planting of Christianity in Japan, Portuguese and Spanish commercial interests began to be accurately perceived by the Japanese rulers as exploitive, and therefore the religion of the Europeans (Christianity) and their new Japanese converts became the target of brutal persecutions.

Within 60 years of the start of Xavier's mission church, it was a capital crime to be a Christian. The Japanese Christians who refused to recant of their beliefs suffered ostracism, torture and even crucifixions similar to the Roman persecutions in the first three centuries of Christianity. After the reign of terror was over, it appeared to all observers that Japanese Christianity had been stamped out.

However, 250 years later, in the 1850s, after the coercive gunboat diplomacy of Commodore Perry forced open an offshore island for American trade purposes, it was discovered that there were thousands of baptized Christians in Nagasaki, living their faith in a catacomb existence, completely unknown to the government - which immediately started another purge. But because of international pressure, the persecutions were soon stopped, and Nagasaki Christianity came up from the underground. And by 1917, with no help from the government, the Japanese Christian community built the massive St. Mary's Cathedral, in the Urakami River district of Nagasaki.

Now it turned out, in the mystery of good and evil, that St. Mary's Cathedral was one of the landmarks that the Bock's Car bombardier had been briefed on, and looking through his bomb site over Nagasaki that day, he identified the cathedral and ordered the drop.

At 11:02 am, Nagasaki Christianity was boiled, evaporated and carbonized in a scorching, radioactive fireball. The persecuted, vibrant, faithful, surviving center of Japanese Christianity had become ground zero.

And what the Japanese Imperial government could not do in over 200 years of persecution, American Christians did in 9 seconds. The entire worshipping community of Nagasaki was wiped out. . . .



http://medicolegal.tripod.com/kohlsnagasaki-untold-story.htm







Dr. Kohls is the Mid-West coordinator of Every Church A Peace Church (ECAPC), a national, interdenominational movement of Christian peacemakers that are urging their mainline and fundamentalist church brothers and sisters to become more prophetic in their peace and justice ministries. He was instrumental in organizing the movement's April 2001 inaugural conference in Duluth, MN.

[msongs]

1. when you start a war sometimes you have to do intolerable things when you lose nt

[RobertEarl]

4. Back in those days

There were many military men who having been through a few years of war became bloodthirsty. It is no surprise that they would want to see just what was done to Japan. Even more.

I wonder if Japan had the bomb, would they have used it? Imo, yes.

[jimlup]

5. Yes and they did have a nuclear program

And some American intelligence estimated that it was farther along than it actually was. Nevertheless the Americans knew at the time of the Atomic bombings that Japan did not have nuclear weapons.

I'm very interested in learning more of the surrender debate within Japan. I know that there were hawks and doves within the Japanese war council and that Tojo involved the emperor to break the tie after the bombings. The history of this period is extremely interesting to me as it serves to open a window on the only circumstances in which Nuclear weapons have actually been used. Ultimately I feel that the bombings were morally unjustified but then again I feel that arial bombardment in general is unjustified so I guess that puts me towards the pacifist side of the political spectrum.

[sarisataka]

9. One of the best I have read is

Japan's Longest Day http://www.amazon.com/Japans-Longest-Pacific-Research-Society/dp/4770028873
Though it only covers the last 24 hours and not the entire surrender debate. It does summarize some of the prior discussions.

[jimlup]

10. Thanks - yes I'll look into it

[dipsydoodle]

2. Nagasaki marks 68th anniversary of atomic bombing

TOKYO (AP) -- Nagasaki's mayor has criticized Japan's government for failing to sign on to an international nuclear disarmament effort as the country marked the 68th anniversary Friday of the atomic bombing of his city.

Mayor Tomihisa Taue's criticism stemmed from Japan's refusal to sign in April a document in which nearly 80 countries unconditionally pledged to never use nuclear weapons.

He said Japan's inaction "betrayed expectations of the global community."

The document, prepared in Geneva by a U.N. committee, is largely symbolic because none of the signatories possess nuclear weapons. None of the countries known to have a nuclear arsenal including the United States, Russia, India and Pakistan signed it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_JAPAN_NAGASAKI_ANNIVERSARY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-09-03-54-13

[RobertEarl]

3. Rumor has it

That Japan had nuclear bomb making capabilities at Fukushima and that part of the explosions we saw were that bomb material going off.

And they refuse to sign a no-nuclear use document? Hmmmm

[jimlup]

7. very unlikley

The explosions at Fukushima were almost certainly hydrogen gas. The only exception being reactor #4 which may have been something more as evidenced by the strength of the blast. It is highly unlikely that the Japanese government ever was or was at the time of Fukushima in possession of any bomb grade material.

[RobertEarl]

33. "almost certainly hydrogen"

Well you at least admit the 'official' story may NOT be correct.

But it is very likely, as Octafish reports below, that Japan sure is interested in joining the US in the nuclear club.

Most independent reports point to some type of nuclear critcallity at Fukushima. Of course, not only is the place too dangerous to investigate, it is also a place under tight controls as to who can enter.

And there are signs of iodine being emitted; which are signs of nuclear reactions taking place, still.

[jimlup]

35. Oh don't get me wrong...

I believe that there was a criticality event in reactor #4 (as I roughly recall from the time) but don't make the mistake of assuming this was weapons grade material. There is a big difference between reactor grade and weapons grade.

[zappaman]

16. 'Rumor has it"

[Octafish]

29. Fukushima Daiichi Reactor No. 3 used Plutonium-Uranium Oxide Fuel for a reason. Here's what I got...

Fukushima, Plutonium, CIA, and the BFEE: Deep Doo-Doo Four Ways to Doomsday

The story connects a few dots from the present day back to World War II.



War crime, Yakuza, Secret Government. Why not?

Japan’s Nuclear Industry: The CIA Link.

By Eleanor Warnock
June 1, 2012, 10:18 AM JST.
Wall Street Journal Blog

Tetsuo Arima, a researcher at Waseda University in Tokyo, told JRT he discovered in the U.S. National Archives a trove of declassified CIA files that showed how one man, Matsutaro Shoriki, was instrumental in jumpstarting Japan’s nascent nuclear industry.

Mr. Shoriki was many things: a Class A war criminal, the head of the Yomiuri Shimbun (Japan’s biggest-selling and most influential newspaper) and the founder of both the country’s first commercial broadcaster and the Tokyo Giants baseball team. Less well known, according to Mr. Arima, was that the media mogul worked with the CIA to promote nuclear power.

SNIP...

Mr. Shoriki, backed by the CIA, used his influence to publish articles in the Yomiuri that extolled the virtues of nuclear power, according to the documents found by Mr. Arima. Keen on remilitarizing Japan, Mr. Shoriki endorsed nuclear power in hopes its development would one day arm the country with the ability to make its own nuclear weapons, according to Mr. Arima. Mr. Shoriki’s behind-the-scenes push created a chain reaction in other media that eventually changed public opinion.

SNIP…

Mr. Shoriki, backed by the CIA, used his influence to publish articles in the Yomiuri that extolled the virtues of nuclear power, according to the documents found by Mr. Arima. Keen on remilitarizing Japan, Mr. Shoriki endorsed nuclear power in hopes its development would one day arm the country with the ability to make its own nuclear weapons, according to Mr. Arima. Mr. Shoriki’s behind-the-scenes push created a chain reaction in other media that eventually changed public opinion.

CONTINUED...

http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2012/06/01/japans-nuclear-industry-the-cia-link/

After President Carter was out of office, it was pretty much full-steam ahead for the Japanese bomb during the Pruneface Ronnie-Poppy Bush years. Hence, Fukushima Daiichi Number 3 and other select Japanese reactors were set up to process plutonium uranium fuels.

United States Circumvented Laws To Help Japan Accumulate Tons of Plutonium

By Joseph Trento
on April 9th, 2012
National Security News Service

The United States deliberately allowed Japan access to the United States’ most secret nuclear weapons facilities while it transferred tens of billions of dollars worth of American tax paid research that has allowed Japan to amass 70 tons of weapons grade plutonium since the 1980s, a National Security News Service investigation reveals. These activities repeatedly violated U.S. laws regarding controls of sensitive nuclear materials that could be diverted to weapons programs in Japan. The NSNS investigation found that the United States has known about a secret nuclear weapons program in Japan since the 1960s, according to CIA reports.

The diversion of U.S. classified technology began during the Reagan administration after it allowed a $10 billion reactor sale to China. Japan protested that sensitive technology was being sold to a potential nuclear adversary. The Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations permitted sensitive technology and nuclear materials to be transferred to Japan despite laws and treaties preventing such transfers. Highly sensitive technology on plutonium separation from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site and Hanford nuclear weapons complex, as well as tens of billions of dollars worth of breeder reactor research was turned over to Japan with almost no safeguards against proliferation. Japanese scientist and technicians were given access to both Hanford and Savannah River as part of the transfer process.

SNIP...

A year ago a natural disaster combined with a man-made tragedy decimated Northern Japan and came close to making Tokyo, a city of 30 million people, uninhabitable. Nuclear tragedies plague Japan’s modern history. It is the only nation in the world attacked with nuclear weapons. In March 2011, after a tsunami swept on shore, hydrogen explosions and the subsequent meltdowns of three reactors at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant spewed radiation across the region. Like the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan will face the aftermath for generations. A twelve-mile area around the site is considered uninhabitable. It is a national sacrifice zone.

How Japan ended up in this nuclear nightmare is a subject the National Security News Service has been investigating since 1991. We learned that Japan had a dual use nuclear program. The public program was to develop and provide unlimited energy for the country. But there was also a secret component, an undeclared nuclear weapons program that would allow Japan to amass enough nuclear material and technology to become a major nuclear power on short notice.

CONTINUED...

http://www.dcbureau.org/201204097128/national-security-news-service/united-states-circumvented-laws-to-help-japan-accumulate-tons-of-plutonium.html

Those of who have seen The World at War series on the tee vee are familiar with the black and white footage and great narrative chronicling the main events and figures of World War II. One of those episodes was entitled "The Bomb" and featured an interview with John J. McCloy, Assistant Secretary of War to President Roosevelt and President Truman.

Here's part of what Mr. McCloy said about the Atomic Bomb – the use of which he counseled only as a last resort, after warning Japan to surrender (around 7:30 mark of Part 2):

“Besides that, we’ve got a new force, a new type of energy that will revolutionize warfare, destructive beyond any contemplation. I’d said, I’d mention the bomb. Mentioning the bomb, even at that late date, in that select group, was like, it was like they were all shocked. Because it was such a closely guarded secret. It was comparable to mentioning Skull and Bones at Yale – which you’re not supposed to do.”

After the war, McCloy was the United States High Commissioner to Germany, administering the U.S. zone of occupation, making him one of the front-line leaders of the Cold War. In that capacity, one of the questionable things he did was to forgive several NAZI industrialists and war criminals.

The great cartoonist Herb Block, HERBLOCK, depicted McCloy holding open a prison door for a NAZI, while in the background Stalin took a photo (if anyone has a copy or link to the cartoon, I’d be much obliged). About 15 years later, Mr. McCloy served the nation as a member of the Warren Commission.

While he wasn’t a member of Skull and Bones, McCloy certainly worked closely with a bunch of them, including Averell Harriman and Prescott Bush. As a Wall Street and Washington insider, "Mr. Establishment" he was called, Mr. McCloy used the offices of government to centralize power and wealth. That is most un-democratic.

Mother Jones goes into detail:

The Nuclear Weapons Industry's Money Bombs

How millions in campaign cash and revolving-door lobbying have kept America's atomic arsenal off the chopping block.

— By R. Jeffrey Smith, Center for Public Integrity
Mother Jones
Wed Jun. 6, 2012 3:00 AM PDT

Employees of private companies that produce the main pieces of the US nuclear arsenal have invested more than $18 million in the election campaigns of lawmakers that oversee related federal spending, and the companies also employ more than 95 former members of Congress or Capitol Hill staff to lobby for government funding, according to a new report.

The Center for International Policy, a nonprofit group that supports the "demilitarization" of US foreign policy, released the report on Wednesday to highlight what it described as the heavy influence of campaign donations and pork-barrel politics on a part of the defense budget not usually associated with large profits or contractor power: nuclear arms.

As Congress deliberated this spring on nuclear weapons-related projects, including funding for the development of more modern submarines and bombers, the top 14 contractors gave nearly $3 million to the 2012 reelection campaigns of lawmakers whose support they needed for these and other projects, the report disclosed.

Half of that sum went to members of the four key committees or subcommittees that must approve all spending for nuclear arms—the House and Senate Armed Services Committees and the Energy and Water or Defense appropriations subcommittees, according to data the Center compiled from the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics. The rest went to lawmakers who are active on nuclear weapons issues because they have related factories or laboratories in their states or districts.

Members of the House Armed Services Committee this year have sought to erect legislative roadblocks to further reductions in nuclear arms, and also demanded more spending for related facilities than the Obama administration sought, including $100 million in unrequested funds for a new plant that will make plutonium cores for nuclear warheads, and $374 million for a new ballistic missile-firing submarine. The House has approved those requests, but the Senate has not held a similar vote on the 2013 defense bill.

CONTINUED...

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/nuclear-bombs-congress-elections-campaign-donations

It isn't ironic or coincidental. It is the Establishment, the in-group, the Elite, the One-Percent that’s pretty much gotten the lion’s share of the wealth created over the last 50 years. The same group that’s pretty much had their fingers on the atomic button ever since the Bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as profited from the development of nuclear power, nuclear weapons, and the almost continuous state of war since then. For lack of a better term, I call them the BFEE, or War Party.

[geek tragedy]

6. A brazen lie within two sentences of the start

The only obstacle to surrender had been the Truman administration's insistence on unconditional surrender

That, and the fanaticism of the Japanese military, who happened to be the real rulers of Japan, whose representatives on the War Council voted against surrender AFTER Nagasaki, and who nearly pulled off a coup to avoid the surrender AFTER Nagasaki.

But, yeah, it was really those mean old Americans who just refused to be reasonable with the poor Japanese Empire.

He's a not a historian, but he plays one on the Internet.

[jimlup]

8. I think that the original statement in the article was somewhat flawed however ...

There were clearly cracks in the Japanese will to fight on well before the bombings. One has to ask what the moral responsibility of the winning side is even in the case of a horrible war like WWII.

My view is that both sides were being trenchant. There were doves within Japan clearly seeking surrender terms but there were hawks who under the stress of their sure death by suicide or execution insisted on fighting on.

[geek tragedy]

11. Certainly there were cracks, but they were not wide or deep enough

to cause the wall of defiance to crumble.

The role of the winning side is to end the bloody affair as quickly as possible, while ensuring that the defeated would not rise again as a military threat.

[jimlup]

12. Well that's the accepted story by the winners who wrote the history

After some study I'm not convinced actually. I understand the idea that the Americans had towards "winning." It appears not to have been completely practical in the end as the Emperor was maintained (wisely) under the surrender conditions. I would agree however that this article presents a naive version of the surrender debate within Japan at the time of the A bombings.

[geek tragedy]

13. The emperor staying on was one thing--disbanding the Japanese army

and allied occupation were the major sticking points.

If the Japanese were willing to agree to those terms pre-Hiroshima, they did a very, very, very poor job of communicating that. They sent very mixed signals to the Soviets.

78 years later and people are still playing "what if" and speculating in the absence of conclusive evidence. Truman et al didn't have the luxury of going over 8 decades worth of debate and document analysis. Given the experiences in Okinawa and Iwo Jima, one can hardly blame Truman for thinking that the Japanese military was not going to surrender without a game-changer. The fact that the invasion, meaning likely 500,000 American dead, was scheduled indicates they didn't think the Japanese were ready to fall.

They could have been wrong, bottom line is that we'll never know with any degree of certitude.

[jimlup]

14. I understand the various arguments and agree

that we will never know with absolute certainty.

I think though that the "game changer" may actually have been the Soviet declaration of war and not the A bombings themselves. This is clearly debatable as the A bombings provided an additional point for the doves and the Emperor.

Whatever the actual truth is regarding the surrender terms the inhumanity to the civilian population of the Atomic bombings can not be denied or excused by other events surrounding them. It is my opinion that Truman acted immorally. One can justify it perhaps if one follows the current accepted cultural dogma of warfare but I personally can not.

[geek tragedy]

17. re: morality, that gets into what particular moral philosophy one follows

deontologism vs various forms of utilitarianism, etc.

Sometimes there is an absence of moral options. Would it have been more moral to let the war drag out with even more people dying due to bombing raids, starvation, disease, etc?

[jimlup]

22. It isn't necessarily true that it would have

so your point doesn't convince me. Truman could have had his surrender and without the bombings. Had I been in his shoes I would have not resorted to that. I would have tried everything else first - he clearly did not. In fact the evidence suggests he rushed the bombings afraid that the Soviet declaration (which he knew was coming) would result in a Japanese surrender. The Japanese knew that the Soviets might but they were holding out hope that they would not. It must have been a devastating blow when the declaration arrived.

[geek tragedy]

23. It is true that Truman would have eventually had the surrender without the nukes.

But what is not known is what the cost of that surrender would have been.

And the price of waiting was human death. A lot of it. There was still a savage, brutal, unlimited war going on. Conventional bombing was killing 100,000 civilians per month in Japan. Not to mention the death toll from the land war across the Pacific.

[jimlup]

24. So

you go on the record as supporting the A bombings. I go on record as opposing them. So be it.

[geek tragedy]

25. Indeed, what's done is done nt

[LanternWaste]

26. What are the specific, peer-reviewed sources which compel you to remain unconvinced?

What are the specific, peer-reviewed sources which compel you to remain unconvinced of the standard historicity of this series of events?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

19. Exactly. Imagine how many lives would have been saved IF

Didn't WAIT for the NUKES?

[geek tragedy]

21. Yes, if Japan had let the Soviets know that it was willing to surrender, disarm and disband

its military, and subject itself to occupation and rule by the Allies with the sole condition being keeping Hirohito, many lives could have been saved.

But, they never said that, so they cost their own country dearly.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

18. Just because it doesn't conform to the tired old propaganda doesn't mean it's not true

What Truman did in Potsdam, on the advice of his dick Cheney like VP, is well documented, and not in debate.

They decided politically, not due to military necessity, to use the bombs to give them a very clumsy big diplomatic stick.

[geek tragedy]

20. Japan's defeat militarily was not in question, the timing and manner of its surrender were.

War is an extension of politics in any event, so the distinction is bogus. The Japanese military's leadership gave no indication that it was willing to disarm, disband, bow their heads to the foreign enemies, and turn over their leaders for public humiliation in war crimes trials. The civilian foreign minister's nebulous game of footsy with his Soviet counterpart gave no such indication.

Had Japan been willing to surrender unconditionally in every respect but for the emperor, it could have communicated that directly to the Soviets. They chose not to.

[LanternWaste]

27. Much as "Just because it you call it propaganda doesn't mean it's not history"

"Just because it doesn't conform to the tired old propaganda doesn't mean it's not true..."

Much as "Just because it you call it propaganda doesn't mean it's not history"

Six of one, half a dozen of the other... except, history supplies valid, peer-reviewed primary and secondary sources, while you supply us with little more than editorial. (Insert rationalization here...)

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

32. Nah, it's just tired, old propaganda (LINK)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023417433

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

15. Hiroshima is the 2nd most horrid word in the American lexicon

Succeeded only by Nagasaki.

Thanks for sharing

[CK_John]

28. I remember that day because I was in a NYC wading pool on Riverside Drive

and off in the distance there was a low rumble of thunder and my mom got us out of the pool dried us off and started home. On the walk home people were yelling out the windows that the war was ending.

Later that day when the news came about the second atomic bomb my mother put 2 and 2 together and believed she heard the atom bomb go off. She kept that belief until she passes away.

I know that would be impossible but the dancing in the streets was real.

[Progressive dog]

30. It would have been immoral to not use the bombs

How many Japanese surrendered on Iwo Jima, Saipan, and the other islands that US forces invaded? Almost none, even when it became clear that all they were buying with their lives was time. Their military believed that they could make invasion of Japan too costly in Allied lives. They did not care how many of their own died.
They allowed the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians by conventional bombing while continuing preparations for an invasion. It took two bombs to convince them that an invasion was unnecessary.
The Potsdam declaration gave the Japanese military no reason to expect concessions from the Allies.

[hunter]

31. Thanks for posting this.

The bombing of Nagasaki was partly a call out to the Soviet Union, partly an experiment to see what the new plutonium bomb would do to a modern industrial city. Japan was in ruins and time was running out to test these new weapons. It was obvious the plutonium implosion bomb would be the weapon of the future.

Quite frankly there were probably people in our military who were disappointed when Japan surrendered so quickly because they wanted to see how useful atomic bombs were as tactical weapons. After the war we simulated the tactical use of these weapons using our own soldiers and sailors, exposing many of them and many civilian peacetime populations to high levels of radiation that would be entirely unacceptable today.

A few popular U.S. myths are that these bombs "prevented" the bloody invasion of the Japanese homeland scheduled for November 1st. The neutral fact is that this invasion was moot after the successful "Trinity" test on July 16th. Plans changed to simply firebomb and atomic bomb Japan for as long as it took, "back into the stone age" as it's now said. Of course nobody in the invasion forces knew this. They honestly believed they were heading into a horrible fight, and that they would die fighting suicidal Japanese soldiers or old men, women, and children armed with bamboo spears.

Another popular myth is that these bombs were flaky prototypes built by scientists who were not sure if they would work. This myth is ludicrous. Do people really think we'd have risked a free parachute delivery of plutonium and highly enriched uranium to a sophisticated enemy had these bombs been duds? Seriously?

The reality is that the Manhattan project had been built from the ground up to fight an atomic war with Germany, and we'd built a production capacity to exceed any effort Germany might have made. The Hiroshima bomb and the Trinity bombs were the first to be assembled, but there were more highly enriched uranium and plutonium bombs being made. We built five "Little Boy" uranium bombs and 120 "Fat Man" plutonium bombs. They'd all been taken out of service by 1950 because they were obsolete and had been replaced with more sophisticated designs. The U.S.A. had the industrial capacity to drop firebombs and atomic bombs on Japan without pause.

[longship]

36. According to Richard Rhodes, they only had the two bombs ready in Aug, 1945.

The were effectively hand made at Los Alamos anyway. The weapon grade Pu was slow in coming at that time.

You are right that they were not flaky prototypes. But they were precise but still experimental. The Trinity test was a static test of Fat Man. But neither Little Boy or Fat Man had ever been tested by being dropped out of a plane. They knew that Little Boy would work. The uranium 235 gun concept was very simple.

There were several scientists, including Leo Szilard trying to stop the USA from using the bombs on the enemy. Szilard and others suggested a public demonstration. But with so few available, I imagine that entered into the calculus. What if we demonstrate it and the Japanese don't give in? What then? Now we don't have enough bombs -- only one? -- to convince them of the futility.

It is a complicated issue.

Good thread.

[roamer65]

34. It took 3 events to get the Japanese to stomach unconditional surrender.

1. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima (August 6th)
2. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria (August 9th)
3. The atomic bombing of Nagasaki (August 9th)

Those three events in very quick succession convinced Hirohito enough was enough. Many lives were spared not having to invade Kyushu and the main island Honshu. The massive firebombing of cities and impending invasions would have killed millions in late 1945 and probably most of 1946. The plan was to turn Kyushu into the launching pad for the largest air assault in human history (for that time), through the use of conventional AND atomic weapons.