(02-26-2015 03:59 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 11:12 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  If you've ever been in one of those "Hiroshima wasn't necessary" arguments, read "Retribution" by Max Hastings. You'll wish we had dropped the big one on Tokyo.

Dropping #1 (Hiroshima) was absolutely justified, IMHO. So much so that not using it would have been wrong.

Dropping #2 (Nagasaki) is kind of a gray area to me. It may have been necessary or may not have been. Ideally, I wish Truman had waited another day or two before doing that. The reactions of Japanese authority were, frankly, confused and inconsistent in the hours immediately following Hiroshima, so it's hard to say if "another round" was needed to force them to surrender.

Even after Nagasaki, the position of the generals was to not surrender. When the emperor gave the signal to surrender, many of the generals committed ritual suicide rather than suffer the dishonor of defeat. It is very likely several million more Japanese, mostly elder, woman and children, would have died in a land invasion.