On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:08:53 -0700, Tim wrote:


Eisboch wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...


We had reduced Japanese naval power to the point where an effective
blockade of the island nation would probably have inspired its
surrender within a matter of weeks...likely without an invasion.


rest snipped for brevity

Monday morning quarterbacking is always easier than playing the game and
we'll probably never know for sure, but there where many then and many today
that believed Japan was close to using an A-bomb ... on *us
http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-hung.htm

Eisboch

I didn't know that Japan had that type of technology....yet.

Nothing close. That's an "internet speculation piece" to me.
A few facts, then like fission, they split into a mushroom cloud of
speculation.
Might as well believe anything. Like Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction. Garbage intelligence, and mindless and erroneous
speculation.
The MacArthur and Ike views mentioned by Chuck are almost irrelevant,
if even accurate and contemporaneous with the time the bombs were
dropped. Theater generals painting rosy scenarios of easy victory, or
greatly underestimating actual costs wasn't new then, and still
happens.
Truman and Marshall were running the show, and had the best picture.
Personally, I would have asked a grunt who survived Tarawa or Iwo Jima
or Okinawa, who had seen, heard and smelled the mayhem, his buddies
killed and maimed. He fought the Japs on those islands, and the Japs
fought to their death.
"Well, son, we have a choice. We can drop a couple A-bombs on Japan,
war's over, and you can go home. Or if you prefer, gear up and we'll
land you in Japan to fight more Japs. What'll it be?"
Then go with the answer. Truman already knew the answer.
Anyway, having read much on the then Japanese view of combat and
honor, it isn't much different in effect than Islamo-facism. They
were nuts. The A-bomb was a nutcracker.
Nukes generate a lot of fear, which is perfectly understandable, but
the firebombing of cities, starvation, disease, and endless combat
needed to take Japan would have been much worse.
Victory in combat was the primary Jap goal, but dying in combat ran a
close second. Being toasted by an unseen enemy tossing a nuke on
your head turned their world upside down, and cracked the nut.
IMHO.
Tibbets belonged to that great generation to whom we owe so much,
and I salute him. May he RIP.
BTW, I was born in 1947. For all I know, my Dad might have died in
the invasion of Japan in '45 or '46 and then I would be writing this
as somebody else.

But then again, anyone who can (at that time) successfully calculate
bombs carried by weather ballons, that could make it to the US from
Japan all those thousands of miles across the Pacific, were actually
no dummies.

Fat lot of good that did them. Might as well throw TNT-rigged
coconuts in the gulf stream to blow up Ireland.
But hey, everything can help in war. Kept some number of
West-coasters busy on balloon patrol.
Whenever the Jap balloons come up, I'm reminded of the American bat
guy whose bats, incendiaries on their legs, were near the point of
being dropped in Japan. Those bats might have caused more Jap
casualties than the A-bombs. Who knows?

--Vic