The President who saved morst lives when in office
My vote (even though I am a conservative Republican) goes to Harry Truman. He had the iron clad brass b*lls to use the Atom Bomb to end the war in Japan quickly without the great loss of lives a Invasion of Japan meant. Without Trumans O.K. a hell of a lot of your daddies and granddaddies wouldnt have survived. Its just too bad his saying, "the buck stops here" isnt still carried out for our own good, not for other
"special interest" reasons.
"special interest" reasons.
0
-
+1 joeaf1911a1 0 -
Can't argue with that- 0 -
I would have prefered that FDR and Harry S would have had the wisdom to see that supporting the, at the time, non-Communist residents of Indo-China, rather than helping France to regain control of the area as the Japanese were evicted. 0 -
+1 0 -
Right again, Joe. 0 -
Some how, I have a feeling that one day Iran will see what having "The Bomb" is all about. 0 -
I have to say that I agree with you Joe. It is important to remember that even back then there were Americans who believed that we could scare the hell out of the Japanese and cause them to surrender simply by giving them a demonstration of the atomic bomb. The idea was to haul a boat load of folks out into the Pacific Ocean where we would detontate a bomb and once the Japanese were suitably impressed they would then surrender within minutes. This would be much the same as the deep thinkers we have today wanting to launch ICMBs loaded with blanks or have us threaten to blow up Mecca or some other area of signifigance in order to have our enemies crawling on their knees to us begging for forgiveness. It should also be remembered that even after the use of two atomic bombs the Japanese military and the civilain population had no plans to surrender and in fact the Japanese military was fully prepared to fight on until Japan either ceased to exist as a nation or until we simply grew tired of the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of American lives and left. It was the emperor himself who forced a peace because he saw that the result of the war going on would be the end of Japan itself and since emperor was considered a God his will was the final word in Japan. Even then the Japanese military made an effort to continue the war by attempting to kidnap the emperor in order to fight on! Overwhelming force and mass destruction of people and property are not the threats that we like to imagine they are and people who are dedicated to a cause are being guided by forces far above simple politics are not going to give in no matter how much suffering is inflicted upon them unless that country is physically conquered and occupied forever. This is why would have never have won the war in Vietnam, nor will we ever win in Iraq. 0 -
No, kristov, Japan did surrender. Unconditionally as a matter of fact. There was no full scale invasion of the Japanese Mainland.
The reason we didn't win the Koran and Vietnam wars is the same reason we will not win the Iraq war. The politicians have simply decided not to.0 -
quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
No, kristov, Japan did surrender. Unconditionally as a matter of fact. There was no full scale invasion of the Japanese Mainland.
The reason we didn't win the Koran and Vietnam wars is the same reason we will not win the Iraq war. The politicians have simply decided not to.
You are correct, sir!0 -
Joe -
You are right, but I think the question was BEFORE he became President, and I have no idea.
Doug0 -
joe,
Gonna have to agree with ya.
JamesRK,
I don't think we lost the Korean War - we got what we wanted out of it, as did the Chinese. Whether we call it a draw or a mutual victory, I think it got done the way and as far as it needed to get done.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
joe,
Gonna have to agree with ya.
JamesRK,
I don't think we lost the Korean War - we got what we wanted out of it, as did the Chinese. Whether we call it a draw or a mutual victory, I think it got done the way and as far as it needed to get done.
EMM - I think what James was trying to say is that what we should have in Korea right now is one country under democratic rule. We could have accomplished this if Washington hadn't gotten involved.0 -
Yup, I agree. We haven't had a president with ba##s for quite a while.We have had a bunch with alligator mouths and , well you get the point. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
No, kristov, Japan did surrender. Unconditionally as a matter of fact. There was no full scale invasion of the Japanese Mainland.
The reason we didn't win the Koran and Vietnam wars is the same reason we will not win the Iraq war. The politicians have simply decided not to.
I don't believe I said that the Jpanaese did not surrender nor did I say that we were forced to invade their homeland, but putting words into peoples mouths is a Gun Broker specialty and there is a league of folks waiting to hop on board if the poster is not known for towing the party line. What I did say was had it not been for the emperor an invasion of Japan would have been neded and the resulting losses of American and Japanese lives would have been devestating to both countries. Japan's emperor was an interesting figure during the war, some saying he spent the entire conflict sitting on the sidelines while the military dictated policy in his name and others insist that he took a very active role in the war. The truth likely falls some where in the middle. Where it not for his god like hold on his subjects I would say that Japan's surrender after dropping the two atomic bombs would not have happened and the Japanese military would have continued the struggle until Japan itself ceased to exist. Your opinion on this is welcome.0 -
quote:Originally posted by kristov
I have to say that I agree with you Joe. It is important to remember that even back then there were Americans who believed that we could scare the hell out of the Japanese and cause them to surrender simply by giving them a demonstration of the atomic bomb. The idea was to haul a boat load of folks out into the Pacific Ocean where we would detontate a bomb and once the Japanese were suitably impressed they would then surrender within minutes. This would be much the same as the deep thinkers we have today wanting to launch ICMBs loaded with blanks or have us threaten to blow up Mecca or some other area of signifigance in order to have our enemies crawling on their knees to us begging for forgiveness. It should also be remembered that even after the use of two atomic bombs the Japanese military and the civilain population had no plans to surrender and in fact the Japanese military was fully prepared to fight on until Japan either ceased to exist as a nation or until we simply grew tired of the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of American lives and left. It was the emperor himself who forced a peace because he saw that the result of the war going on would be the end of Japan itself and since emperor was considered a God his will was the final word in Japan. Even then the Japanese military made an effort to continue the war by attempting to kidnap the emperor in order to fight on! Overwhelming force and mass destruction of people and property are not the threats that we like to imagine they are and people who are dedicated to a cause are being guided by forces far above simple politics are not going to give in no matter how much suffering is inflicted upon them unless that country is physically conquered and occupied forever. This is why would have never have won the war in Vietnam, nor will we ever win in Iraq.
The facts you post about Japan are accurate. It is one reason MacArthur left the Emperor alone in the defeat of Japan. He was not charged with war crimes because of his status as a God to the Japanese. We needed the Emperor to help keep the peace after the hot war.
I hope you are wrong about Iraq; but I fear you may be correct there also.0 -
I didn't put any words in your mouth. If you will read your post you will see that you are arguing both sides of the subject. You say "It was the emperor himself who forced a peace because he saw that the result of the war going on would be the end of Japan itself and since emperor was considered a God his will was the final word in Japan." Then you say "Overwhelming force and mass destruction of people and property are not the threats that we like to imagine they are and people who are dedicated to a cause are being guided by forces far above simple politics are not going to give in no matter how much suffering is inflicted upon them unless that country is physically conquered and occupied forever."
The Japanese people weren't the only ones who thought the emperor was a god. The emperor thought he was a god. He was one who was "guided by forces far above simple politics", and wasn't particularly concerned about what happened to the Japanese people. After the second atomic bomb, he saw that the first one wasn't a fluke and knew Japan could either surrender unconditionally or cease to exist. It wasn't a sudden rush of magnanimity on the part of the emperor. It was "Little Boy" and "Fat Man".
The reason the emperor was not tried for war crimes and hanged was simply that it was more useful to leave him in place for control of the population.
The use of force is far more effective than the threat of force, but the threat of force can be very effective if it is creditable. The threat of force which is not creditable is totally useless. For example, it would be useless to tell the Muslim maniacs that another nine eleven would bring a nuke to Mecca because they know we won't do it, nor will we use nukes of any kind. It's not a matter of their dedication, it is simply a matter of creditability.0 -
I see no conflict in the post K made. 0 -
http://www.warbirdforum.com/end.htm
How Japan surrendered
The following post appeared several years ago on the moderated newsgroup, soc.history.war.world-war-ii. I trust the author won't mind my publishing it here: his essay is so thoughtful and clear that I wanted to share it.
From: tth@surya.caltech.edu (Thomas Hamilton)
Newsgroups: soc.history.war.world-war-ii
Subject: How and Why Japan Surrendered (long)
Date: 10 Aug 1995 10:10:52 GMT
This is a brief account of how and why Japan surrendered. The best account of these events is found in Nihon no Ichiban Nagai Hi by the Pacific War Research Society. The Society was a group of 14 Japanese historians who spent years interviewing every Japanese survivor involved in any way with the decision, except Hirohito. Their book was published in 1965. It was translated into English and published by Kondansha with the title Japan's Longest Day [JLD]. This is still the authoritative book on the subject. This post is condensed from JLD. If you have read JLD, don't bother with this post. Otherwise, here are the Cliff notes.
Japan in the summer of 1945 was governed, in the name of the emperor, by the Supreme War Council or Big Six. The SWC consisted of representives of the Army, the Navy and the civilian government. This body ruled by consensus. That is the six would debate amoung themselves until they all agreed on a course of action which could be presented to Hirohito. The most powerful person on the SWC was the Army Minister. It had become a rule of Japanese politics that the Army Minister was chosen by the Army and no cabinet could exist without an Army Minister. This meant that the Army could veto any decision by having its Minister resign.
The issue on the table in late summer of 1945 was the surrender of Japan. The SWC could not, did not achieve consensus.
It is a remarkable fact about the crisis which overtook the SWC in August 1945 that no one changed their opinion. The SWC members who advocated immediate acceptance of the Potsdam declaration stayed pro-peace throughout. More amazingly, the SWC members who opposed surrender before Hiroshima, continued to oppose it right up till August 14.
SWC DOVES:
Foreign Minister Togo (the leader of the doves)
Prime Minister Admiral Suzuki (77 and very flaky)
Navy Minister Admiral Yonai
SWC HAWKS
Army Minister General Anami (the leader of the hawks)
Army Chief of Staff General Umezu
Navy Chief of Staff Admiral Toyoda
It is a curious fact that the Navy was so important, even though it only had a few destroyers left.
Since these six people were unable to agree to end the war, there were two other sources of authority which could possibly break the deadlock, although, since Japan was already at war, the hawks had no desire to break the deadlock.
THE ARMY
The Army was in physical control of the country and Tokyo. The Army had a tradition of murdering political opponents. Many middle level officers in the Army believed that the Army should murder all the doves and take control of the country. This would mean, in effect, kidnapping Hirohito. Many officers viewed this as preferable to surrender. Everyone believed that a surrender order would be followed by an immediate coup attempt and assasination spree.
THE EMPEROR
Hirohito strongly wanted peace. In principle, he could have ordered the Army to surrender at any time. Under the Meiji Constitution he was explicitly Commander and Chief. However, it was not clear that the Army would obey him. If he ordered the Army to surrender, a successful coup would leave him a prisoner. He knew he only had one shot. He would have to stake his position and the lives of his fellow doves on one attempt to bulldoze the Army. The question was, when to try it. Hirohito was not isolated, he had the help of many senior politicians. He had friends in the Army. It just wasn't clear that he had enough to ride out a coup.
DOVE arguments:
Everyone agreed on the importance of protecting the 'national polity'. Doves emphasized the importance of the Monarchy. They argued that immediate surrender to the US was the best way to preserve the Monarchy. Peace feelers to the US from doves had been broken off at hawks insistence, but not before the US had communicated to the doves that Japan could surrender and keep an emperor. The doves also didn't like the Russians and would have preferred ending the war before they occupied any of Japan. (Even though Japan was still at peace with Russia, indeed trying desperately to negotiate with Stalin, Japan could see the Russians deploying massive forces on the border. The Russian attack was not a big surprise.)
HAWK arguments:
The hawks accepted that the war, and empire, were gone. They believed that the US would allow Japan to retain its government structure and independence if it were clear that the price of insisting on occupation was too high. They advocated a guerilla war. They believed that even if the emperor were hiding in the mountains with a few soldiers, that was preferable to having the public humiliation of the emperor subordinated to foreigners.
However, the hawks didn't think it would come to that. After all, all they wanted was a little area around Tokyo where the emperor and his soldiers could wave the flag unmolested. Was this too much to ask in exchange for thousands of US lives? The hawks thought US diplomatic concessions would be coming.
The hawks also thought the Soviets would help. They could pressure the US directly, although that was unlikely. More usefully, the Soviets could overrun Manchuria and Korea, scaring the US into coming to terms.
However, the hawks main hope was for a US invasion. Until the US invaded, Japan had no good way to kill Americans. However, if the US fought Japan's 2 million man home army in Japan's rugged terrain, Japan would kill plenty of Americans.
POTSDAM PROCLAMATION:
The July 26 PP explicitly called for the "unconditional surrender of the Japanese Armed Forces". The cabinet correctly interpreted this as saying that the monarchy would not be eliminated. The foreign office pressed for immediate acceptance. The Army was unmoved. The SWC reached a consensus to do and say nothing. (This was there most common approach to all problems). Unfortunately, PM Suzuki said to reporters that the cabinet would 'mokusatsu' the PP. This harsh language, which was a slip from a well-meaning but senile dove, infuriated Togo because he knew it would get a bad reaction from the US. How bad, he couldn't imagine.
HIROSHIMA
Hiroshima was bombed on Aug 6. Nothing happened in Tokyo on the 6th or 7th. On Aug 8, Hirohito informed PM Suzuki that the war must be ended immediately. Suzuki was instructed to call an immediate SWC meeting for that purpose, "but the meeting had to be postponed because one of the members was unavoidably detained by 'more pressing business' elsewhere." [I, also, find this incredible, so I just quoted what JLD says]
RUSSIA
Russia declared war the afternoon of the 8th.
AUGUST 9
The doves woke up early this Thursday. Furious about the meeting that had been blown off, leading to Russian entry, Togo et al. managed to get an SWC meeting going by 10:30 AM. Immediately, the SWC split into its two familiar factions and started going over the familiar arguments. Halfway through the meeting a message arrived saying that Nagasaki had been bombed at 11:00 that morning. This changed no opinions. The SWC meeting broke up at 1:00 PM with no decision having been made.
That afternoon the arguments were repeated in a full cabinet meeting lasting from 2:30 to 10:00 PM. The Home Minister explicitly predicted that a coup would likely happen if the government ordered surrender. The meeting had no result.
Suzuki then, after consultation with Hirohito, called a SWC meeting for 11:50 PM, to be held in the presence of the emperor, an unprecedented, although perfectly legal, procedure.
AUGUST 10
For two hours the SWC went over the same arguments it had been arguing non-stop since mid-morning the day before. At 2:00 AM Suzuki turned to Hirohito, saying "your decision is requested". Hirohito said he supported Togo. He then left the room.
Suzuki then convened a cabinet meeting to prepare the formal note of surrender. By 4:00 AM the note had been approved by the cabinet and sent to the Foreign Office for translation and transmission. The FO had one last trick. The cabinet had demanded that the US respect "the powers of His Majesty". The FO translated that to English reading "the prerogatives of His Majesty." Since few hawks spoke English, they got away with it.
Anami returned to the Army Ministry where he addressed senior personnel and explained the developments. A young officer demanded, "Is the Army Minister actually considering surrender?" Anami silenced the officer by smashing the table with his swagger stick. However, the young officers could still hope that the Allies would reject the note and a coup would be unnecessary.
The US delivered a massive bombing raid on Tokyo.
AUGUST 11
In Tokyo the leaders waited for the US reply. Anami made a belligerent public proclamation. Young officers began drawing up lists of doves to be killed.
AUGUST 12
The Byrnes reply came at 00:45. The FO diplomatically mistranslated it as well, substituting "controlled by" for Byrnes' "subject to" in the crucial phrase describing the Hirohito's relation with MacArthur.
This was the signal to start the same arguments all over again. There was now the added edge that the coup planning was in full process. Anami hoped to use the threat of the coup to prevent acceptance of the Byrnes note, but he also wanted to make sure there was no actual coup.
AUGUST 14
The Allies dropped leaflets describing the exchange of notes. This terrified the government. They were sure this would lead to a coup. So by 10:00 AM the SWC and cabinet were assembled for an Imperial Conference down
in Hirohito's bunker. Hirohito announced his decision to accept the Byrnes note. He asked the cabinet to prepare an appropriate rescript for him to read to the nation.
That afternoon Hirohito recorded the rescript
Anami forced the top Army officers to sign a statement of loyalty. Anami was still consorting with the coup planners but Umezu definitely decided he was against a coup.
That night Anami went to his house and committed sepukku.
The coup began with junior officers seizing the Imperial Guards Division and the Imperial Palace. General Mori, commander of the Guards, was murdered. Meanwhile, a series of assasinations was attempted. PM Suzuki barely got out of his house alive before soldiers came, searched it, and burned it in frustration. He went into hiding at a friend's house.
AUGUST 15
Although the rebels had held the palace all night, the coup ran out of steam in the morning. General Tanaka of the Eastern District Army showed up at the palace. Hirohito and his hosehold were safe. Most of the plotters killed themselves.
At 12 noon, Hirohitos voice read the rescript ending the war on NHK.
Although sporadic mutinies contined for a few days, the situation was stable when the US arrived. General Umezu signed on the Missouri.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dlrjj
I see no conflict in the post K made.
He says Japan surrendered because of force, then he says no amount of force can force a surrender. To me, that's a conflict.0 -
James, with all due respect fully intended, I believe that you missed the point of the conditions and qualifiers "K" put on his post.
Kristov clearly stated that it was the Emperor who "forced" the Japanese to surrender, and that the military was quite ready to continue the fight indefinitely. While the real truth of that concept is unknown and unknowable, the fact remains that the bombs, conventional or nuclear, had not yet compelled the general public or the military to plead for peace.
His statement that "Overwhelming force and mass destruction of people and property are not the threats that we like to imagine they are" is correct, particularly when couched in the terms and with the conditions he expressed. The statement "people who are dedicated to a cause are being guided by forces far above simple politics (and) are not going to give in no matter how much suffering is inflicted upon them unless that country is physically conquered and occupied forever" is correct and can be observed in many wars and time periods.
That doesn't mean it doesn't work, it just sets the conditions for success.
His point is correct in all aspects: the fanatics don't tend to surrender, the Japanese were fanatics in many cases, and the Emperor was to a great degree responsible for the surrender taking place at the time that it did.
This is somewhat similar to Robert E. Lee's decision to surrender his army even though many of the more fanatical officers and men wanted to disband the formal forces and resort to guerilla warfare. Whether justified or not, fanatics don't tend to stop just because they have "lost".
That is the point of kristov's post.[:)]0 -
dlrjj, with all due respect and then some right back atcha [:)], overwhelming force works. I'll agree with you and kristov that the Emperor of Japan "forced" the Japanese to surrender, but what forced the Emperor to force surrender? Little Boy and Fat Man.
Another example would be the Nazis in Germany. It would be hard to find a gang more fanatical than Hitler and the boys. When they saw what he was bringing to the country some of his own fanatics tried to kill him. He still insisted on fighting to the last German. He never surrendered so he died in his bunker. Just as acceptable an outcome as surrender. There were enough fanatics suing for peace to hold four unconditional surrender ceremonies to end World War Two in Europe.
There were some fanatics in Germany who weren't willing to accept the surrender and did carry on a Guerrilla War for a short time, but the Allies, particularly the USSR and the Brits, weren't very tolerant of the rebellion and it didn't last very long. They used overwhelming force on a smaller scale.
In the War Between the State, harsh feelings not withstanding, Robert E. Lee did surrender and his troops either went home and back to the plow, migrated West, returned to civilian life or turned to crime. In any case, none of them were a serious threat to the United States.
The only time overwhelming force doesn't work is when it is not used or when there is no credible threat of its use.
It's a little like what Henry Winkler (The Fonz) told Ron Howard (Richie) in Happy Days. Richie tried to run a bluff on some tough guys and they didn't buy it. He asked The Fonz what went wrong. Fonz told him at some point you have to have actually hit someone. In other words, they have to believe it.0 -
Millard Fillmore. 0 -
Truman only did what any American President would have done when presented with using an A-bomb to end WWII. He used it.
As far as this logical act bestowing any greatness on Roosevelt's handpicked successor, I don't see it. He was still the small minded little Democrat from Mo.0 -
I would like to think you are right, but I have my doubts that Clinton would have done it, and I'm almost certain Carter wouldn't have. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
24 comments