The Controversial Decision

The Controversial Decision

Japan's Situation
5
views

II. The Japanese Situation

Gar Alperovitz asserts in the being of his text that the Japanese Army was in fact defeated and the use of the Atomic Bomb was unnecessary to defeat the Japan.[Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995), 18.] Morton also touches on this issue very briefly and states that a major question at the time had whether the Japanese had been beaten. [Louis Morton. The Decision to Use the Atom Bomb. (Washington, D.C.: Center of Military History, U.S. Army. 1990.), 493.] Alperovitz begins talking about the common and generally well-known theory of the state of Japan and it’s Military by the end of the war. [Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995), 17.] In his text, Alperovitz includes a quote by Robert J.C. Butow describing Japan’s state:

“…the scales of war had been tipped so steeply against the Japanese that no counterweights at their disposal could possibly have balanced them…the defense perimeter that Japan had created been cracked and penetrated; worst of all, Japan’s military potential was dropping rapidly with her industrial capacity…” [Ibid.]

As a result of the United States superior industrial capacity, the lack of a European German victory and the breakdown of Japan’s industrial base, Japan was faltering in 1945. [Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995),18] To add the already dire Japanese situation the United States Navy and Army Air Corps had as Alperovitz says, “Mercilessly pummeled” Japan by November of 1944. [Ibid.]

With this, the Japanese government and military was defeated, meanwhile the United States Military was gearing up for what they believed to be the most difficult campaign of the war. [Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995), 19] However, in reality according to Alperovitz Japan was beaten and therefore willing to surrender before the bomb would be dropped. [Ibid.]

Meanwhile though, Japan (probably) sensing the impending invasion by the United States and Great Britain sought out help from the Soviet Union. [Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995), 20] Despite prior assurances by Stalin to Roosevelt about assistance with the Japanese invasion, Japan attempted to curtail the United States effort for unconditional surrender by requesting assistance from the Soviet Union, who was not officially at war with Japan yet. [Ibid.]

Alperovitz concludes that the United States had knowledge of Japan’s decline, however whether or not they knew that they could end the war without an invasion or atomic bomb. [Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995), 33.] With these factors in mind, why did then the United States decide to bomb Japan? Alperovitz claims it was dealing with Truman’s fixation on the unconditional surrender of the Japanese Empire. [Ibid., 34.]

However the idea of an unconditional surrender threatened this idea of the Japanese Emperor being revered as a living deity, which was well known to the United States government. [Gar Alperovitz. The Decision to use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1995), 35-36.] This brings Alperovitz to his conclusion on Truman’s decision the United States had no guarantee what the loss of life would be in taking the island, and with no guarantee of the Soviet Union’s assistance, and the reassurances that the Emperor would remain in charge, Truman used the bomb to force the Soviet Union’s involvement and Japan’s capitulation. [Ibid., 85.]

With this being said Alperovitz claims that the United States didn’t need to use the atomic bomb or an invasion. However, is Alperovitz asserting then, that Truman did use the atomic bomb in order to bait Stalin into declaring war? However finally, with Alperovitz’s claims then Truman’s goals where aimed towards a Soviet response.

However, many scholars such as D.M. Giangreco state that many members of the cabinet had developed causality estimates. One of the most telling is that Herbert Hoover, former President of the United States (1929-1933) submitted a report similar to that of Truman’s advisors: 500,000-1,000,000. [D.M. Giangreco. “A Score of Bloody Okinawas and Iwo Jimas: President Truman and Casualty Estimates for the Invasion of Japan,” University of California Press Vol. 72, No. 1 (2003): 110.]

However, his monthly mortality rate per month was 100,000 men, this is significantly higher than previous estimates. [D.M. Giangreco. “A Score of Bloody Okinawas and Iwo Jimas: President Truman and Casualty Estimates for the Invasion of Japan,” University of California Press Vol. 72, No. 1 (2003): 107.] Many advisors (including Hoover) had also concluded that the Japanese Army had three and half million troops at their disposal. [Ibid.] The reports also showed that Japan was trying to produce close five million troops, all of which were well armed and prepared to fight the Allied invasion. [Ibid.]

Cover Image Credit: Goodimages

Popular Right Now

An Open Letter to the Person Who Still Uses the "R Word"

Your negative associations are slowly poisoning the true meaning of an incredibly beautiful, exclusive word.
229372
views

What do you mean you didn't “mean it like that?" You said it.

People don't say things just for the hell of it. It has one definition. Merriam-Webster defines it as, "To be less advanced in mental, physical or social development than is usual for one's age."

So, when you were “retarded drunk" this past weekend, as you claim, were you diagnosed with a physical or mental disability?

When you called your friend “retarded," did you realize that you were actually falsely labeling them as handicapped?

Don't correct yourself with words like “stupid," “dumb," or “ignorant." when I call you out. Sharpen your vocabulary a little more and broaden your horizons, because I promise you that if people with disabilities could banish that word forever, they would.

Especially when people associate it with drunks, bad decisions, idiotic statements, their enemies and other meaningless issues. Oh trust me, they are way more than that.

I'm not quite sure if you have had your eyes opened as to what a disabled person is capable of, but let me go ahead and lay it out there for you. My best friend has Down Syndrome, and when I tell people that their initial reaction is, “Oh that is so nice of you! You are so selfless to hang out with her."

Well, thanks for the compliment, but she is a person. A living, breathing, normal girl who has feelings, friends, thousands of abilities, knowledge, and compassion out the wazoo.

She listens better than anyone I know, she gets more excited to see me than anyone I know, and she works harder at her hobbies, school, work, and sports than anyone I know. She attends a private school, is a member of the swim team, has won multiple events in the Special Olympics, is in the school choir, and could quite possibly be the most popular girl at her school!

So yes, I would love to take your compliment, but please realize that most people who are labeled as “disabled" are actually more “able" than normal people. I hang out with her because she is one of the people who has so effortlessly taught me simplicity, gratitude, strength, faith, passion, love, genuine happiness and so much more.

Speaking for the people who cannot defend themselves: choose a new word.

The trend has gone out of style, just like smoking cigarettes or not wearing your seat belt. It is poisonous, it is ignorant, and it is low class.

As I explained above, most people with disabilities are actually more capable than a normal human because of their advantageous ways of making peoples' days and unknowingly changing lives. Hang out with a handicapped person, even if it is just for a day. I can one hundred percent guarantee you will bite your tongue next time you go to use the term out of context.

Hopefully you at least think of my friend, who in my book is a hero, a champion and an overcomer. Don't use the “R Word". You are way too good for that. Stand up and correct someone today.

Cover Image Credit: Kaitlin Murray

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

2019 Just Means That The 2020 Election Is Coming

I don't want things to be that way, people running for President make it that way.

99
views

The 2020 election has begun with Senator Elizabeth Warren announcing that she has formed an exploratory committee to run for president.

Other likely candidates include Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, Beto O'Rourke, Michael Bloomberg, Sherrod Brown, Kirsten Gillibrand, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders. And those are only the people eating at the adult's table, there are other Democrats that will probably throw their hats in the ring just for some publicity.

The last time a primary began to decide the opponent for an unpopular incumbent Republican president that had lost the popular vote in his first campaign was just 15 years ago, in 2004 when John Kerry became the nominee to challenge President George W. Bush.

Kerry may have lost the election, but he did have an easy primary. Kerry beat out his early challengers and went on to easily win almost all of the primary caucuses and elections.

I do not think that 2020 will be so easy and that is due in part to 2016. The 2016 primary may have eclipsed 2008 in terms of being one of the most consequential primaries in US history.

2016 showed the ideological split within the Democratic Party, with many New Democrats, socially liberal economically conservative centrists, holding most of the power within, while there's a strong grassroots force urging the party leftwards. Critics will claim Hillary Clinton lost because she was not left-wing enough. And Bernie Sanders's surprising success shows that anybody who wants to be the nominee has to appeal to the Sanders demographic.

This article is not really here to endorse any candidate, you can read my other articles to figure out who I'm voting for, it is however here to point out just how difficult it will be to win the nomination.

A candidate has to, according to the so-called experts: be left-leaning but also be a centrist, and be able to get minorities out to vote but also appeal to some Trump voters that they think they can win over by calling out the President's divisive tactics.

Trickle-down economics and massive deregulation always throws the economy into a recession, but the question now is when will that happen? If it happens during the 2020 election it's safe to say it's over for Trump, but if a Democrat has to challenge a Republican while the economy is doing great, it will be all the more difficult. The election will turn into a debate over so-called "social" issues (assuming Trump does not take us to war).

Issues that seem to be on most Americans' minds are healthcare and immigration. The healthcare debate will turn into a debate amongst Democrats over whether or not single-payer is possible and will likely be one of the most divisive issues of the primary. Immigration will be easy, every Democrat will go the safe route and boldly proclaim that putting children in cages and letting them die is not good. This will lead to Trump accusing them of being Antifa thugs.

The road to the White House is not meant to be easy. You need to fight hard to win the hearts of Americans, unless you are a Republican then you just need to win over rich Americans and let the electoral college do the rest of the work.

But seriously, we need to start the process of finding someone that will undo the years of horror unleashed by the Trump administration and also put the country in a new direction. Someone that will help the old and the young, and all workers. It's time for a leader that works for the American laborer, not the American entrepreneur, and above all, it is time for a new president.

Related Content

Facebook Comments