Accounts of Enola Gay Crew

[lonesoullost3]

Very interesting article with a rarely heard perspective.

They were young men hoping to help end World War II. But to their mission's critics, the crews that dropped the atomic bombs on Japan were part of a war crime.

Three men involved in the attack on Hiroshima shared with the BBC their memories of a day that has stayed with them for 60 years.

Theodore "Dutch" Van Kirk - Navigator
Morris "Dick" Jepson - Weapons test officer
Dr Harold Agnew - Scientist, on observation plane

Theodore "Dutch" Van Kirk, 84

The day before the mission we sat through briefings on Tinian island where they told us who was assigned to which plane, and we ran through what we were going to do.

About 2pm we were told to get some sleep. But I don't know how they expected to tell us were we dropping the first atomic bomb on Japan and then expect us to sleep.

I didn't get a wink. Nor did most of the others. But at 10pm we had to get up again because we were flying at 2.45am.

They briefed us that the weather was good, but they were sending weather observation planes up so we would have the best information on targeting Hiroshima.

We had a final breakfast and then went down to the plane shortly after midnight.

There was a lot of picture-taking and interviewing going on - by the military - and it was a relief to get in the Enola Gay about an hour before we took off.

We flew in low over Iwo Jima while the bomb crew checked and armed Little Boy (the uranium bomb) and once we cleared the island we began climbing to our bombing altitude of just over 30,000 feet.

It was perfectly clear and I was just doing all the things I'd always done as a navigator - plotting our course, getting fixes to make sure we were on course and reading the drifts so we knew the wind speed.

As we flew over an inland sea I could make out the city of Hiroshima from miles away - my first thought was 'That's the target, now let's bomb the damn thing'.

But it was quiet in the sky. I'd flown 58 missions over Europe and Africa - and I said to one of the boys that if we'd sat in the sky for so long over there we'd have been blown out of the air.

Once we verified the target, I went in the back and just sat down. The next thing I felt was 94,000lbs of bomb leaving the aircraft - there was a huge surge and we immediately banked into a right hand turn and lost about 2,000 feet.

We'd been told that if we were eight miles away when the thing went off, we'd probably be ok - so we wanted to put as much distance as possible between us and the blast.

All of us - except the pilot - were wearing dark goggles, but we still saw a flash - a bit like a camera bulb going off in the plane.

There was a great jolt on the aircraft and we were thrown off the floor. Someone called out 'flak' but of course it was the shockwave from the bomb.

The tail-gunner later said he saw it coming towards us - a bit like the haze you see over a car park on a hot day, but moving forwards a great speed.

We turned to look back at Hiroshima and already there was a huge white cloud reaching up more than 42,000 feet. At the base you could see nothing but thick black dust and debris - it looked like a pot of hot oil down there.

We were pleased that the bomb had exploded as planned and later we got to talking about what it meant for the war.

We concluded that it would be over - that not even the most obstinate, uncaring leaders could refuse to surrender after this.

In the weeks afterwards, I actually flew back to Japan with some US scientists and some Japanese from their atomic programme.

We flew low over Hiroshima but could not land anywhere and eventually landed at Nagasaki.

We didn't hide the fact that we were American and many people turned their faces away from us. But where we stayed we were made very welcome and I think people were glad that the war had ended.

Morris "Dick" Jepson, 83

I was a young second lieutenant in the US Air Force and was designated as the weapons test officer on the Enola Gay.

The bomb was designed to detonate when it was about 1,500 feet - or about one-and-a-half seconds - above the ground to ensure the maximum possible destructive range.

To that end it contained a range of radar-designated electronics.

In the run-up to the mission I had spent five months at Harvard and three months at MIT studying radar design.

For several months I worked on developing the electronics that would allow the bomb to detonate above the ground, flying test missions over southern California.

The Manhattan Project [to build the atomic bomb] was compartmentalised so the thousands of people working on it could not know the full details of the plan, but I was in no doubt I was training for an atomic bomb drop.

On the day of the mission, I had to perform some final tests on the electronics that operated the bomb.

There was a box in the plane's forward compartment that connected to the bomb via a cable system.

My final job was to climb down into the bomb bay, crawl around the bomb and manually arm the device. I took out three testing plugs that isolated the bomb and put in three red firing plugs.

The most important thought in my mind was that this would detonate and end the war.

Unlike the others, this was the only combat mission I had been on, but there was only one point when I was apprehensive.

I knew how long it took for the bomb to fall and detonate - 43 seconds - so I counted but nothing happened. I just thought this was devastating.

But in the excitement I had counted too fast. That second, the crew reported a huge flash and it had gone off.

A few seconds later I felt the first blast wave.

There was a second shockwave and I knew by the delay that it had detonated at the right height - and this second wave was the force of the bomb bouncing back off the ground.

Everyone's thoughts turned to what devastation there would have been down below - we all had that thought on our mind because we had seen what the bomb could do.

But it was the right thing to do.

Dr Harold Agnew, 85

I had come from working on the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos and my abiding memory is of it being a very exciting time, working with all the best scientific minds of the day.

I describe myself as a 'grunt' at that time, I did what I was told to do. But I was part of a great undertaking.

For the Hiroshima mission I was on board The Great Artiste, a second B-29 that had tailed the Enola Gay to the bombing zone.

We'd flown alongside them all the way up there and were about four or five miles off to one side of Hiroshima, dropping gauges with parachutes that would measure the yield of the bomb.

After we dropped our gauges I remember we made a sharp turn to the right so that we would not get caught in the blast - but we still got badly shaken up by it.

I don't think anyone realised exactly what would happen. It was the only uranium bomb to be dropped.

My honest feeling at the time was that they deserved it, and as far as I am concerned that is still how I feel today.

People never look back to what led up to it - Pearl Harbour, Nanking - and there are no innocent civilians in war, everyone is doing something, contributing to the war effort, building bombs.

What we did saved a lot of lives in the long run and I am proud to have been part of it.

After the war I returned to the University of Chicago to continue my studies and later rejoined Los Alamos, where I eventually became director of the laboratory.

About three-quarters of the US nuclear arsenal was designed under my tutelage at Los Alamos. That is my legacy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4718579.stm

And for their joint statement:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4743061.stm

[Nebiki]

Yes it is a interesting view point. It's even more of an interesting view point if you turn the perspective around. The Japanese may be well know for their war crimes but what about America?
Can you justify dropping the Atomic bomb? Something that was so devestating that it has never been repeated, at present day.
Has American ever apologised for droping the Atomic bomb?
Though I found the article interesting. Certainly something to think about.

[lonesoullost3]

Yes it is a interesting view point. It's even more of an interesting view point if you turn the perspective around. The Japanese may be well know for their war crimes but what about America?
Can you justify dropping the Atomic bomb? Something that was so devestating that it has never been repeated, at present day.
Has American ever apologised for droping the Atomic bomb?
Though I found the article interesting. Certainly something to think about.

First, I edited my first post and put the correct link for their joint statement.

The drop the A-bomb vs. prolong-the-war debate, unfortunately, is all based on speculation. There's nothing substantial that can be used in it. All we have is the stats from one side - the side that was used. Can the a-bomb be considered a war crime though? Even now - would it be considered a war crime or just a violation of Anti-Nuclear treaties? Countries are still developing the atomic bomb (and testing them) which suggests that countries don't view it as a war crime. Nevertheless, it is true that the US hasn't offered apologies - and reading the thoughts of the crew it's interesting that they don't think apologies are necessary (of course, they use the speculation debate).

Much like history is written by the victors, so are war crimes. The winning side of a war will always try the otherside for war crimes - not the other way around. Had Germany, Italy, and Japan won WW2 there would definitely be war crime trials against the Allies and people today would be saying "Has Italy ever apologized?". Is it fair? Of course not - but what can you expect.

[Mike Cash]

Yes it is a interesting view point. It's even more of an interesting view point if you turn the perspective around. The Japanese may be well know for their war crimes but what about America?

Of which war crimes are you speaking in particular?


Can you justify dropping the Atomic bomb?

Yes.


Has American ever apologised for droping the Atomic bomb?


I certainly hope not.

[Nebiki]

Sorry to be on your back about this mikecash. Could go into further detail about how, you feel that the dropping of the atomic bomb, can be justified?

[Horizon]

Considering how people are STILL dying from the aftermath, or so I heard on the documentary I watched, I don't particularly think it was justified myself.

As for America apologizing, even if they should, I highly doubt they would...

[Kinsao]

I find it difficult to think about the '... or prolong the war' argument, because of course it's impossible to go back and try the other way :( Personally I feel that the dropping of the A-bomb can never be justified. But I'm not able to put forward a reasoned argument to support my point of view :bluush:

[Mike Cash]

Forgive me for just giving you a link, but I've spent enough Augusts in Japan that I am sick to death of this topic already and really hate typing the same stuff over and over again: http://tinyurl.com/9vc4a

Also, I just had to sit through another session of Japanese television's highly self-serving annual coverage of this dead horse which has continued to be whipped to the point that not a shred of flesh remains on the bones.

[Horizon]

Well, to give for the other argument, I can see perfectly well why it was pretty much necessary as it stopped the Japanese from taking any more action in the war, but, well, it still killed innocent people (and, apparently, is still doing so), so, yeah...That's the thing I have the problem with.

But I can and do definately see both sides here.

Also, thanks for the link. I'm sure they have some good points to say. I'll definately have a read with them so to speak.

[lexico]

The use of the atomic weapon was a necessary moment in history. We have no regrets.
...
[We] pray that reason will prevail among leaders before we ever again need to call upon our nuclear might. There are no regrets. We were proud to have served.When a man has engaged in one action which, at the time of carrying out seemed justified, but later has raised doubts, what choices are laid before him ?

To rationalize. Of course there are other options available to him; to regret the act. But to regret would make him vulnerable not only to criticism from others, but also to criticism coming from himself, his conscience. This will obviously lead to a tormented life. He will find it painful to recall the moment of the action, and the moments that immediately preceded it.

Every time he thinks of the victims, he will surely tremble in agony; at first for himself, for the preservation of his being as a whole person. If the person has the mental capacity to empathise for the victims by going beyond the immediate physical and emotional needs of himself, and of those who surround him, then he might come to terms with the unshakable truth of his failure to live up to a certain idea. Thus abandoning all wishful thinking about what might have been, or what might not have been, he may barely begin to see what inhumanity he has created without making an excuse, without justifying that it was necessary.

But there is also the easier route of escape, esp. if there are those around him who validate, and console; one might even whisper into his ears, "You are not an agressor, but you are the victim. Because of the undue situation created by the other, you were forced into taking that action, and somebody, even if not you, would have had to do the dirty job of dropping the A-bomb. You have done a great service to mankind, and your personal pain of conscience is the burden you bear for all good people of this world."

Even this option of regret-first-affirm-later was way too dramatic an option to be realistic for people like Theodore Van Kirk, Morris Jepson, and Dr Harold Agnew. The weight of practical necessasity is too grave to dwell on "girlie" sentimentalism.

So the most practical choice for them was not to regret, nor to regret-&-excuse, but to fully rationalise. They are proud to have served in the nuclear massacre even to say that they "were able to stop the killing" when in reality death was delivered by their hands to at least 130,000 lives on the morn of August 6, 1945 Hiroshima.

[Void]

there was testing, so certainly there was the idea about how destructive such bomb could be (at least among those giving orders)
http://www.dannen.com/decision/

was it necessary? it still questionable
http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm
http://www.doug-long.com/hirosh2.htm

bombing civilians...
Bombing of Dresden was also to stop the war? Or it`s nothing more but moral terror? Were allies thus any different from fascist Germany or Japan, doing wrong in a name of right?

[Nebiki]

For those who don't know much about the Dresden bombing:
In 1941 Charles Portal of the British Air Staff advocated that entire cities and towns should be bombed. Portal claimed that this would quickly bring about the collapse of civilian morale in Germany. Air Marshall Arthur Harris agreed and when he became head of RAF Bomber Command in February 1942, he introduced a policy of area bombing (known in Germany as terror bombing) where entire cities and towns were targeted.

One tactic used by the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Force was the creation of firestorms. This was achieved by dropping incendiary bombs, filled with highly combustible chemicals such as magnesium, phosphorus or petroleum jelly (napalm), in clusters over a specific target. After the area caught fire, the air above the bombed area, become extremely hot and rose rapidly. Cold air then rushed in at ground level from the outside and people were sucked into the fire.

In 1945, Arthur Harris decided to create a firestorm in the medieval city of Dresden. He considered it a good target as it had not been attacked during the war and was virtually undefended by anti-aircraft guns. The population of the city was now far greater than the normal 650,000 due to the large numbers of refugees fleeing from the advancing Red Army.

On the 13th February 1945, 773 Avro Lancasters bombed Dresden. During the next two days the USAAF sent over 527 heavy bombers to follow up the RAF attack. Dresden was nearly totally destroyed. As a result of the firestorm it was afterwards impossible to count the number of victims. Recent research suggest that 35,000 were killed but some German sources have argued that it was over 100,000.
Out of interest, did the British government ever officially apologise for the bombing of Dresden?
A horrible tragedy served without passion, not an ounce of mercy was given to those who resided in Dresden.

[lonesoullost3]

Here's another link article - from the view of a survivor (though not so much a reflection on whether the bomb should be dropped, but rather the relation of an experience).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4739615.stm

Surviving Hiroshima: Keiko Ogura

Keiko Ogura tried to help the many injured after the bombing
Keiko Ogura was eight years old when the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. She still lives in the city.
I wanted to go to school, but my father said 'I have a very strange feeling today - you shouldn't go to school, stay with us'.

That morning I was on the road near the house and all of a sudden I saw a flash of blueish white light - a magnesium-like flash and soon after a big sound with dust, and I was blown away and fell on the ground.

I found myself lying on the ground near the house. I thought the house was just in front of me but I couldn't see it because everything had become so dark and many pieces of wood and roof tiles and rubbish were falling on my head.

And in the darkness there was a strong, strong wind like a typhoon. I couldn't open my eyes but tried to get back to my house and in the darkness I heard somebody was crying - my brother and sister.

I was 2.4km from the hypocentre but houses nearer the hypocentre had caught fire and were burning.

I saw long lines of refugees, just quiet, I don't know why they were so quiet. There were long lines, like ghosts.

Most of them were stretching out their arms because the skin was peeling off from the tips of their fingers. I could clearly see the hanging skin, peeling skin, and the wet red flesh and their hair was burned and smelled, the burnt hair smelled a lot.

And many people, just slowly passed by the front of my house.

Parched

All of a sudden a hand squeezed my ankle. I was so scared but they said 'get me water'. Almost all the people were just asking 'water', and 'help me'.

I rushed into my home where there was a well and brought them water. They thanked me but some of them were drinking water and vomiting blood and [then] died, stopped moving. They died in front of me. I felt regret and so scared. Maybe I killed them? Did I kill them?

And that night, 6 August, my father was so busy looking after the neighbours, but when he came back he said: 'Listen children - you shouldn't give water, some of the refugees died after drinking water. Please remember that.'

Then I felt so guilty, and I saw them many times in my nightmares. I thought I was a very bad girl - I didn't do what my father said - so I kept it a secret. I didn't tell anybody this story until my father died.

There was black rain falling, black rain mingling with ashes and rubbish and oil, something like that. It smelled bad and there were many spots on my white blouse - sticky, dirty rain.

In the morning people were moving, brushing away flies from their skin. My house was full of injured people.

But as a little girl I was so curious. I wanted to see what the city looked like. My house was at the bottom of a hill - I climbed up the hill, near our house, and then I saw the whole city. I was so astonished - all the city was flattened and demolished. I counted just a couple of concrete buildings.

In denial

The next day some of the buildings were still burning, and the next day, and the next day, and for three or four days I climbed the hill to see what the city was like.

I have a brother-in-law. He was living almost at the centre of the city - his family was very close to the hypocentre. Until now his family members were missing and he didn't want to recognise they were all gone, so he refused to say and report the family's names to the officials and he didn't want to visit Hiroshima.

Right now, he is living far away in Tokyo, and only last year he decided to report to Hiroshima city that his family members - his mother and sister - had passed away.

And there were so many people [who saw] so many dead or dying, but actually, most of them made up their mind not to tell anyone about what they saw.

And from a soldier's view:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4741541.stm
Surviving Hiroshima: Yutaka Nakagawa

Private Yutaka Nakagawa was a 20-year-old soldier and veteran of the Indonesia campaign, stationed in Hiroshima when the bomb fell on 6 August 1945.

I was in the barracks on the night of the 5 August. There was a warning of an air-raid. But I was in bed. A B29 was flying over the city and dropped hundreds of leaflets.

The leaflets said Japan would be defeated. The officers said don't touch the leaflets - they could be poisoned. Our officers collected them up so we didn't read them.

On the night of the 5 August there were warnings of air raids so I had to take our unit's communications equipment to a bunker 2km from our barracks.

All through the night I was moving this equipment so in the morning I was allowed to rest. When the bomb fell I was asleep. But when I awoke I saw the aftermath - some of my fellow soldiers were horribly burned.

In the city, the citizens of Hiroshima were trying to reach the Ota river to drink water. The banks of the rivers were covered with dead bodies.

Cries for water

Some time later I returned to the barracks. Inside the barracks were civilian victims, lying on the ground.

When I approached they cried out for water but our officers said: 'Don't give them water - if you do that they'll die immediately'.

But there was a pond inside the barracks - water reserved for fire-fighting - I saw black, burned bodies in the water - it was like a nightmare.

Even now I cannot believe the things that I saw. There are lots of memorials in Hiroshima - like the atomic bomb dome - but for me the most vivid image of the atomic bomb is the memory of those burned bodies.

[Silverpoint]

For those who don't know much about the Dresden bombing:

Out of interest, did the British government ever officially apologise for the bombing of Dresden?
A horrible tragedy served without passion, not an ounce of mercy was given to those who resided in Dresden.

There was a certain amount of soul searching a few years back in the UK when a statue dedicated to "Bomber" Harris (who masterminded the Dresden campaign) was proposed. A fairly significant proportion of the population came out against it, but the statue was eventually erected. Interesting the epithet under the statue simply reads "The Nation owes them all an immense debt", not actually directly glorifying the individual himself.

Recently Queen Elizabeth II made a trip to Germany in which she gave a vague admission that 'bad things were done by both sides' or something along those lines. I don't believe an official apology has ever been forthcoming though.

[Mike Cash]

I find it extremely interesting that people who look for some act of bombing with which to compare the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki invariably end up discussing Dresden....and practically never make the slightest mention of the horrific fire bombing of Tokyo.

Educate yourselves, if you've never heard of it. Here's a place to start:
http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm

Not even the Japanese make much mention of it. I doubt that many of the younger generation even know it happened at all. Television and other media here certainly don't make an annual event out of remembering it.

At this point I suppose I could go into the long-winded rant that my wife got subjected to the other day, but I'd rather spend a pleasant day off than piss myself off first thing in the morning.

[lonesoullost3]

I find it extremely interesting that people who look for some act of bombing with which to compare the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki invariably end up discussing Dresden....and practically never make the slightest mention of the horrific fire bombing of Tokyo.

Educate yourselves, if you've never heard of it. Here's a place to start:
http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm

Not even the Japanese make much mention of it. I doubt that many of the younger generation even know it happened at all. Television and other media here certainly don't make an annual event out of remembering it.

At this point I suppose I could go into the long-winded rant that my wife got subjected to the other day, but I'd rather spend a pleasant day off than piss myself off first thing in the morning.

I think the reason why most people talk about Dresden is because when you think about the major bombing in Japan you think Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Hands down they were more devastating than the firebombing. On the flip side, Dresden was the major bombing in Germany. So it's a comparison of the largest attacks in countries that draws people to Dresden, not necessarily ignorance of the Tokyo firebombing.

[Mike Cash]

So we place relative values on human life depending on where the event resulting in its loss stands in the public consciousness rankings? Or in inverse relation to the number of explosive/incendiary devices involved? Or is there some other reason that Japanese media chooses to focus exclusively on the two atomic bombings and the massive suffering and loss of life from them while totally failing to commemorate comparable suffering and death from the Tokyo fire bombings? I say that there is a self-serving political reason for Japan to do so and invite others to give a little thought to guessing what it might be.

[senseiman]

So we place relative values on human life depending on where the event resulting in its loss stands in the public consciousness rankings? Or in inverse relation to the number of explosive/incendiary devices involved? Or is there some other reason that Japanese media chooses to focus exclusively on the two atomic bombings and the massive suffering and loss of life from them while totally failing to commemorate comparable suffering and death from the Tokyo fire bombings? I say that there is a self-serving political reason for Japan to do so and invite others to give a little thought to guessing what it might be.


The obvious answer is that for much of the 60 years since Hiroshima and Nagasaki the world has been on the verge of a nuclear holocaust that would have wiped out human civilization as we know it. The conventional bombs dropped on Tokyo, horrendous though they are, don't pose the same total threat to the survivability of our species, so naturally people are much more pre-occupied with the sight of the world's only place where Nuclear weapons were used in anger. You could also notice that the Atomic bombings are widely credited with having ended the war, causing the downfall and discrediting of Japanese militarists and ushering in a whole new era in Japanese history, something which the Tokyo firebombings did not do.

There isn't anything self serving politically for the Japanese government either. The whole spirit of the memorial ceremonies and related media coverage are actually completely at odds with the policies of Junichiro Koizumi's government which is seeking to alter Japan's constitution and forge closer military ties with the US. A lot of it must be quite embarassing for the ruling party.

As for people getting sick and tired of seeing and hearing about Hiroshima I might ask how tired you get of the annual Pearl harbour or D-Day ceremonies and TV coverage in the US, which is every bit as heavy as coverage of the atomic bombings in Japan. The same banal arguments about the value of American lives lost on D-day vs. those lost on some less prominent battlefield like North Africa or Italy apply as the ones about lives lost in Tokyo vs. Hiroshima. In both cases it should be obvious why the media and people focus more on one versus the other. The atomic bombings and D-day are much more important events in historical context than the Tokyo firebombings or Operation Torch.

[Mike Cash]

No points for getting the obvious answer. Try for the unobvious answer.

[GaijinPunch]

The drop the A-bomb vs. prolong-the-war debate, unfortunately, is all based on speculation.

I won't state my opinions on if the bomb was justified or not, but there's not much to speculate on in regards to the "prolonged war theory". Read a book... even written by a Japanese. They weren't going to quit... not anytime soon.

Japanese television's highly self-serving annual coverage of this dead horse which has continued to be whipped to the point that not a shred of flesh remains on the bones.

Indeed. Just be thankful nobody's gone off on the whole "The US tricked Japan into attacking Perl Harbor" tangent.

[Nebiki]

As for people getting sick and tired of seeing and hearing about Hiroshima I might ask how tired you get of the annual Pearl harbour or D-Day ceremonies and TV coverage in the US, which is every bit as heavy as coverage of the atomic bombings in Japan. The same banal arguments about the value of American lives lost on D-day vs. those lost on some less prominent battlefield like North Africa or Italy apply as the ones about lives lost in Tokyo vs. Hiroshima. In both cases it should be obvious why the media and people focus more on one versus the other. The atomic bombings and D-day are much more important events in historical context than the Tokyo firebombings or Operation Torch.
Yeah, I certainly get sick of the annual D-Day celebrations.
The US tricked Japan into attacking Perl Harbor" tangent
Everybody looks for a way to justify their actions. No matter, how strange or perhaps even preposterous, the explanation may be.

[Silverpoint]

but there's not much to speculate on in regards to the "prolonged war theory". Read a book... even written by a Japanese. They weren't going to quit... not anytime soon.

Actually there's plenty to speculate on. Try reading one of the numerous and equally compelling publications which puts a totally different side of the story. The point is, you have no idea whether the war would have continued for a long time, or whether Japan would have surrendered, and neither have I. You're just giving us an opinion based on what you've heard.

Indeed. Just be thankful nobody's gone off on the whole "The US tricked Japan into attacking Perl Harbor" tangent.

Again this is slightly misprepresentative. You state this as if it were almost inevitable, when in fact the theory is so discredited as to be hardly worth commenting on and very few people would be likely to.

[Mike Cash]

I know there are at least three truck drivers on JREF. To translate that into meaningful terms: I know there are at least three conspiracy theorists on JREF.

[Silverpoint]

Are you suggesting JREF is representative of the populous as a whole?

[lexico]

I know there are at least three truck drivers on JREF. To translate that into meaningful terms: I know there are at least three conspiracy theorists on JREF.What is the connection ? Are you implicating anyone in particular, or just inviting people of all professions a/o opinions to the discussion ?

[Mike Cash]

I should have been more clear. The comment was in reference to "...the theory is so discredited as to be hardly worth commenting on and very few people would be likely to." in Silverpoint's post. My point being that as long as there are truck drivers around, there is always somebody ready to discuss a conspiracy, no matter how obscure or discounted it may be.

[ArmandV]

Letter from Truman to Irv Kupcinet, August 5, 1963

HARRY S. TRUMAN
INDEPENDENCE, MISSOURI
August 5, 1963

Dear Kup:

I appreciated most highly your column of July 30th, a copy of which you sent me.

I have been rather careful not to comment on the articles that have been written on the dropping of the bomb for the simple reason that the dropping of the bomb was completely and thoroughly explained in my Memoirs, and it was done to save 125,000 youngsters on the American side and 125,000 on the Japanese side from getting killed and that is what it did. It probably also saved a half million youngsters on both sides from being maimed for life.

You must always remember that people forget, as you said in your column, that the bombing of Pearl Harbor was done while we were at peace with Japan and trying our best to negotiate a treaty with them.

All you have to do is to go out and stand on the keel of the Battleship in Pearl Harbor with the 3,000 youngsters underneath it who had no chance whatever of saving their lives. That is true of two or three other battleships that were sunk in Pearl Harbor. Altogether, there were between 3,000 and 6,000 youngsters killed at that time without any declaration of war. It was plain murder.

I knew what I was doing when I stopped the war that would have killed a half million youngsters on both sides if those bombs had not been dropped. I have no regrets and, under the same circumstances, I would do it again - and this letter is not confidential.

Sincerely yours,

Harry Truman

Mr. Irv Kupcinet
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago, Illinois

[Buntaro]

"I knew what I was doing when I stopped the war that would have killed a half million youngsters on both sides if those bombs had not been dropped."

--> It is important that both sides of any issue be understood. This is one side of the issue that has been ignored by many people.

[lexico]

Thanks Mike for explaining; I'm a little slow to grasp. :)

Back on topic: Shall we proceed with the demystifying ? :biggrin:


I have been rather careful not to comment on the articles that have been written on the dropping of the bomb for the simple reason that the dropping of the bomb was completely and thoroughly explained in my Memoirs, and it was done to save 125,000 youngsters on the American side and 125,000 on the Japanese side from getting killed and that is what it did. It probably also saved a half million youngsters on both sides from being maimed for life.Brown University prof. James L. McClain of the history department disproves the verity of Truman's claim to have expected "125,000 deaths and half a million wounded Americans had he not used the atomic bomb." (in paraphrase)

Later Truman and his staff claimed that by dropping the atomic bomb they were able to save other lives. In 1947 Harry L. Stimson who served as Secretary of War in the administrations of Roosevelt and Truman contributed a special report to the The Harper's Magazine stating the official position of the US administrations. He wrote that "the US Airforce alone could have suffered casualties of over one million" in the landings on Kyushu in the fall of 1945 and on Honshu the following spring. ("The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb" Harry L. Stimson, The Harper's Magazine, 194:1161, Feb 1947, p. 102)

According to the military tabulation submitted to Pres. Truman in July 1945, however, the expected loss in the US military was at most 33,500 (spelt "thirty-three thousand and five hundred") casualties including the dead, the wounded, and those missing-in-action as a result of a [forecful] landing on Kyushu; therefore the figure of "over one million casuaties" stated by Stimson was in fact absolutely groundless.

retranslated from the Korean edition, 일본근현대사(日本近現代史), James L. McClain, translated by 이경아, Darakwon Publishing Inc., 2002, p. 651, ISBN 89-7255-789-7 04910How could Truman claim to have expected over 625,000 US casualties when the miilitary report forecast only 33,500 ? Does anyone have further information on the military report containing the casualty forecast of 33,500 of July 1945 submitted to then president Truman ?


You must always remember that people forget, as you said in your column, that the bombing of Pearl Harbor was done while we were at peace with Japan and trying our best to negotiate a treaty with them.No, the US was expecting that Japan would probably react to the US trade embargo on scrap-metal, crude oil, rubber, vanadium, molybdenum, and copper by invading southeast Asia to secure these raw materials. In order to do so it was necessary for Imperial Japan to immobilise the US navy, hence the obviously predictable response.

All you have to do is to go out and stand on the keel of the Battleship in Pearl Harbor with the 3,000 youngsters underneath it who had no chance whatever of saving their lives. That is true of two or three other battleships that were sunk in Pearl Harbor. Altogether, there were between 3,000 and 6,000 youngsters killed at that time without any declaration of war. It was plain murder.Can anyone prove that the US military was not aware of the attack on Pearl Harbor prior to the attack ? Can anyone be absolutely sure there were no Japanese radio transmissions picked up by the US military whether plain or encoded ?

I knew what I was doing when I stopped the war that would have killed a half million youngsters on both sides if those bombs had not been dropped.No, this unsubstantiable claim has been disproved above by McClain.

note: I do not have McClains' Japan: A Modern History in English; I have strived to keep the reverse translation literal; I hope someone with access can verify the integrity of McClains' statement only offered in retranslation.


I have no regrets and, under the same circumstances, I would do it again - and this letter is not confidential.


We have no regrets.
...
[We] pray that reason will prevail among leaders before we ever again need to call upon our nuclear might. There are no regrets.Are these four US citizens saying they have(had) no regrets, that they would have done it back then, and that they would do it again in the future if needed ? I see no other way of reading their open letter and statement to the public, and they appear to be open threats to the world.

[senseiman]

No points for getting the obvious answer. Try for the unobvious answer.

So....the obvious and rationale answer isn't what you are looking for? I know, it must be part of the vast Liberal/Democrat/Feminist plot to take over America and force everyone to worship pagan idols while smoking pot and not driving SUVs. Is this the kind of unobvious answer you are looking for or are you even remotely willing to give common sense a chance?

[ArmandV]

Can anyone prove that the US military was not aware of the attack on Pearl Harbor prior to the attack ?


On the other side of the coin, can anyone prove the U.S. was aware an attack was imminent?

Another quote I heard from Truman last night [on the subject of the A-Bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki] on the NBC Nightly News: "I don't care what the crybabies say!"

[ArmandV]

Truman wrote: "I asked General Marshall what it would cost in lives to land on the Tokyo plain and other places in Japan. It was his opinion that such an invasion would cost at a minimum a quarter of a million American casualties."

In his biography of Truman, David McCullough says that plans for an invasion were real.

"Nor, it must be stressed, was there anything hypothetical about preparations for the invasion - on both sides - a point sometimes overlooked in later years," he (McCullough) wrote.

"Truman had earlier authorised the Chiefs of Staff to move more than one million troops for a final attack on Japan. Japan had some 2.5 million regular troops on the home islands."

David McCullough argues for a more down-to-earth interpretation of Truman's motives.

"How could a president, or the others charged with responsibility for the decision, answer to the American people if... after the bloodbath of an invasion of Japan, it became known that a weapon sufficient to end the war had been available by midsummer and was not used?"

[GaijinPunch]

You state this as if it were almost inevitable, when in fact the theory is so discredited as to be hardly worth commenting on and very few people would be likely to.

That wasn't the point at all. I was referring to the fact that (I feel) it's a point often beat into the ground. I brought up the subject of "how long the war would've gone on" had there been no bomb dropped to my wife. Her reply was six months. Whether that's long or not is anyone's guess. For a country whose motto was "we'll fight until the last Japanese is dead" one could assume they had at least 6 months left... maybe more.

Whether or not more lives would've been lost is unknown, but had there been a land invasion, more American lives would've been lost, which was probably the largest factor in favor of the A-bomb at the time. Anyways, back to my point, she couldn't let it go. She had to throw in, "America made Japan attack Perl Harbor" to which I just said "but that doesn't make it right" and we left it at that.

[Pachipro]

Just be thankful nobody's gone off on the whole "The US tricked Japan into attacking Perl Harbor" tangent.

Again this is slightly misprepresentative. You state this as if it were almost inevitable, when in fact the theory is so discredited as to be hardly worth commenting on and very few people would be likely to.

I know there are at least three truck drivers on JREF. To translate that into meaningful terms: I know there are at least three conspiracy theorists on JREF.
Thank you MIke!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lexico
Can anyone prove that the US military was not aware of the attack on Pearl Harbor prior to the attack ?


On the other side of the coin, can anyone prove the U.S. was aware an attack was imminent?
I can't prove it, but there is enough documented evidence out there for anyone willing to do the research and have their blinders taken off. Remember one thing about war, history is written by the victors.

America needed to get into the war as a way of getting out of the economic depression they were in for the past 11 years, but the majority of Americans held firm to a “do not get involved,” and isolationist attitude. Something dire had to happen to stir up immediate support for entering the war.

Excerpts from Rule by SECRECY by Jim Marrs. pgs 173-175:

Controversy has raged for years over the question of Roosevelt’s foreknowledge of the December 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor. While incontestable proof remains elusive, the accumulation of available information has now caused widespread acceptance of the idea that the devastating attack was encouraged and tolerated in an effort to galvanize public support for America’s participation in the war.

Those who accept the idea that Roosevelt and a few other insiders knew that Pearl Harbor was to be attacked point to these suspicious facts:

-During Pacific naval exercises in 1932 and 1938, and with Japanese military attaches closely observing, U.S. Navy officers theoretically destroyed the Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor both times.

-Roosevelt ordered the Pacific fleet moved to the exposed position at Pearl Harbor over the vigorous objections of Admiral James O. Richardson, who was replaced for refusing to issue the order.

-Roosevelt, Secretary of State Cordell Hull, and other high-level officials knew that war was inevitable and that negotiations with Japan’s Kichisaburo Nomura were hopeless since the broken Japanese code revealed that Nomura was instructed not to yield to Hull’s harsh demands.

-They also knew that a large Japanese task force, including six aircraft carriers, had dropped from sight after moving toward America.

-This prompted U.S. Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall, a close associate to many CFR members, to send an oddly worded message to Pearl Harbor commanders on November 27, 1941, “Hostile action possible at any moment. If hostilities cannot, repeat CANNOT, be avoided, the United States desires that Japan commit the first overt act. This policy should not, repeat NOT, be construed as restricting you to a course of action that might jeopardize your defense.” Despite this clear warning, with its accompanying suggestion not to attack any attackers, Pacific fleet ships remained at anchor and aircraft were bunched into clusters of “sitting ducks” as “security” against saboteurs.

-During the first week of December, Americans intercepted the Japanese diplomatic “Purple” code ordering their embassy in Washington to destroy ass secret papers and prepare to evacuate.

-On December 4 Australian intelligence reported sighting the missing Japanese task force moving toward Pearl Harbor but Roosevelt dismissed it as a rumor begun by pro-war Republicans.

-A British agent named Dusko Popov learned of Japan’s plans from German sources but his warnings to Washington were ignored.
-According to author John Toland, separate warnings regarding a pending attack on Pearl Harbor, though varying as to a specific time, came from U.S. Ambassador to Japan Joseph Grew; FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, Senator Guy Gillette, Congressman Martin Dies, Brigadier General Elliot Thorpe in Java, and Colonel F.G.L. Weijerman, the Dutch military attaché in Washington. Later Dutch naval officer, Captain Johan Ranneft, said sources in U.S. Intelligence told him on December 6 that the Japanese carriers were onl;y 400 miles northwest of Hawaii.

-During investigations after the attack, Marshall and Navy Secretary Frank Knox both testified they could not recall their whereabouts the night of December 6. It was later revealed that they were both in the White House with Roosevelt.

Then there is the issue of the US aircraft carriers. Not one was present at Pearl Harbor on December 7. That’s because General Billy Mitchell had proven the mid-1920’s that a single bomb-loaded airplane could destroy a battle ship. Battleships were obsolete, but the American military and most of the public still believed that it was the ultimate weapon. Victory in any Pacific war would go to the side with the strongest airpower and that meant aircraft carriers. Thus, the U.S hid theirs from the attack.

Not much here I know. Next I'll post the most damning evidence against Roosevelt as to his foreknowledge of the attack.

[Mike Cash]

So....the obvious and rationale answer isn't what you are looking for? I know, it must be part of the vast Liberal/Democrat/Feminist plot to take over America and force everyone to worship pagan idols while smoking pot and not driving SUVs. Is this the kind of unobvious answer you are looking for or are you even remotely willing to give common sense a chance?

Snide nastiness in response to an expressed opinion one finds to be ludicrous, repugnant, or outrageous I can understand.

Snide nastiness in response to an as-yet unexpressed opinion leaves me scratching my head.

[cicatriz esp]

It's been estimated that a 15 to 20 kiloton fission bomb (like that used on Hiroshima) would destroy 5% of modern day Los Angeles. Not to take away from the severity of what happened at all, but what was used was not the metropolis flattening device most people assume it to have been.

[lexico]

It's been estimated that a 15 to 20 kiloton fission bomb (like that used on Hiroshima) would destroy 5% of modern day Los Angeles.If downtown Los Angeles were 95% wooden structure, and the 5% figure still held together, I'd consider your comparison valid. That coupled with a detonation 550m above downtown Los Angeles for maximum destruction, I wonder what percentage of an area comparable to Hiroshima city would be standing. Your comparison, which is obviously unfair, is cruelly unfair ! Just imagine what kind of chaos would be left under the 42,000 feet of heat pillar; bodies, bodies, bodies ! "I love the smell of napalm." Sorry that was the smell of flesh buring. I don't know who did the simulation on his PC or supercomputer; I think he has a sick mind !!!

[cicatriz esp]

It's not a comparison at all. The 5% figure was for geographical area only, not buildings or people. Don't collude the two.

edit: if i was making any comparison, it was between the nuclear weapons of then and now.

[senseiman]

Snide nastiness in response to an expressed opinion one finds to be ludicrous, repugnant, or outrageous I can understand.

Snide nastiness in response to an as-yet unexpressed opinion leaves me scratching my head.

You ask a question, I spend a fair amount of my time trying to give you an intelligent response which you snidely dismiss with a glib one-liner. What did you expect, a medal?

Please excuse the above nastiness, but if you'd care to share your opinion with us all rather than just dispariging those of others I'd be ever so grateful. I'm not really one to show nastiness to someone who actually goes out on a limb and stakes out and defends his opinions.

[senseiman]

It's been estimated that a 15 to 20 kiloton fission bomb (like that used on Hiroshima) would destroy 5% of modern day Los Angeles. Not to take away from the severity of what happened at all, but what was used was not the metropolis flattening device most people assume it to have been.

If you were to detonate a Hirsohima sized bomb on downtown LA, the number of people killed would almost definitely be greater.

Percentages like that mean nothing. Hiroshima is a very compact city which had a population of 350,000 at the time. LA is a sprawling metropolis with suburbs extending over hundreds of square miles.

[Mike Cash]

You ask a question, I spend a fair amount of my time trying to give you an intelligent response which you snidely dismiss with a glib one-liner. What did you expect, a medal?

I didn't snidely dismiss it at all. I agreed with you that it was the obvious answer and took no issue with anything you said. I thought it was a fine answer. But it didn't address my "I say that there is a self-serving political reason for Japan to do so and invite others to give a little thought to guessing what it might be." comment.


Please excuse the above nastiness, but if you'd care to share your opinion with us all rather than just dispariging those of others I'd be ever so grateful. I'm not really one to show nastiness to someone who actually goes out on a limb and stakes out and defends his opinions.

I not only clearly state my opinions here, I go one step farther and put my real name on them. I certainly don't need to be chided on this point by someone who states his opinions behind the anonymity of a screen name.

I've left the opinion unstated thus far in hopes of seeing if there are those who go beyond the obvious when looking at this issue and seeing what ideas others might have regarding what self-serving interest Japan might have in continuing to focus on the two atomic bombings practically to the exclusion of any other aspect of World War Two and in what way this course may have affected international relations between Japan and her neighboring countries over the last sixty years.

[Nebiki]

Well, with regards to self serving interests, Japan might have.
It is rather hypocritical to expect great things of Japan, especially with international relations, when the west does nothing on the contrary to set an example.
But remeber, this is all just my opinion.
And opposing views on the matter I won't criticize.

[Mike Cash]

And it is rather condescending and patronizing to assume that Japan would need the west to set an example for it.

[Nebiki]

You're entitled to an opinion, yes.
My question is how can you possibly find that patronizing?
You feel that Japan would be any less capable of setting an example, for us?
Isn't that patronizing in itself?
It's also worth noticing that I never made the assumption that Japan would need an example. I merely feel, that, how is it reasonable to expect Japan to come to terms with its neighbours when the west won't even apologise for what was quite possibly one of the most horiffic war crimes ever commited?
While I'm all for you challanging my point of view. I feel you possibly you aren't doing it in the most constructive manner possible.

[Mike Cash]

In what way was it a war crime? And why should "the west" apologize for it?

In case nobody has noticed, my question on this regards the national psyche of Japan regarding the war and has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual bombing itself or it's immediate or delayed aftermath, nor with the justification of using the bomb.

[Nebiki]

To quote a referance:
Approximately 40 percent of Nagasaki was destroyed. Luckily for many civilians living in Nagasaki, though this atomic bomb was considered much stronger than the one exploded over Hiroshima, the terrain of Nagasaki prevented the bomb from doing as much damage. Yet the decimation was still great. With a population of 270,000, approximately 70,000 people died by the end of the year.
You don't consider killing 70,000 people, many whom would have been women and children, a war crime? I'm not saying that other countries haven't produced such terrible tragedies, as I would be lieing my friend ;).
Whether the west should apoligise for it, is left to the individual to decide.
Note: The referance I quoted does not include the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
Perhaps I am a pacifist or maybe I am simply a fool to think such weapons don't have a purpose in this world.

[Silverpoint]

"I knew what I was doing when I stopped the war that would have killed a half million youngsters on both sides if those bombs had not been dropped."

--> It is important that both sides of any issue be understood. This is one side of the issue that has been ignored by many people.

The fact that the bomb (may have) saved many lives is something that is ignored by many people? I can't quite for the life of me understand your reasoning here. This is the specific central argument that the entire debate revolves around. The entire world is aware of it. People may disagree with it, but noone ignores it!

Actually I'd be interested to know if anyone saw the Hiroshima debate programme on TV last night on the "BBC World" channel (I think it was repeated a couple of times). One of the guests was a historian who seemed to have been invited to give an impartial, non-political assessment of the dropping of the atomic bombs. While I don't know her background, she seemed pretty academically minded and not some crackpot conspiracy theorist just invited to spice up the show.

Her assessment? Japan was at the time of the bombing trying to negotiate a surrender. Russia was entering the war against Japan, further deepening the need for the Japanese to find a solution to get out of the situation. She said that if Truman had waited even one week longer, there may never have been a need to drop the bombs. Later when someone suggested that perhaps the reason for dropping the bombs on Japan may have been to "scare Stalin" with whom relations were becoming increasingly strained, she said rather diplomatically that it's not impossible to believe there may be some truth in this idea.

It's true that Japan was at the time, as yet, unwilling to accept a total unconditional surrender entirely on the Allies' terms. What is clear though is that they were keen to negotiate some kind of peace. If a country is unwilling to stop fighting and will continue the war to the last gasp of the last man, this may have been a good reason for dropping the bomb to end things quickly. However, if the reason for dropping the bomb is simply because the country in question wants to negotiate conditions for surrender and doesn't want to 100% accept the terms of the opposing force, I find it pretty disgusting that tens of thousands of civillians were wiped out simply to make a point.

Sadly however, the more you read about this tragic event, the more it appears that may be exactly what happened.

[lexico]

Thanks for posting that, Silverpoint.
To bring in an interesting spin; the US wanted a share of the pie on the Korean peninsula. Time was a deciseive factor that would influence the quality and degree of US occupation of Korea.

1) if IJapan surrendered early; US troops could land and estblish one Martial Command on the Korean Peninsula
2) but IJapan lagged in its surrender; giving troops of the USSR a head start in entering present day N.Korea and Pyongyang, while US troops were still fighting a Pacific War.
3) if the surrender were to be delayed one week or more, the Soviets might "liberate" and take over all of Korea.

It is interesting to note that USSR entered Pyongyang immediately following the surrender in August 1945, while the US arrived two months later in October 1945, causing great confusion. Not to mention a massacre of Korean civilians; the US employed former IJA troops to "mow down" a welcoming Korean crowd between Inchon and Seoul -- the US troops supposedly thought they were an angry crowd of rebels, thus the former-IJA used disinformation to apply one last evil blow on the Koreans !

The point being; the US was under a lot of pressure because it had expected to excercise indisputed influence in this area, but that does not make the use of the atomic bombs justified at all. Greed was behind it.

[Void]

2 Silverpoint
That`s almost exactly what my friend answered me today (he is into Japan studies and can be even considered japanophil). He even said that for Japan war was lost at the end of 1943, and it was just the galvanized corpse aftewards: best military cadre are lost, quality of equipment decreases, China as a primary sourse is cut off, besides regular bombing begins. He said that families on Okinava were given 1 granade per each - to kill themselves (was it?), and there was not enough of food for the army. Besides Soviets (whom Japan considered at least neutral) declared the war.
So, he advised to divide supposed number of loses (without A-bomb) at least on 10.

Even when i was at school some of our history teachers told that A-bombing was rather to threaten USSR

i understand that history doesn`t have subjunctive mood. There enough evidence for both sides - theat the war would go on (6 or so months) or that it could be stopped by diplomatic and economic means.

Whatever...
But by 20ies years such thing as atomic desease was known (Curie died because of it and her notes even today are radiactive), Tests showed that 1 a-bomb was more destructive than conventional. Bombing civilians (wheather it`s Tokio, Hambugh, Hiroshima or Dresden) is still a crime... there is no winner at war, only losers

[senseiman]

I didn't snidely dismiss it at all. I agreed with you that it was the obvious answer and took no issue with anything you said. I thought it was a fine answer.

Glad to hear it, if I misunderstood your intentions I apologize.

But it didn't address my "I say that there is a self-serving political reason for Japan to do so and invite others to give a little thought to guessing what it might be." comment.

Actually, and this is what made me feel you were "snidely dismissing my post", because not only did I quite directly address that comment but I also directly addressed several other points you had brought up. Did you actually read my post?



I not only clearly state my opinions here, I go one step farther and put my real name on them. I certainly don't need to be chided on this point by someone who states his opinions behind the anonymity of a screen name.

Using your real name isn't really called for in forums like this so you don't get any extra points for that. And in fact, as you say you haven't stated your opinion here.

I've left the opinion unstated thus far in hopes of seeing if there are those who go beyond the obvious when looking at this issue and seeing what ideas others might have regarding what self-serving interest Japan might have in continuing to focus on the two atomic bombings practically to the exclusion of any other aspect of World War Two and in what way this course may have affected international relations between Japan and her neighboring countries over the last sixty years.

There are probably a million reasons you could think of for why Japan would focus on the atomic bombings. If you've got some sort of conspiracy theory I'm sure we'd all be interested. You seem convinced that Japan has some unseemly, self serving motive for it. OF COURSE Japan has a self serving motive for it. Every national memorial or ceremony in every country on the planet has a self serving purpose. But that doesn't mean that there aren't a mountain of legitimate, non-self serving motives for it, far more so than most other war memorials IMHO. So by just coyly prodding everybody to tell you what you want to hear its hard to tell if you are just spouting Bull or if you actually have something worthwhile to say.

[Jack]

A bit of a serious discussion here, should america have used the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima?

[cicatriz esp]

If you were to detonate a Hirsohima sized bomb on downtown LA, the number of people killed would almost definitely be greater.

Percentages like that mean nothing. Hiroshima is a very compact city which had a population of 350,000 at the time. LA is a sprawling metropolis with suburbs extending over hundreds of square miles.

And yet, if you removed every single person from LA and detonated the bomb, that percentage would still stand. I was only refering to blast radius and maybe psi as a function of that radius, sorry for the confusion.

[lexico]

To be human is to realise he has a choice -- at all times.
To blame others, the opponent, the soviets, the Nazis, Pearl Harbor, the public outrage, need to save lives, is to close eyes to this human condition and to seek refuge in an easy defense -- like an animal that has no choice.
There was a choice, many choices, and many, many more.
Those are for murder-in-self-defense case arguments -- not for the leading country of the free world.

So let us not put the words in the mouths of respondents by asking should -- this is no catholic mass.
My answer is: no. Using the atomic bombs was not necessary because there were at least several choices laid before the US, but the choices were neglected out of choice, blinded by fear, greed, haste, and expediency.

[nice gaijin]

I'm not a historian, but my thoughts are thus:

to the American leadership, in order to end the war a devastating attack was necessary; something to crush the Japanese morale and make victory seem impossible... dropping the second bomb on Nagasaki was to reinforce that sense of hopelessness, and to give the impression that we had more than just one of these bombs, and that we were willing to continue dropping them until there was no one left to fight...

nevertheless, I never liked the idea of targetting civilians. The major arguments for the decision I can remember are that the Japanese would have continued fighting to the last man and dragged the war on for as long as possible; there couldn't have been the same psychological impact if a different target was picked, and that the Japanese had no qualms about targetting civilians, both in Asia and America. I recognize these arguments and the fact that the war did end very quickly after the bombs dropped, but I don't find any of it real justification or vindication for all thse civilian casualties that week (and all the repercussions thereafter). I've read several accounts of what happened in Hiroshima, the first of which was Sadako's thousand paper cranes, one of the first books I read... I find the first-person accounts of how devastating the bombs were to be the most compelling arguments against ever dropping them again.

to sum up my own feelings, America needed to show it had the power to end the war as quickly as possible, and that's what they did, but I would prefer to think that all those civilian casualties were not necessary as collateral damage.

[Silverpoint]

With the greatest of respect to the original poster, there's a considerably longer and more detailed current thread on this topic entitled "Accounts of Enola Gay Crew" which is (at the moment) sitting near the top of the first page of the forum. Maybe a moderator could join the two or something?

Edit: This post got merged from another thread (in case you're wondering what I'm talking about)

[Iron Chef]

Thread merged.

[vorpar]

"She said that if Truman had waited even one week longer, there may never have been a need to drop the bombs."

This is demonstrably untrue. 3 days before that week was up, the Japanese had successfully tested their own atomic bomb. It was planned to be used on the nearly 1 million person strong invasion of Kyushu.

In hindsight, the bombings turned out to stop the war immediately, but I don't know that I can justify them with the knowledge that they had at the time.

[lexico]

"She said that if Truman had waited even one week longer, there may never have been a need to drop the bombs."This is demonstrably untrue. 3 days before that week was up, the Japanese had successfully tested their own atomic bomb. It was planned to be used on the nearly 1 million person strong invasion of Kyushu.Do you have proof of this ? Even 2ndary that might point to the primary proof ? Anything ?

[vorpar]

Wilcox, Rober K. Japan's Secret War. New York: Marlowe & Co., 1995

Pictorial History of the Second World War, vol. 5. New York: Wm. H. Wise & Co., 1970

Parrott, Lindsay. "Five Cyclotrons Wrecked in Japan." New York Times, Novermber 24, 1945. (additional stories on Nov 26, 29 and Dec 5, 6, 14, and 15.)

The book I'm reading has a photo of one of the cyclotrons being disposed of by the US military. Jack Seward's Strange But True Stories from Japan.

I misquoted also, the invasion force was numbered at 3.5 million.

[Silverpoint]

This is demonstrably untrue. 3 days before that week was up, the Japanese had successfully tested their own atomic bomb. It was planned to be used on the nearly 1 million person strong invasion of Kyushu.


And where exactly was this bomb tested? You need an extremely large amount of space to test a bomb. Testing one in Japan would be nearly impossible due to the densely populated environment. The Japanese were being pinned back on every front, so it's unlikely they could have taken it overseas for testing. I'm curious as to where exactly this device went off and why there is no mention of it in any official records.

The original argument for creating the bomb was because Germany was considered to be close to developing one, so the Allies knew they had to develop the technology first. If there was any real knowledge that the Japanese had a bomb, this would have been a propaganda gift for Truman in his argument for ending the war quickly. Yet, no one at the time, or since in an official capacity has ever used this argument that I'm aware of.

[lexico]

Vorpar:

Thank you for the references. I shall be back to post an argument against what you presented; 3 days before that week was up, the Japanese had successfully tested their own atomic bomb.

It was planned to be used on the nearly 1 million [sic. > 3.5 million] person strong invasion of Kyushu.

[vorpar]

If there was any real knowledge that the Japanese had a bomb, this would have been a propaganda gift for Truman in his argument for ending the war quickly.

I didn't quite say it clearly enough, but they didn't know until after it was tested that Japan had the bomb. It wasn't tested until after the Nagasaki bombing.

It was tested at a research facility in Korea. You're right, they sent the scientists away since nothing could get done during the American bombing.

Debate all that you wish. I myself haven't checked the primary sources, so I don't know the complete accuracy of what I have presented here. I don't mean to offend, I just thought this was an interesting little known tidbit.

I personally think that the use of nuclear weapons was a tragedy, especially against a mostly civilian population. Nobody can accurately predict what Japan would have done with their bomb either, so I'm not saying that it justifies the American bombings.

In any case, it isn't really that far-fetched an idea, considering that Japan was researching fission in the '20s, at the same time numerous other countries were.

[lexico]

While Theodore Van Kirk, Navigator, Morris Jepson, Weapons Test Officer, and Dr Harold Agnew reaffirms the bombimg of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, the Commandar of Enola Gay, Robert Lewis, chooses to differ from their view, as do J Robert Oppenheimer and Dwight Eisenhower.

The Independent Online Edition (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article303774.ece)
Independent Media TV (http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=11547&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported)



'My God, what have we done?' - the commander of the 'Enola Gay'

Sixty years ago tomorrow, the crew of the Enola Gay watched in awe as their payload detonated over the city of Hiroshima. "As the bomb exploded, we saw the entire city disappear," said Commander Robert Lewis. "I wrote in my log, 'My God, what have we done?'"

Below, thousands of people were instantly carbonised in a blast that was thousands of times hotter than the sun's surface; further from the epicentre, birds ignited in mid-flight, eyeballs popped and internal organs were sucked from bodies of victims.

By the end of the day an estimated 160,000 were dead or injured and the bomb's "ghosts" walked the city - thousands of initial survivors who would die within days, often with the word mizu -water - on their lips. Many more subsequently died - and are still dying - from various cancers.

Harry Truman, the then President of the Unites States who had ordered Hiroshima destroyed, later said: "We have discovered the most terrible weapon in the history of the world," but steadfastly defended its use and said it had ultimately saved lives.

In March this year, Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the Enola Gay, also said the bomb had saved lives. Asked whether he had any regrets, he said: "Hell no, no second thoughts. If you give me the same circumstances, hell yeah, I'd do it again."

J Robert Oppenheimer, the brilliant scientist who oversaw the building of the bomb, was more ambiguous about his creation. He famously said after the first test detonation: "Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

Truman's successor, President Dwight Eisenhower, also had reservations. In a 1963 interview with Newsweek magazine, he said: "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." Some thought that Imperial Japan, like Nazi Germany, deserved what it got for the brutal, relentless bombing of Shanghai and Chongqing, the Rape of Nanjing and other war atrocities across Asia. But others asked where had the moral high ground of the Allies gone since President Franklin D Roosevelt described the 1940 Nazi blitzkrieg of British cities as "inhuman barbarism"?

"No one seemed conscious of the irony," wrote the US historian Howard Zinn. "One of the reasons for the general indignation against the fascist powers was their history of indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations."

Tomorrow morning, Hiroshima will sidestep the endless debates over whether the bombing was justified and concentrate on commemorating the victims, in a ceremony swelled by thousands of foreign visitors and dominated by fresh concerns that the world is forgetting the lessons learnt here.

"I'm less resentful about what happened in Hiroshima than I am about America's wars today," says Kazuko Kojima, who was born two days after the bomb fell, in a cellar filled with the dead and dying victims. "Why don't they stop? Aren't there better ways to solve problems? The reason people go to war is because they don't understand the feelings of others."

Article Length: 448 words (approx.)(c) 2005 Independent News & Media (UK) Ltd.

[Silverpoint]

It was tested at a research facility in Korea. You're right, they sent the scientists away since nothing could get done during the American bombing.


I'm not saying you're completely wrong, but the balance of probability would lead me to believe that this isn't a true account. Recently a "historian" in the UK published a book claiming that Germany had also developed a bomb, but his arguments were widely discredited. He put up what seemed like a reasonably sound argument to someone reading his book. But when you looked at the bigger picture, he had been incredibly selective with the truth in order to build a case.

Korea, China et. al. need no excuses to criticize Japan's wartime atrocities. If there had been any testing of nuclear weapons on Korean soil, I'm pretty sure it would be at the forefront of any debate and other countries would never let Japan forget about it, yet I've never heard a word come out of Korea about this.

[lexico]

Was there a Japanese A-Bomb, genzai bakudan 原子爆彈, in 1945 ?


The Snell Report on an Interrogation of a Japanese Intelligence Officer
Japan Developed Atom Bomb; Russia Grabbed Scientists (http://www.reformation.org/atlanta-constitution.html) by David Snell
Atlanta Constitution Oct. 3 1946.
(C) The Atlanta Constitution and David Snell 1946


The controversy regarding the Japanese Nuclear Program began with a US Army officer David Snell (an agent of the Twenty-Fourth Criminal Investigation Detachment) who interviewed a certain Japanese Captain Tsetusuo Wakabayashi ( "pseudonym" ) who had been "in charge of counter-espionage at the atomic developing project in Korea.” “Wakabayashi” told Snell in Seoul 1945 that;

Japan had been trying to build its own nuclear bombs since at least as far back as 1938, upon hearing of German success in splitting the atom.

He recounted the appointment by the Imperial Japanese Army of Dr. Nishina Yoshio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshio_Nishina) 仁科芳雄 ---one of the world’s foremost nuclear physicists and a former student of Neils Bohr---to head the bomb assembly effort at the national science academy, Tokyo’s Riken Institute.

Research proceeded at a relatively leisurely pace until the tide of war turned against Japan, after which the Army and, later, the Navy began pouring more and more resources into building a working device and turning it into a practical weapon.

When American B-29s arrived to firebomb mainland cities, the program was disrupted and had to be largely evacuated and reconstituted in Korea, at Hungnam 興南 (Jap. Konan), where Japanese zaibatsu colonial entrepreneurs (such as Noguchi Shitagau 野口 遵, 1873-1944) had built a gigantic military industrial complex after taking control of the area in the 1904-5 Russo-Japanese War.

It was here, Wakabayashi claimed, that the Japanese atomic bomb, the genzai bakudan 原子爆彈 (“greatest fighter” [sic. > "element bomb"]) was completed and test-fired on August 12, just after Nagasaki. He said it would have been finished three months earlier had it not been for the B-29s, which he considered to have been the decisive weapon in the war.

Alas for Japan, there was only enough uranium fuel to power the test detonation, and with the Soviets bearing down on Hungnam 興南 (Jap. Konan)---the largest industrial installation in all of Asia at that time---the decision was made to abandon the project and destroy as much of it as possible.

Much documentation accordingly vanished, along with several bomb casings for additional, not yet completed genzai bakudan 原子爆彈, but the Soviet advance was so fast and overwhelming that most of the complex fell into Russian hands intact, and a number of prominent Japanese atomic scientists were captured---and, later, ruthlessly tortured."The Japanese Bomb And Why It Matters (http://www.coldwar.org/text_files/may_june_04.pdf) (pdf)
William J. Pellas (http://www.williamjpellas.com/)
in Cold War Times May/June 2004 pp. 19-20
(C) US Library of Congress 2003


Obviously there would be thousands of pages to be written on the Japanese nuclear program, and at least dozens of questions raised. These are some that I believe are essential :

1) How much of Wakabayashi's account of Japan's nuclear program and bomb testing relayed in Snell's report can be supported by evidence ?

If the answer is preeminently positive, follows the question;

2) How much was the US aware of the Japanese nuclear program ? Is there evidence ?

If the answer is preeminently positive, follows the question;

3) Did that knowledge influence the US bombing of Hiroshima ? Is there evidence ?

If the answer is preeminently positive, follows the question;

4) How much can Japan be blamed for its hypocricy of crying murder when they themselves were contemplating nuclear bombing US mainland indiscriminately with 9,000 nuclear weapons dropped from balloons as it had done with conventional bombs ? Is there evidence ?

If the answer is preeminently positive, follows the question;

5) How much has Japan been preparing for a nuclear re-armament after 1952 ? Is there evidence ?

If the answer is preeminently positive, follows the questions;

6) Where does Japan's nuclear offensive preparedness stand right now ?
What evidence do we have of Japan walking the double ropes of "victim" and "villain" ?
What has been its main means of information manipulation ?

7) What interest lies in a "possible" nuclear re-armament of Japan for the US ?
It is obvious that a nuclear re-armament amounts to independence from the US nuclear shield, politically and militarily.
What's in it for the US to let Japan slip out of its rein ?
Or is it just another "conspiration cooked up by idle day-dreamers and Japan bashers" ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Useful links On the (Japanese) Nuclear Program(s):

Japanese atomic program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_atomic_program)
Nuclear Weapons Program (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/nuke/) FAS: The Federation of American Scientists
Japan and Atomic Bombs (http://vikingphoenix.com/public/JapanIncorporated/1895-1945/japan_abombs.htm) Links to Japan Incorporated articles
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF NUCLEAR WEAPON (http://www.ask.ne.jp/~hankaku/english/chronotbl.html) Masaaki Koarashi
Japanese development of nuclear energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Nuclear_Energy_Development) several possible Japanese nuclear testings before August 15, 1945
Supposedly...studies advanced to making one or two little experimental atomic artefacts in Hungnam 興南 (Konan) Installations in Korea 朝鮮 (Chosen), using the heavy water facilities provided for Noguchi Zaibatsu, and test-fired just after the final of war this in the Eastern Sea (Sea of Japan). Other versions mentions why these experiments continuing in Manchukuo and the test-fire was carried out in East Gobi desert in Hsingan province with support of Unit 731. (words edited for diction)
Japan's Atomic Bomb: We almost lost all (http://www.grunt.com/scuttlebutt/corps-stories/ww2/atomicbomb.asp) a personal account by Leon Thompson
Japan's A-Bomb (http://39th.org/39th/hc/hc_japan_a_bomb.html) 39th Bomb Group (VH), 20th Air Force, claims Japan detonated an atomic bomb
Japan's Atomic Bomb (http://www.trossman.blogspot.com/) Michael Trossman favors Imperial Japan's motivation, suggests nuclear rearmament of modern Japan
Wiki Talk: Japanese atomic program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Japanese_atomic_program) discussion on IJ nuclear program

German nuclear energy project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_energy_project)
Soviet atomic bomb project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project)
Manhattan Project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project)
Links: japan nuclear weapons program (http://www.google.com/custom?q=japan+nuclear+weapons+program&sitesearch=fas.org&sa=Search&cof=LW%3A600%3BBIMG%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.fas.org%2Fp aper2.jpg%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.fas.org%2Ffas_ban ner.gif%3BLH%3A50%3BAH%3Acenter%3BGL%3A0%3BAWFID%3 A0d60397048482b28%3B&formAction=) Links to FAS articles, nuclear programs of the world
List of countries with nuclear weapons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_nuclear_weapons)

History of nuclear weapons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_nuclear_weapons)
Nuclear weapon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon)
Nuclear weapon design (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_design)
Critical mass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass)

Uranium Maps (http://www.wise-uranium.org/umaps.html) Worldwide distribution of Uranium Ores (requires Java)
Uraninite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_ore)
Yellowcake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake)
Uranium hexafluoride (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_hexafluoride)
Uranium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium)
Uranium-235 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-235)
Uranium-238 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-238)
Plutonium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium)

Uranium Production (http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/uranium.htm) FAS page
Heavy water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Water)
Enriched uranium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium)
Uranium Enrichment (http://www.uic.com.au/nip33.htm)
Uranium Enrichment (http://www.urenco.com/im/uploaded/1086887106.pdf) (pdf)
Isotope separation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope_separation) for uranium enrichment

Gaseous diffusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaseous_diffusion)
Gas centrifuge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_centrifuge)
Zippe-type centrifuge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zippe-type_centrifuge)

Cyclotron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclotron) a kind of particle accelerator
Particle accelerator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_accelerator)
Particle Accelerators Around the World (http://www-elsa.physik.uni-bonn.de/accelerator_list.html)

Nuclear testing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_testing)
Nuclear explosion (detonation, blast) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_explosion)
Nuclear Weapon Effects Calculator (http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Science/Nuke.html)
Electromagnetic pulse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse)
Gamma radiation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_rays)
Firestorm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_storm)
Shock wave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_wave)
Mushroom cloud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_cloud)
Radioactive contamination (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_contamination)
Nuclear fallout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout)

Trinity test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_test)
Castle Bravo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Bravo)
Tsar Bomba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba)
Table of Known Nuclear Tests Worldwide: 1945-69 | 1970-96 (http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab15.asp) National Resources Defense Council
Category: Nuclear test sites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nuclear_test_sites)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vorpar:

What are required for Wakabayashi-Snell-Wilcox's claim to Japan's Nuclear Bomb Testing of August 12, 1945 ?

These are the bare minimum number of conditions that would have to be met
1) for a Japanese atomic bomb to have existed at that time
2) for the nuclear bomb to have detonated off shore of Hungnam 興南 (Jap. Konan) Korea, August 12, 1945.

First there would have had to be uranium ore(s) to supply the raw, naturally occurring uranium within Japanese access.

Second there would have had to be a facility with a certain throughput, processing the raw uranium to a higher concentration of uranium.

Third there would have had to be an established enrichment technology.

Fourth there would have had to be a facility employing the enrichment technolgy to separate U-235 from U-238 via enrichment.

Fifth the enrichment process would have had to last long enough to have accumulated U-235 above critical mass.

Six there would have had to be an explosion mechanism deveoped. The enriched U-235 of a quantity above critical mass would have had to be assembled in sub-critical mass parts that would reach above critical mass at time of desired detonation.

Seventh if the bomb was tested, there would have had to be telltale signs of the testing if the test was performed above ground or waters.

Does the August 12, 1945 Japanese a-bomb have enough evidence (records, witness accounts, orders, plans, reports, books) to satisfy these criteria ?

What does Robert K. Wilcox have to offer in terms of concrete evidence supporting the existence of a working atomic bomb in Imperial Japan before the surrender ?

[lexico]

Vorpar:

"She said that if Truman had waited even one week longer, there may never have been a need to drop the bombs." This is demonstrably untrue. 3 days before that week was up, the Japanese had successfully tested their own atomic bomb.I believe you mean August 12, 1945. From what I read, the atomic bomb testing might not have been successful. What makes you (or your sources) conclude that the a-bomb testing was a success ? Besides, even if the testing was a success, those happened AFTER the dropping of fat-man and little-boy. So in principle, the testing which occurred later could not have influenced the US decision to "nuke 'em" both of which which occurred earlier than the alleged Japanese testing.It was planned to be used on the nearly 1 million [sic. > 3.5 million] person strong invasion of Kyushu... In hindsight, the bombings turned out to stop the war immediately, but I don't know that I can justify them with the knowledge that they had at the time. Could you be more specific on that piece of info ?
When was the decision made ?
Who (or what document) relates that decision ?
Who knew in Imperial Japan of that decision ?
Who in the US knew this beforehand ?
Unless the US knew this IJ decision, it would also become impossible to say that the "Kyushu Plan" had anything to do with the US decision to nuke Hiroshima & Nagasaki.Wilcox, Rober K. Japan's Secret War. New York: Marlowe & Co., 1995He is definitely the spearhead of the theory now. Are you aware of any new evidence he was able to muster in his new 1995 edition after the 1985 edition ?Pictorial History of the Second World War, vol. 5. New York: Wm. H. Wise & Co., 1970

Parrott, Lindsay. "Five Cyclotrons Wrecked in Japan." New York Times, Novermber 24, 1945.
(additional stories on Nov 26, 29 and Dec 5, 6, 14, and 15.)
The book I'm reading has a photo of one of the cyclotrons being disposed of by the US military. Jack Seward's Strange But True Stories from Japan.The existence of cyclotrons doesn't mean a thing in itself; in fact there are Particle Accelerators and Accelerator Laboratories around the World (http://www-elsa.physik.uni-bonn.de/accelerator_list.html) on Electron accelerator ELSA (http://www-elsa.physik.uni-bonn.de/index_en.html) page
This is not a complete list in that it only counts major particle accelerator lab sites; often one lab will have more than one accelerator, but is counted as one.

Argentina 1
Belgium 1
Brazil 1
Canada 2
China 1
Denmark 1
Finland 1
France 5
Germany 21
India 3
Italy 8
Japan 6
Jordan 1
South Korea 1
Netherlands 1
Russian Federation 6
South Africa 1
Switzerland 8
Sweden 4
Taiwan 1
UK 3
USA 3422 countries listed here for illustration that have the more advanced version of the cyclotron, and hence those that could be considered comparable to Japan having 5 cyclotrons back in 1945. Now they don't all have nuclear bombs, do they ?
Also must be noted, countries with nuclear weapons such as Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel are not even listed. Therefore using the cyclotron as evidence to support the existence of atomic bombs in 1945 Japan before the surrender is unfounded.

60-inch cyclotron, completed 1938 Riken Institute (http://www.riken.jp/engn/r-world/riken/history/zaidan-b/index.html) (理研) 理化学研究所 (http://www.riken.jp/r-world/riken/history/zaidan-b/index.html)
The first to be built in Japan, this was a copy of Lawrence Livermore National Lab's; developping the cyclotron at Cal Berkeley in the 1930's, the American inventor Dr Ernst Lawrence had personally delivered the plans for this device to Dr Nishina Yoshio himself. Of course this was before the Pacific War broke out in Dec. 1941.

http://www.riken.jp/engn/r-world/riken/history/zaidan-b/image/cyclo.jpg http://www.riken.jp/engn/r-world/riken/history/zaidan-b/image/cyclo02.jpg

[lexico]

Korea, China et. al. need no excuses to criticize Japan's wartime atrocities. If there had been any testing of nuclear weapons on Korean soil, I'm pretty sure it would be at the forefront of any debate and other countries would never let Japan forget about it, yet I've never heard a word come out of Korea about this.There are claims being made in Korean sources, so the possiblity does deserve some attention. While some of the arguments and evidence rely on either the original Snell report or the studies done by Robert Wilcox, there are certain independent studies with evidence from Hungnam workers who now reside in South Korea.

Also Newsweek once did a special report on the North Korean nuclear program, and I remember reading about the scientists/students/workers at Hungnam during the Japanese Occupation of Korea. Many personnel from before August 15, 1945 are supposed to have participated in the current N.Korean nuclear weapons program. Not to mention the alleged Japanese involvement in non-peaceful use of nuclear energy behind doors since 1954 to the present, the subject deserves an even closer study. This might be connected to the "conspiracy" that is shrouded behind all the cries of Japan being a "victimised nation." I've left the opinion unstated thus far in hopes of seeing if there are those who go beyond the obvious when looking at this issue and seeing what ideas others might have regarding what self-serving interest Japan might have in continuing to focus on the two atomic bombings practically to the exclusion of any other aspect of World War Two and in what way this course may have affected international relations between Japan and her neighboring countries over the last sixty years.

[lexico]

And where exactly was this bomb tested ? You need an extremely large amount of space to test a bomb. Testing one in Japan would be nearly impossible due to the densely populated environment. The Japanese were being pinned back on every front, so it's unlikely they could have taken it overseas for testing. I'm curious as to where exactly this device went off and why there is no mention of it in any official records.Three pieces of information say;

1) On board an unmanned naval ship off the seaport city of Hungnam 興南 (Konan), the test bomb detonated, creating a "mushroom cloud," a "flash of light," and an "audible tone of explosion" visible/audible from 32 km away.
One source says this is recorded in a military intelligence report dated August 12, 1945. See map for Hungnam, on the east coast facing Eastern Sea in present day North Korea.

http://tplantevin.free.fr/IMAGES/Cartes/Asie/Coree_carte.gif

2) Another account point to Nagoya for a planned atomic testing which never happened.

3) Yet another account tells of a test-fire was in East Gobi desert, Hsingan province, China, with Unit 731 support.

Japanese development of nuclear energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_development_of_nuclear_energy) several possible Japanese nuclear testings before August 15, 1945

Supposedly...studies advanced to making one or two little experimental atomic artefacts in Hungnam 興南 (Konan) Installations in Korea 朝鮮 (Chosen)... these experiments continuing in Manchukuo and the test-fire was carried out in East Gobi desert in Hsingan province with support of Unit 731. (words edited for diction)

The original argument for creating the bomb was because Germany was considered to be close to developing one, so the Allies knew they had to develop the technology first. If there was any real knowledge that the Japanese had a bomb, this would have been a propaganda gift for Truman in his argument for ending the war quickly.What you say could be the case, however N.Korea, including Hungnam, was captured by the USSR, together with the plans, scientists, technicians, facilities, and materials if they existed. Either Truman was not aware of Hungnam's importance, underestimated the Soviets, or was too embarassed to make public the Japanese atomic program in Hungnam, Korea, code name "*NZ PROJECT." Yet, no one at the time, or since in an official capacity has ever used this argument that I'm aware of.True, but the revised 1995 Robert Wilcox book seems to present some gov'tal/intelligence documents that support the Hungnam atomic bomb testing.

*NZ PROJECT is the term favored by Korean sources that also claim the code name was an exact copy of the German nuclear project. Acc. to William Pellas, however, there were two Japanese nuclear programs;

1. Project Ni IJ Army's effort, Headed by Nishina at Riken. This program was halted by the April 1945 B-29 firebombing raids of Tokyo.

2. Project F-Go What was left of Project Ni was folded into IJ Navy's program, authorised in 1943. Acc. to "Wakabayashi" it was the F-Go that acutally completed and test fired a single warhead utilising the facilities at Hungnam, Korea.

http://www.arirang21.com/news/photo/1229-2-2416.jpg

Hungnam 興南 (Konan) where the alleged Japanese atomic bomb was developed and tested. One can see facilities of Choson Nitrogen Fertiliser Factory Co., a daughter company of Nippon Nitrogen Fertilzer Co., Tokyo.

http://www.tparents.org/library/unification/books/sm-early/Hungnam-Bomb.gif

Hungnam, following US air raids in the Korean War 1950-1953

edit: The third testing info regarding a test-fire of an atomic bomb in the Gobi desert appeared after original posting, and was added subsequently.

[Silverpoint]

I just want to clarify at this point so that I know we're all on the same page. When I talk about "testing" to me this means actually detonating a bomb, not just trying to build one. I realise that this word could be interpreted in a number of ways, so I want to make sure we're all agreeing terms.

[lexico]

Good point, Silverpoint. There have been quite misleading reports such as the one done by BBC in 2004 that S.Korea had conducted a "nuclear test."

S Korea chided for nuclear tests (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4004865.stm)
11 November, 2004
BBC Newsthe government has argued that the tests were on too small a scale to be significant and only 0.7g of plutonium and 200mg of uranium were produced...
The report said that South Korean scientists had enriched a small amount of uranium to 77% uranium-235, which is close to weapons-grade.

However, it said the average enrichment during the uranium experiments was about 10.2%.

The report stated that the IAEA had found no indications that the experiments had gone beyond small-scale laboratory activities. While the "nuclear test" being referred to at the time involved only 0.7 grams of plutonium and 0.2 grams of a uranium isotope to study the chemical properties, the headline gave the impression of a "nuclear warhead detonating test" causing international uproars.

In the case of the alleged Hungnam "nuclear testing" it seems pretty clear from context that it is referring to a "nuclear warhead detonating test," not the chemical properties test in a chemistry-physics lab of micorscopic scale. But it's good that you raised the point to prevent any possible confusion, thanks. It is especially so because of the obvious historical implication a nuclear program conducted by Imperial Japan will have on the August 6 dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Now whether, and how much, the US gov't/military knew beforehand will in itself constitute a totally separate matter; still I agree with you that it is mandatory to excercise the greatest caution, whichever matter we are discussing.

[lexico]

Recently a "historian" in the UK published a book claiming that Germany had also developed a bomb, but his arguments were widely discredited. He put up what seemed like a reasonably sound argument to someone reading his book. But when you looked at the bigger picture, he had been incredibly selective with the truth in order to build a case.There was also a German economic historian Rainer Karlsch who published Hitler's Bomb. He claimed that German scientists "set off a test explosion two months before the end of World War II, killing hundreds of people in eastern Germany." He also claimed that "the March 1945 device didn't achieve fission, but did scatter telltale radioactive particles at the Ohrdruf test site. It also claims that Nazi Germany briefly had a working nuclear reactor."

Book: Nazis Tested Crude Nuclear Device (http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/docs/atombomb/Ruegen_more.html)
Tony Czuczkam, March 14, 2005
Associated Press
Jeremy Bernstein, who edited the Farm Hall transcripts for the book "Hitler's Uranium Club: The Secret Recordings at Farm Hall," said a key question was where the enriched uranium could have come from.

"To enrich uranium, you need an plant the size of Oak Ridge, and the Germans never had one," he said, referring to the sprawling U.S. facility that produced enriched uranium for the Hiroshima bomb.

[lexico]

The alleged nuclear testing off shore of Hungnam (Konan) is detailed in this essay. Since the Snell report came out in 1946, and Wilcox's Secret War is the 1st 1985 edition, the so-called 1947 USO Intelligence report must have been cited in Wilcox's 1985 book. Without primary evidence, however, Tittle's account might simply turn out to be positive statements of Wilcox's speculations.

Military History: Invasion Japan (http://www.combatsim.com/review.php?id=721)
Jim Tittle
2005-08-09 INVASION JAPAN -PART 4: The definitive defensive weapon and some conclusions.

NIPPONESE NUKES

Ok so lots of people have heard that the Germans were working on nuclear physics with the ultimate aim of creating an atomic bomb, right ? The 1.8 billion dollar Manhattan Project to produce the A-bombs that effectively ended the war is well known. What about Japanese endeavors in nuclear bombs ? You thought there were none? Think again.

The chief persona of the Japanese atomic program was Dr. Yoshio Nishina who was an intimate associate of Albert Einstein. Dr. Nishina foundeded his own Nishina Laboratory of the Institute for Physical and Chemical Research in 1931 to study high-energy physics. He built the first cyclotron in Japan in 1936. It was a 26-incher. A 60-inch, 220 ton cyclotron was built in 1937. In 1938 Japan also purchased a cyclotron from the University of California, Berkeley. Cyclotrons were used to separate fissionable material from uranium.

Nishida understood the military potential of nuclear weapons, and figured that the Americans were working on a genzai bakudan (atomic bomb). Unlike his counterpart, Heisenberg in Germany, he wholeheartedly sought to solve the atomic riddle and produce a weapon. In 1939, President Roosevelt funded the first nuclear studies into fissionable weapons in the United States. This prompted the patriotic Dr. Nishina to match the U.S. research and develop a nuclear weapon. Lt. General Takeo Yasuda of the Japanese Army decided in October 1940, that such a weapons program was worthy of study and the Japanese atomic program commenced in July 1941 under the guidance of Dr. Nishina.

The well-know rivalry between the Japanese Army and Navy diluted strength of production projects as each insisted their own weapon was of paramount importance even if it was nearly identical to the other’s. They perpetually wasted manpower and resources duplicating efforts. So it was in atomic research.

A completely separate atomic program run by the Japanese Navy was in simultaneous study in 1942. The project was called “F-Go” and was headed by Professor Bunsaku Arakatsu, who studied under Albert Einstein. Arakatsu built his own cyclotron too.

The Navy’s plan wisely was to harness nuclear energy as an power source in order to reduce the dependence on petroleum. As the war unfolded not favoring Japan the idea of making a nuclear weapon became more promising. Initially it was assumed that an atomic weapon could not be developed during the limited span of time of the war.

A search for uranium throughout the empire commenced. The Japanese military took what Nishina had learned so far and expanded the program. The Navy payed large amounts for uranium on the Chinese black market. And we know about U-234’s unsuccessful attempt to transport uranium oxide to Japan from Germany. How far the Navy project progressed is a matter of conjecture but a member of the team was Hideki Yukawa, the first Japanese physicist to receive a Nobel Prize in 1949.

So where did the uranium ore come from? The atomic programs found a source of uranium ore in Korea. Dr. Nishina experimented with a number of methods for enriching the uranium and decided that the gaseous diffusion method was the most rewarding. Colonel Tatsusaburo Suzuki coordinated the effort for the Army and built five advanced gaseous diffusion separators based on the smaller one developed by Nishina. The fate of these separators is a mystery.

In 1938 Germany and Japan met to discuss the feasibility of the production of atomic weapons and atomic energy. Theories were explored but techinal data was not exchanged at that time. Japan later requested assistance from ally Germany but it is not known how much material Japan received. This is lost to history. All we know of for sure is the one shipment of uranium oxide that was intercepted on U-234 just after VE Day.

The program was moved from Nagoya to Konan, Korea (North Korea now) in 1943 due to increasing bombing attacks. Some 40,000 worked at the facility 25,000 of whom were engineers and scientists. The facility was partly underground. About 400 worked in the underground cave area on the most sensitive aspects of the bomb. A project director coordinated with six other reknown scientists each contributing but one phase and unaware of the others.

By August 10, 1945 the Hiroshima blast had taken place so the men assembling the bomb worked quickly. If an Allied invasion was imminent Japan would need the A-bomb to make toast of the forthcoming American invasion armada. Stalin declared war on Japan on August 8th and with enough reinforcements free from European combat Russians crossed the Manchurian border.

After midnight the device was trucked to the Konan harbor. It was loaded aboard a small vessel and final preparations were undertaken for the test. Presumably an anchorage in an inlet some twenty miles away was to be the unsuspecting and unwilling live target area. It was filled with mostly wooden fishing boats and ships with sails.

The boat with the device was robot controlled and it puttered towards the anchorage before dawn on August 12th. The vessel beached itself just as the sun’s first rays of the day hit the water. The genzai bakudan triggered and the observers wearing welding goggles gasped at the immediate intense burst of light rivaling the sun.

The fire flash was about 1,000 yards in diameter and from it a mushroom cloud boiled up to the stratosphere. The vaporized water obscured the anchored vessels but most of them were burning. When the epicenter cleared some ships previously seen were completely gone without trace. The area of destruction was approximately one square mile.

But it was all too late. The Russians were hours away and the equipment at the Konan facility was smashed and the underground entrances blown up. The scientists were unable to escape and at least the top men were spirited away to Moscow for torture. The Soviets closed up the area quickly and tightly. American War Reparations personnel later were kept under constant supervision and restricted from many areas. Even a B-29 with humanitarian supplies was shot down by the itchy Russians.

On Aug. 29, 1945, an American B-29 piloted by a Lt. Jose H. Queen of Ashland, KY headed for Konan with a cargo of food and medical supplies. They were to be dropped over an Allied prisoner of war camp there. Four Yak fighters from nearby Hammung Airfield circled the B-29 and signaled the pilot to land on the too-small airstrip.

Queen did not obey and swung the big plane around to return to Saipan. Ten miles off the coast the Yaks opened up and the B-29 went down. All twelve disembarked safely but one Yak strafed and missed the radio operator. The Russians said they saw the American markings but since the Germans had used captured American planes they thought the Japanese might also. Remember this was two weeks after the official end of hostilities.

While the consensus of the Americans was that the Japanese could have been nowhere near producing an atomic bomb, that even the Germans were farther advanced, it is curious what this conclusion is based upon since no American has ever inspected the Konan facilities ! It was a dangerous game to underestimate your enemy as the Allies found in December 1944 when the Ardennes Offensive (Battle of the Bulge) shocked the Americans to the realization that they could still lose the war. When the kamikazes became a horrifying reality in a divine wind over Okinawa there was no defense for them. There were no intelligence reports on either event to suggest the Allies were not taken completely by surprise.

Yoshio Nishina died in 1951. Since World War II the Konan area has been either in Soviet or North Korean hands so no look-see has ever been possible. It has been determined that heavy water was shipped out of the area in the 1950s to Russia.

At any rate, the Japanese could very well have had the capability of cobbling together a dirty bomb that did not create a chain reaction explosion but would rather dispense radioactive material into the vicinity of the target point, as the Germans could have done. Let us guess if they would have used it over Kyushu.

Snell, David
Japan Developed Atom Bomb; Russia Grabbed Scientists
Atlanta Constitution Oct 2, 1946

Wilcox, Robert K.
Japan's Secret War: Japan's Race Against Time to Build Its Own Atomic Bomb Morrow Publishing, NY 1985 Copyright ©1996 - 2005 COMBATSIM.COM, Inc.

[lexico]

The following has more quotes in greater detail although none are conclusive evidence of a Japanese atomic testing. Scroll down to 12/1/2004, 9:04 pm EST, bluescreenofdeath's very long post.

Iran: Saudi Arabia has nuclear weapons, Archives - December 2004, www.godlikeproductions.com (http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/aitem.php?message=46924&show=1204&PHPSESSID=14d22b3df6080a2d25c0bc7f52f4e0db)

[Mars Man]

A whole lot of good spade work has been done. This is information for me to learn from, without doubt. I will study it as I have the time. Thank you guys for all this nice detail. :cool:

As for the actual bombings, and my feelings, I have no firm and fixed thoughts or conclusions. I just feel, that it happened in the 'heat of the battle', so to speak. I would strongly prefer that it had not happened. No war is for the better, no killing is either, but the social animal has it in the natural makings, it seems, to fight and, sadly, kill (not by honest error).

I sometimes wonder what 'turning the other cheek' would do for natural selection? :?

[lexico]

Does anyone have additional information regarding a "nuclear research" in Manchuria in the later yrs of the Sino-Japanese War/WWII/Pacific War conducted by a Unit or Special facility such as one dircected by Unit 731 ?
With a general amnesty extended to former personnel at Unit 731 and the like in exchange for collaboration, there must be enough survivors to live and tell the details of the 'nuclear testing' if it happened. Why is there so little information ? What do we know about the Japanese nuclear experiments in the Gobi desert ? Were they all required to commit suicide to secure secrecy or are they keeping silence at the request of the US gov't ?

Kempeitai 憲兵隊 Political Department and Epidemic Prevention Research Laboratory 防疫硏究所 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kempeitai_Political_Department_and_Epidemic_Preven tion_Research_Laboratory)
Kempeitai Political Department 憲兵隊 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kempeitai)
Unit 731: Epidemic Prevention Research Laboratory 防疫硏究所 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731)

The Political department and Epidemic Prevention Research Laboratory, now usually associated with the name Unit 731, was initially set up as a political and ideological section of the Kempeitai military police of pre-Pacific War Japan. It was meant to counter the ideological or political influence of enemies, and to reinforce the ideology of military units.

It worked through political propaganda and as ideological representative of the Imperial Japanese Army's Kodoha 皇道派 (Imperial way faction, or war party). In the first phase this section drove against communist propaganda, but extended its responsibilities in other directions, at home and overseas.

It acted in Manchukuo and other areas on the Asian mainland. It was a rough equivalent to the NKVD political sections and or politruk (political commissar) units of the Soviets; or the German Nazi SS propoganda departments. They promoted racial superiority, racialist theories, counterespionage, intelligence, political sabotage and infiltration of enemy lines. They liased with the Manchukuo military police, the Manchu intelligence service, regular Manchu police, Manchu Residents committees, Local Nationalist Manchu Parties and the Japanese Secret Service detachment in Manchukuo. The section in Manchukuo used some agents from White Russian, Chinese, Manchu, Mongol and other foreign backgrounds for special services or covert actions at home and abroad.Epidemic Preve