What would have happened if Japan had not surrendered after the second atomic bomb?

If the Japanese had not surrendered after the second Atomic bomb hit Nagasaki, what would the Americans have done to finish the war in Japan? Would they have invaded Japan with the Russians like they were originally planning to do? Or would they have been deterred from invading by the high levels of radiation from the Atomic bombs? If so, would they have made more atomic bombs and continue to drop them on Japan?

The Battle of Okinawa and Kamikaze Tactics

The Battle of Okinawa was the largest battle in the Pacific during WWII on the island of Okinawa (off the coast of Japan) that lasted for almost 2 months between early April and late June of 1945 in which the Americans were trying to invade the island and take it for potentially using it as a staging area for an invasion of Japan while the Japanese used extremely defensive some drastic tactics in order to get an advantage over the Americans. Most of the Japanese military was structured along defense lines near landing beaches that allowed them to "conduct a fierce defense" according to an article by History.com, causing significant bloodshed on both sides of the battle since the strongpoints were almost impossible to destroy without explosives or heavy manpower. This was also a battle in which the Japanese unleashed a new tactic called the kamikaze, in which Japanese pilots would divebomb their planes into American ships and aircraft carriers, taking out thousands of Americans as well as their planes, weapons, and supplies as they wanted to "[determine] that Allied forces perhaps faced their most difficult Pacific campaign" (according to the article) and protect the island. One Japanese kamikaze pilot, Itsanu-San, ended up surviving the war (due to his plane landing in the water) and was interviewed by the BBC as part of their article, "Remembering Japan's kamikaze pilots." He described how, "If Okinawa was invaded, then the American planes would be able to use it as a base to attack the main islands of Japan ... so we young people had to prevent that. In March 1945 it was a normal thing to be a kamikaze pilot. All of us who were asked to volunteer did so." These statements emphasize the significance of kamikaze tactics and how they played a role in WWII, since Japanese propaganda, patriotism, and expectations drove individuals to do whatever they could to "prevent" the Americans from getting an edge over them, including such extreme suicide bombings. And based on a PBS article describing the most disastrous attack on the U.S. Fifth Fleet, these attacks were extremely effective for the Japanese. "Almost 2,000 Japanese pilots [willingly lost] their lives in these attacks. By late June 1945, close to 5,000 U.S. sailors had been killed and 5,000 more wounded by the Japanese suicide pilots. Thirty ships had been sunk and almost 400 others were damaged. The attack on the Fifth Fleet off Okinawa would mark the worst losses of World War II for the U.S. Navy." By referring to these kamikaze attacks as causing "the worst losses" the American Navy had during WWII, the article highlights just how much damage it caused to our sailors, supplies, weapons, and ships, as it was so extreme that no other naval battle involving the US during the war was so chaotic. The US lost thousands of men as well as many of their ships and aircraft carriers that carried supplies and planes, making it extremely hard for the Americans to make up for their losses and take over Okinawa. Yet, the American forces were able to persevere through the kamikaze attacks and extremely effective defensive strategies by destroying their pillboxes and strongpoints, flushing out caves and other areas where Japanese soldiers were hiding, and pushing back their military until they were eventually able to take over the island. Now, as we all know, the Americans didn't up having to use this island to help stage their invasion of Japan due to the use of their atomic bombs, however, it was still very beneficial towards their war efforts as it pushed the Japanese closer to an unconditional surrender which is part of why it was so significant. It was also extremely important because it showed the lengths at which the Japanese would go to in order to defeat the Americans and emphasized many of the hardships both sides faced while trying to gain power in the Pacific since there were such high casualties and losses. This is why overall, I believe the Battle of Okinawa and kamikaze tactics were very important factors in determining the ending of the American war with the Japanese in the Pacific, since there were very high stakes involved for both sides involved in fighting this battle and each country's military ended up paying a significant price to try and gain control over the island.

Atomic Bomb

When I was first exposed to the atomic bomb debate, my immediate response was that it should not have been dropped and that it was completely unnecessary and awful. However, after reading the three articles on edmodo, my opinion has changed somewhat.

It is easy for us, 72 years later, to say that it was unnecessary and too much. But I think it is understandable that they wanted to end the war as soon as possible with the fewest American casualties. While of course that is selfish, when is war not selfish? After enduring the war for several years and having constant fear and hard work, I can see why they were very desperate. Another interesting point one of the articles made is that it helped prevent the Cold War from becoming a real war because it showed the true damage of the bomb. While it is impossible to know if that is true or not, it is a rational prediction.

I think rationally, and for the amount that they had gone through, the bomb was (somewhat) justified. They did not have to drop two bombs, they could have waited for the Russian attack on August 9, only three days after, or done a naval blockade. However, I still stand that the bomb was not morally justified. But morals don't come first in war.

The Significance of American Firebombing

In May of 1945, the US began a firebombing campaign against the Japanese in order to destroy urban infrastructure, hurt civilian populations, and push Japan's government towards an unconditional surrender. Because most of the buildings in their cities such as Tokyo were made out of wood and because the populations in these urban regions were densely-packed, the US military knew that going through with this plan would hurt the Japanese extremely badly and be much more successful than their firebombing attempts in Germany. By flying a few hundred B-29 bombers stripped of most of their guns (to decrease the weight load and allow the planes to carry more bombs) low to the ground and dropping all of their firebombs onto Japan's most populated cities such as Tokyo, the US military was able to destroy hundreds of buildings throughout the country and kill more than a hundred thousand people. According to a History.com article about this subject, during the American firebombing of Shitamachi, a suburb of Tokyo, "the human carnage was so great that the blood-red mists and stench of burning flesh that wafted up sickened the [American] bomber pilots, forcing them to grab oxygen masks to keep from vomiting." Also, the article describes the account of a Japanese doctor who witnessed the bombing, explaining how "'In the black Sumida River, countless bodies were floating, clothed bodies, naked bodies, all black as charcoal. It was unreal." Now, although the bombing was useful to the US because it caused so much damage to Japan as emphasized by these passages (as there was a great amount of "human carnage" and infrastructural destruction), it was considered extremely unethical at the time (mostly by the Japanese themselves) and could eventually be compared to the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in terms of their effects. Even though most people today don't necessarily remember the firebombing raids that the US carried out on Japan due to being considered less significant than their attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (since they were the first and only time humans have used nuclear weaponry to attack one another), I feel that they were still very historically significant in how they contributed to the end of the American war with Japan. They weakened the will and strength of the Japanese people, destroyed a good portion of the urban infrastructure protecting them, and wiped out some of their war-producing factories, giving the US a strong edge on the country for winning the war. According to an article by Mark Selden, the senior researcher at the East Asia Program at Cornell University, the firebomb raids "destroyed 180 square miles of 67 cities" as "the area of the fire was nearly 100 percent burned; no structure or its contents escaped damage." This shows just how effective the firebombing tactic was for the US in terms of being able to gain a strategic advantage over the Japanese, as it destroyed so many cities, hurt so many people, and inevitably made it more difficult for Japan to defend itself from the Americans. Overall, this is significant, because it shows that even though this firebombing campaign was/is considered extremely unethical, it was still beneficial to the US by hurting the Japanese in many different ways, helping the Americans eventually win the war.

The Role of Code-Breaking and Espionage in WWII

Guns, tanks, planes, etc. played a big role in the fighting of WWII. However, not all of WWII was fought physically: code-breaking and espionage played an equally important role that enabled the Allies to win the war. This is shown in multiple key moments throughout the war, including the Battle of Normandy. Because the Allies were able to decode the enigma, they were able to learn of enemy movement. Also, double-agents and spies fed the Germans with false information leading them to think that the invasion would not take place in Normandy. Another example is the Battle of Midway where the Americans set a trap by saying that they were short of water, prompting the Japanese to attack- in reality, the Americans were very well prepared. The Japanese lost 4 entire carriers as well as many of their top officers and pilots. Obviously, these tactics were very effective and gave the Allies a tremendous advantage. How do you suppose that non-physical tactics such as these are being applied to modern-day wars?

Japanese Form of Propaganda Against the US

In World War 2 the Japanese were known for never surrendering.  Fighting to their very last breath, this made them a force to try to defeat.  As the US slowly began to progress towards the main land of Japan, many islands where blinded with propaganda that made them view the US Marines in such a filthy way to help persuade every Japanese to fight till there last breath rather than surrender.  Because if they surrendered they were told that the US Marines would kill them instantly. Although this was false for the most part even though they would just be taken captive, the Japanese were told that for a solider to become a Marine they had to shoot there parents and forced to rape women, setting a fear factor that forced many Japanese not to surrender. Because of this many committed suicide by jumping off cliffs to shooting ones self, which the government made public to Japans people expressing how it was a act of courage and sacrifice for their country. These suicides mentally effect the US soldiers, eventually breaking them down which was Japans greater plan.  They tried to show that the US was weak and bound to give up under extreme pressure and illness and even surrendered which the Japanese viewed as cowardice. Treating those US soldiers they took captive horribly for they were no "real" solider.

propaganda and Saipan

In class, we learned that Americans had anti-Japanese propaganda, but did the Japanese have anti-American propaganda?
When watching a video in class, we learned that the Japanese were told that Americans had to kill their parents to become a marine. The Japanese press greatly overexaggerated number of suicides at Saipan. For me personally, that would not make me want to go to war to know that there was a lot of suicide. The question then might be, why might it have a different effect on Japanese? The interpretation may be that: rather than surrender, they would rather die for their nation. The Japanese government wants people to think that only 17 were taken as prisoner, and the rest fought to the death, meaning that they are trying to get their people to fight to the last breathe.
IF you are an American soldier what is your perception of this? You may think that this is crazy or even frightening. Can you imagine being 19 or 20 and watch people commit suicide. This may make the Americans not want to fight or the effect where they say: okay we won't take more prisoners. Psychologically watching people commit suicide would cause a person to have PTSD.

For whatever reason, the propaganda used isn't exactly the same but the same thing. Often the propaganda you use against one group to show them as bad, it is exactly the opposite of how we view ourselves.

How did we over power the Germany in World War 2?

World War 2 was a battle of the most equipped in the end of the day. From who had the most trained soldiers to the most war ships, or war weapons.  The united states struggled trying to get into the war and took a lot of time properly training their men for battle. Having had much man and women power in the industry of making military and war weapons we were able o have a large supply of back ups with about all weaponry.  But we were also smart, when we noticed while attempting to invade Germany with tiny war crafts where not the best idea, so we created mini bombers that help protect out large air crafts while still fighting off Germany's air force.  World War 2 was truly a battle of the fittest with metal and tactics. In the end of the day our motto of believing that building more crafts that weren't as nice was a greater advantage than only a few high tech ones cause in the end of the day those will eventually give out and you will not have any more back up.

WWII Propaganda

The usage of propaganda during World War II was very widespread. Both sides used this as a strategy for gaining support from their citizens and to spread a sense of hate towards their enemies. These included very racist and offensive posters such as Tokio Kid which portrayed the Japanese as inhuman, vermin like monsters who had blood lust for Americans. As terrible as they may have been, strategies such as this were very effective at doing their job. They instilled hate towards the enemies and gave American's a better sense of nationality and motivation to win the war. However, its post-war effect was very negative in America- it promoted hatred towards all Japanese (including American-born citizens) and fostered racism. Do you think that these propaganda posters were necessary? If not, what are possible alternatives that would've have a lesser post-war side effect?

   

Propaganda

Do you think propaganda was a necessary part of WWII? Would the United States have done as well with less propaganda, or without any propaganda?
In more recent wars, the United States hasn't had as much propaganda, with less posters or other things, which has led to wars being less popular, including the Vietnam war and the Iraq war, which were pretty unpopular in the United States. If there had been no propaganda during WWII, would the war have been seen similarly to Vietnam, where many people didn't support the war or want it to continue?

Also, is propaganda ethical, or is it more like brainwashing?

Lucky Me!

I am writing this post, existing, because of luck. My grandparents were born in New York City in the 1920s and the location of their birth is what "saved" me. All my family that lived in modern-day Hungary, Galicia before World War I, perished in the Holocaust except for my great uncle Shlomi (similar to Sammy in Yiddish). He escaped from a Concentration Camp leaving his belongings, his hearing, and his dead wife and children behind. Shlomi, my grandfather's mother's uncle, was one of the lucky ones, and his story is not original. He lost his hearing when a gun was fired next to his ear. But worse than that, his whole family. The only positive thing that can be taken away from this horrible event in history is that we know how it happened and what caused it to happen. In this way, we can see warning signs early. Using fear and scapegoating one group of people was a huge contributor to mass extermination of a race. The real question is, could this ever happen again? And what will we do to keep it from happening?

The Significance of Japanese Persecution During the 1940s

Throughout history, Americans have constantly persecuted immigrants from countries in Asia to a much greater extent than their European counterparts. From the Gentlemen's Agreement between the US and Japan preventing Japanese laborers from entering America for many years to the increased expectations put on the Japanese entering through Angel Island as opposed to Europeans entering through Ellis Island, suffice to say the Japanese were heavily persecuted against time and time again in America's history. However, I believe the significance to these racial tensions was not just a barely noticeable social issue affecting the country, especially during the Second World War when hatred between Japan and the US grew exponentially over territorial and trade disputes. So, I think that it's important to look at persecution and racism in the US throughout this time period because it sheds a lot of light on the differences between how Japanese immigrants were treated in comparison to their German and Italian counterparts. As we all know, when the US first joined the war after being attacked by the Japanese in Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 which  forced all of the Japanese individuals in the West Coast to live in guarded internment camps far from society due to fears of Japanese immigrants being involved in plots against the government. These individuals, no matter what their situation was for a great amount of time, had to live in crowded, unsuitable, and depressing conditions after being forced to leave everything they had behind this Executive Order was made, causing Japanese persecution to grow more and more. In comparison, few German or Italian immigrants were forced into similar internment camps even though Germany and Italy were both extremely powerful countries that had the potential to hurt the US as badly as Japan could. According to a report by the American government analyst, Peter Sheridan written in 1980, "a significantly smaller number of number of Germans and Italien aliens [...] were also interned, despite the fact that they comprised a greater population than the Japanese Americans, and were present in larger numbers in equally sensitive and strategic areas of the United States." From this quote, it is clear that to some extent, racial tensions and segregation towards the Japanese had to play a major part in causing them to get put in internment camps rather than German and Italian immigrants, as they lived in smaller numbers than the Germans and Italians in America but were still considered the bigger threat. And although reasons for not putting Germans and Italians into internment camps simply due to its inviability (since there were millions of people in the US who were either German/Italian or had heritage from these countries) played a role in this decision, I still think prejudices, racism, and past persecution were also major factors for the Japanese being mistreated to a much greater extent than the Germans/Italians in the US during WWII. What other reasons can you think contributed to the Japanese being persecuted in the US to a greater extent than the Germans and Italians?

Pearl Harbor

I knew that Pearl Harbor was bad but I didn't really take the time to realize why it all happened besides it being a surprise attack that led the US to joining WWII. I learned why it is such a big part in American history. This unit that we are learning right now in class is explaining to me everything that had happened in 1941. The Japanese wanted to destroy the US Pacific Fleet so that it could not disrupt the Japanese expansion through the Southern Pacific. Japan had planned a surprise attack on the US Naval Base on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, they used bombers and the submarines. This had ruined most of the US weapons and military vehicles. This was a moment in history that will never be forgotten and even though this had happened and we aren't happy about it, we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the war.

Pearl harbor attack.

We have been learning a lot about pearl harbor this unit, and I am starting to understand why it was sutch a huge part of history. Not only did japan find a way to stratigicly attack the US and bomb a military site, they also ruined most of their military weapons and vehicles. All the people on the island at the time must have been so confused and scared as it was happening. People screaming, crying, running, trying to stop the invasion. Then after the end all the things on the island were destroyed, people dead, people hurt, families broken, its just so scary I wish it never happened but it also was a segway for america to get invloved in the war, and things went well for us, so that is one upside.

After World War II if Germany won

What would have happened after the war if Germany had won? 

Would Hitler have kept expanding his territory and gone on to control the majority of the rest of Europe? Or would he have stopped, realizing that if he did that his forces would be spread too thin across Europe making it easier for a rebellion to occur and be successful? If he did continue expanding the range of his control, would he have moved over to other continents and tried to take control of those as well? Or would he remain solely in Europe and tried to maintain control of all of that area? 

Propaganda in Germany

In the 1936 Olympics Germany wanted to promote a very positive image and leave out all the terror of the Nazis. After the Olympics, the government in Germany put loudspeakers in the street and put radios in schools and homes. This was kind of like brainwash and was a massive control over Hitler youth.
Also, there were propaganda films. Propaganda is used to create a certain belief. In a propaganda film in Germany, it showed lots of people lots of flags so it seemed like everyone was becoming part of the nazis. In a picture of Hitler, it seemed as though they made it seem like they look up at Hitler because they put Hitler at an angle that the viewer would have to look up to him and since he was in between clouds it may seem as though he is like a ‘god’.
Because of this propaganda, it seemed to the German people that Hitler was good and even if you didn't believe all the propaganda, you may be afraid of what would happen to you if you didn't listen.
Do you think that in America we are also susceptible to propaganda?

Hindsight Bias

The policy of appeasement, as we all know, did not go as planned. It's very easy to have hindsight bias and think that we would have seen it coming. However, I'm pretty sure that had I been in their shoes I would have also wanted a policy of appeasement. I consider myself, in general, to be a pacifist in regards to war. Usually, I think that most conflicts do not need to be solved by sending people to kill each other.
With World War I looming so close in their memories, they would have definitely wanted to avoid another war. The policy of appeasement would have worked simply because we often don't believe a lot of what politicians say. They made a mistake in which statements they thought were true. Other countries did not believe Hitler in his book Mein Kampf which said that his goal was to take over the rest of Europe and make them Germans. However, they did believe him when he said that taking Czechoslovakia would be his last one. The two above statements are conflicting with each other so they would have to choose one to believe. Most people, when faced with a statement as grand as taking the rest of Europe over, would think that it wouldn't be true. Obviously, they chose the wrong statements to believe but it seems that it would be more likely he would stop then that he would continue on a quest to conquer the world.
In conclusion, it's a lot easier today to agree with the cookie example used in class. In reality, opinions would probably have been much more diverse over the policy of appeasement.
What do you think? Would you have supported appeasement and why?

Land-Lease Act

This act was passed in March of 1941 after many public and congressional deputes.  This act was determined to provide "Britain with aid after the war and urged congress to adopt a plan to end, not sell, arms to Britain."  When news of this act got around Germany instantly took advantage and occupied most of Europe and threatened the indication of Great Britain.  They did invading and bombing the cities of Great Britain forcing United States to help Britain by passing the "Land-Lease Act" which allowed the United States to provide Britain with arms along with the Soviet Union later in history.

Hitlers Road to Conquering Czechoslovakia

Hitler has always been a fan of war and has never feared war.  His actions and steps proved to us that war was of no worry if he was gonna achieve what he wanted.  During Hitlers reign he wanted to seize power over Czechoslovakia which would allow him to gain control over Prague and the Czech capital.  But as Hitler requested to seize the lands back after loosing it in past war, Churchill denied and Hitler grew more eager for the land, eventually Churchill feared war was upon and signed the nonaggression Act giving Hitler the land.  But his was a turning point in all countries now France and Britain made it clear that Germany could not conquer any more of the smaller countries or war would be declared.

Racisim

Today in class I asked about why and where racisim came from. I didnt get the answer I expected. Before, I thought it was because of a war or maybe a disagreement started people thinking that darker skin needed to be lower, but it turns out that it's probably because people just like to catigorize things. From what I understand, it reminds me of this:

 There were 4 diferent colors of beads. Red, blue, green, and yellow. they were mixed together but then they decided to seperate themselfs into groups. Of course, they started talking and all felt together and similar and decided they didnt want anyone to join their colors. Over time, one group of beads, lets say the red beads, started to put the other colors down and sort of gained power. 

 That is my understanding of what happened but I have no idea if it is true. 

Japanese Politics/Economics Before WW2

Because we are learning about the origins of WW2 in class, I decided to research a bit about the state of Japan's politics and economy prior to the war, mostly because I didn't know much about this topic even though the Japanese were involved significantly in it. As the classroom textbook explains in Chapter 34, before the second world war, Japan was an extremely militant power in Asia, mostly due to the country's needs for natural resources. As a result of this, the Japanese military dominated Korea, Taiwan, and the Chinese region of Manchuria, since they sought the raw materials throughout different countries where Japan had colonies. And even though other countries such as China did not want the Japanese to involve their military in their countries, they were so desperate for oil and rubber that they continued to seize international resources to benefit themselves. However, as an article by the East Asian Institute at Columbia University describes, the Japanese were somewhat forced to do this to an extent in order to survive, mainly because "this was a time when 'free trade' was in disrepute. The great powers not only jealously protected their special economic rights within their colonies and spheres of influence, but sought to bolster their sagging economies through high tariffs, dumping of goods, and other trade manipulation." So just as this article describes, "free trade" or a free international market did not exist throughout the years before WW2, mainly because countries had political and economic ambitions to hold onto their resources and promote domestic success over trade. In consequence, countries relying on trade for economic success such as Japan were stuck in a situation where they either had to desperately find other nations to trade with for raw materials with, or they had to seize these resources internationally. Because Japan was undergoing a major period of militaristic conquest throughout southeast Asia (due to the military taking most of the nation's political power from the government), the Japanese chose to seize other nations' resources in an aggressive and forceful way, promoting their economy and nationalistic ideals. In addition to these drastic trade restrictions hurting the Japanese economy, President Roosevelt of the US put an embargo on oil exports to Japan to restrict their militaristic expansion, which prevented their navy from being able to support itself. So as a result of combined limitations that different countries were putting on Japan, a country that relied heavily on raw material imports, the Japanese were put into a situation where they had to continue expanding and retrieving resources from other countries, which in-turn angered these nations even further. Additionally, prior to WW2, Japan was significantly involved in direct conflicts with other nations, especially the Soviet Union and China. The reason why the Japanese were fighting the USSR was because they were trying to take land in northern areas of China near Manchuria, which bordered Soviet territory and therefore threatened them. However, this conflict was not too significant in comparison to Japanese aggression towards China, since the Soviet Union only influenced Japan to not take more land close to them. Meanwhile, Japan's military was warring with the Chinese over territorial expansion and local raw materials, which ended with the Japanese defeating the Chinese in many regions and then expanding even further into Dutch Indonesia and British Malaysia, where they were able to get control over oil and rubber. So overall, before WW2, Japan was an extremely aggressive, demanding, and desperate country that sought to use its military to gain control over other nation's resources and land for their own economic success. Such drastic expansion was mainly due to conflicts and tensions with other countries, a lack of an international free market, and extremely nationalistic domestic politics. I believe that these factors ended up contributing significantly to the nation's involvement in WW2 and its alliances with fascist countries because throughout the 1930s, the Japanese politics and economy centered around international aggression against the British, Americans, and Soviets. What are some other reasons you all believe that contributed to Japan's involvement in WW2?

Understanding opinions

a lot of people are not okay with people having other opinions. I for one, am fine with you having diferent opinions, but others for some reason cant have any diference. I persnally think that it is becuse that is what you are used to. If you are raised to feel that blue is a better color than red, and someone comes along telling you that red is the best, its going to be hard to let that go. You want to tell them that actually, blue is better, and its going to go back and forth. Here's where it gets werid because you have the option to get violent to proove your side, you could make a compromise, you could convince the other, or maybe just walk away. A lot of people just go to the walk away idea, but more people seem to go to the violence thing, weather that be with words or actions. It's really strange because if you are on the blue side, then the red side to you is 'bad.' but if you are on the red side, the blue side is 'bad' so you really have to see both sides before doing anything you could regret.

Imperialism

Personally, I think extending someone's power by force is wrong. If I am just having a great time farming and being the way I was raised, and someone comes along telling me that i have to change my ways no matter what, I would be pretty upset. When I hear of people doing this in history, it makes me mad. You shouldnt be able to have that option. People can do what they want. But then I thought about it, and realised that some times there is a way that forcing someone to change can be good. If your friend is a smoker, and you force them to stop, they might be mad at you and you might lose that friendship, but now they are healthier and safer. Yes you forced them to do something they didnt want, but it was for the best. Now you cant go around stabbing people saying its for the greater good and get away with it, unless you have an actuall legal reasonable reason to go around killing people. I also thought about how if there was a city that was independnt and they were doing terrible things, and hurting people, that is an okay situation to move in and force them to stop, because not only are they hurting others but they are probably breaking some laws and causing a lot of anger. overall, I think that as long as you are following the laws, not hurting others, you do what you want.