The atom bombing of Japan.

[BlackIronCrown]

I specifically say American soldiers because the government told everyone that unless the bombs were dropped, 800,000 more american soldiers would die. I thought that was questionable since japan was on the verge of surrendering and had their munitions and industries firebombed.

This is a difficult question as viewpoints on the issue depend on the historian you're talking to.
Generally, it is conceded that the Japanese government of the time would NOT surrender for any reason and would order the civilian population to attack invading soldiers barehanded. There is evidence that this would have happened; Emperor worship was still prevalent and there were many Japanese who were prepared to throw babies and the American soldiers and then charge screaming. Or not. As I said, depends on who you ask.

Operation Downfall, known popularly as Olympic, was the plan for the invasion. Here were its assumptions, taken from what was known of the current Japanese government and its hold over the population:

- That operations in this area will be opposed not only by the available organized military forces of the Empire, but also by a fanatically hostile population."
- "That approximately three (3) hostile divisions will be disposed in Southern KYUSHU and an additional three (3) in Northern KYUSHU at initiation of the OLYMPIC operation."
- "That total hostile forces committed against KYUSHU operations will not exceed eight (8) to ten (10) divisions and that this level will be speedily attained."
- "That approximately twenty-one (21) hostile divisions, including depot divisions, will be on HONSHU at initiation of that operation Coronet and that fourteen (14) of these divisions may be employed in the KANTO PLAIN area."
- "That the enemy may withdraw his land-based air forces to the Asiatic Mainland for protection from our neutralizing attacks. That under such circumstances he can possibly amass from 2,000 to 2,500 planes in that area by exercise of rigid economy, and that this force can operate against KYUSHU landings by staging through homeland fields."

As for casualties, the 800,000 was for deaths alone The actual total estimate of casualties, wounded and dead, was higher:

"A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7 to 4 million American casualties, including 400,000 to 800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan"

So, they think an invasion would have meant anywhere from 6.7 to 14 million dead and wounded on both sides. That was a prime consideration.

I am starting to see how the bombing might have been needed to scare the Japanese people from fighting, but was dropping two bombs really necessary? Wouldn't just one have gotten the point across?

Possibly. There was some experimentation mentality, I am sure. I truly think they did NOT know what the effects of the nuclear bomb were at the time. For instance, in Operation Downfall, if we had invaded there were plans to drop SEVEN nuclear bombs on targets...and then send in OUR troops for mop-up 48 hours later because the fallout and radiation would have dissipated by that time.

That's right. 48 HOURS. Not days, not years.
People just did not understand the long-term effects of these weapons then.

Would a ground battle on Japan really have been inevitable if the bombs had not been dropped? I read that a starvation blockade was already prepared by the Navy, wouldn't that have done anything?

Most people agree that the starvation blockade would have been effective in reducing the number of casualties, but that an invasion would still have been necessary.

Most of that has to do with the nature of Japanese fascism...it bears resemblence to Islamofacist characteristics. Starve to death in the name of the Emperor and then attack the American! To do so is holy and in the service of your God.

[repsac]

The dropping of the atomic bombs really wasn't tactical so much as revenge. Thing is it was part of a larger campaign that featured a number of atrocities committed against the Japanese.

It's ironic in a way, that in the European theater of war, that the United States Army Bomber Corps went to a great deal of trouble NOT to bomb civilian targets. (RAF's night bombing couldn't guarantee that they wouldn't hit non military targets.) The precision of the Norton bomb sight allowed the US a great deal of accuracy, so they didn't carpet bomb the civilian targets.

Curiously in Japan it's exactly the opposite.

The US bomber corps went to a great deal of trouble to ensure they got as many civilian casualties as they could. The question begs to be asked, "Why?" Like I said, it was revenge.

At the time the attitude was that here you had this country that wasn't the size of some of the states suddenly rearing up and giving the US military, the strongest military of the era, a serious black eye. How DARE they attack! How dare they have the gall to think they could do better than US?

The Japanese of the day were seen as very backward. For one they still had an Emperor, and for another their culture was so vastly different that it meant they (the japanese) must be either ignorant or backward. So when they suddenly attacked at Pearl, it didn't fit with what the typical US citizen thought should be. It didn't help that they weren't Christian, (well for the most part) and thust they HAD to be evil.

I'm not saying that the Japanese didn't commit atrocities also, but I doubt it warranted dropping atomic bombs upon them.