On August 6, 1945, during World War II, the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, a Japanese city and headquarters of the 2nd General Army. Sixteen hours later after the attack, U.S. President Harry S. Truman’s report of the event was broadcast to radio listeners:

“The world will know that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military target. We won a race of discovery against the Germans (?). We have used it in order to sharpen the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands young Americans. We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan’s power to make war.”(Since the audio of his speech was not very clear, there are some questionable moments that will be corrected as soon as we obtain a copy of his exact words.wrongways.com

The war with Japan was not easy for all for allies, even though they were using all kind of sophisticated weapons against Japanese military. America and Britain showered Japan with virtually everything what had a capability to explode and destroy things and as Paul Johnson notes in his book, “Modern Times”:

“To decline to use the super-bomb would have been illogical, indeed irresponsible, since its novelty might have an impact on Japan’s so far inflexible resolve to continue resistance”.(Paul Johnson, p.425)

How inflexible? In the Pacific, military operations against Japan were moving at one step at the time, breaking fierce Japanese resistance at heavy cost. American soldiers had to fight for Guadalcanal, for New Guinea, Philippines, the Gilbert Islands, the Marshalls, the Carolines – all heavily fortified and showered with trenches. But the things were turning Allie’s way and in March 1945, American forces captured the eight-square-mile strategic island of Iwo Jima. And in a bloody battle that lasted more than 2 ½ months, in the spring of 1945 they captured island of Okinawa, 300 miles away from a mainland Japan. At that moment, Germany collapsed in Europe, and allies dominated Pacific theater in all aspects pushing a Japanese Emperor toward unconditional surrender. (R. Palmer, J.Colton, L. Kramer, p. 826.)

To make him more thoughtful on this matter, allies bombard Tokyo with two-foot-long napalm sticks. Napalm was previously used by them to clear heavy jungles in order to reveal entrenched Japanese forces. And now hundreds B-29’s fly over Tokyo showering it with the incendiary devices.

“Streets become canyons of fire. Huge sheets of flame leap from structure to structure, rolling into a molten tidal wave that converts people into blazing matchsticks. While they fruitlessly jump into boiling ponds, planes hit them with bombs and napalm the river, cutting off escape”, that is how Michael K. Smith describes bombardment of Tokyo. The result is eighty to one hundred thousand civilians “scorched and boiled and baked to death”. (Michael K. Smith, p.14)

Can it be any worse? History shows that it will be worse in the few months.
On July 16, a plutonium bomb is exploded on the Alamogordo bomb-test site in New Mexico. Minutes before it Robert Oppenheimer reminds himself: “I must remain conscious!” His fellow scientist Sam Allison afraid that it may electrocute him, drops the microphone at the last second. At 5:29 a.m. he shouts “Zero”. The horizon ignites and a bright fire-ball with a temperature four times that at the center of the sun rises above the ground.
Physicist Isidor Rabi fears the fire will bun forever. Colleague Dick Feynman, momentarily blinded, turns away in pain. Oppenheimer recalls a line from the Bhagavad Gita: “I am become death, the shatterer of worlds!” And under a curtain of fallout, jubilant scientists break into a jig on the desert floor. (Michael K. Smith, p.12)

The test was undoubtedly successful and the news was sent to the President Truman who was on his way Potsdam. Now, he had the ultimate weapon of mass destruction, something that no one in this world had at that moment. And this weapon needed some “marketing”. A year ago, he signed a protocol that stated: “when the bomb is finally available it might perhaps after mature consideration be used against the Japanese.”(Paul Johnson, p.425)

There was not any mature consideration and many historians agree on it: Truman wanted to use the A-bomb as soon as possible. Some say that he wanted to showcase the A-bomb to make Russians more flexible in the post-war negotiations, others note that Japan was not about to surrender no matter what. They say that although the Emperor was told that war could not be won back in 1942, and he probably knew the outcome of the war, on June 6 the Japanese Supreme Council approved a document, “Fundamental Policy to be followed henceforth in the Conduct of the War”, which asserted

“we shall…prosecute the war to the bitter end.”

They organized a force of ten thousand suicide planes, 2, 350,000 trained troops, 4 million army and navy civilian employees and civilian militia numbering 28 millions. Allied commanders calculated that allied forces will have about a million of casualties while Japanese civilian population will suffer 10-20 million casualties.(Paul Johnson, p.425)
Perhaps, with this in mind, the U.S. Target Committee meets to select a Japanese city for atomic doom. And after Secretary of State Henry Stimson, vetoes Kyoto as a first choice, the committee opts for Hiroshima. (Michael K. Smith, p.13)
On Aug. 6, 1945, at 8:15 a.m. the bomb-bay doors open and 5 tons of doom is dropped on Hiroshima. Witnessing the effects, pilot Robert Lewis writes down his reaction: “My God, what have we done?”

And some time later, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey concludes:

“Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts…it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”(Zinn, p.414)

This is how some historians comment on the same events. We looked at the works by Paul Johnson, who tends to be more conservative in his views, and Michael K. Smith, a dissident writer famous for his liberal approach. As you can see their accounts of the Hiroshima bombings drastically differ. One supports one idea, another leans toward a different explanation. We will continue to update this article with a hope to make it more detailed.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 7th, 2005 at 4:27 pm and is filed under History. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.