# A-bombs vs. firebombing of Tokyo **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 28, 2016, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893 "2016-05-28T15:22:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2016, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/41 "2016-05-29T20:44:34Z")
He also ignores the danger of kamikaze attacks. Our ships were sitting ducks. ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2016, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/42 "2016-05-29T22:02:24Z")
War is Hell. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2016, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/43 "2016-05-29T23:37:50Z")
Raw is War ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2016, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/44 "2016-05-29T23:54:18Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > He also ignores the danger of kamikaze attacks. Our ships were sitting ducks. Cite > **[The Perilous Fight . The Kamikaze Threat | PBS](https://www.pbs.org/perilousfight/psychology/the_kamikaze_threat/)** > > Deciding to drop the atomic bomb, disbelief of German atrocities, letters from the front, the Kamikaze threat ---
**Author:** ![Soulcatcher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/94ad74/32.png) [@Soulcatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soulcatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2016, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/45 "2016-05-29T23:59:16Z")
I find the oft cited argument that the Japanese surrendered mostly or even in part due to the Russian declaration of war to be absurd. If the Japanese were willing to hold out in the face of entire cities being incinerated (whether by A-bomb or fire bomb), the successful blockage and starvation of the population, ,the total defeat of their air and naval forces, and the pending invasion of their homeland…how in the hell could losing Manchuria be the tipping point for ending the war? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/46 "2016-05-30T00:41:44Z")
Fire storms require more than just a shit ton of incendiaries dropped on densely packed wooden houses, they need specific weather conditions as well. The A bomb is just a terribly effective individual weapon, and so I can see moral questions coming into play for and individual who dropped the bomb verses one who participated in but one of many sorties during a freak a weather pattern. Moral questions coming a generation later, mind you, no one who was assigned to Operation Downfall had any doubts at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/47 "2016-05-30T01:50:24Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > Fire storms require more than just a shit ton of incendiaries dropped on densely packed wooden houses, they need specific weather conditions as well. The A bomb is just a terribly effective individual weapon, and so I can see moral questions coming into play for and individual who dropped the bomb verses one who participated in but one of many sorties during a freak a weather pattern. > > Moral questions coming a generation later, mind you, no one who was assigned to Operation Downfall had any doubts at the time. Atomic bombs at the time needed clear weather to locate the target. That’s why Nagasaki was bombed instead of Kokura. In fact, Nagasaki wasn’t firebombed because they couldn’t locate it at night with ground radar. So both types of weapons had their weather and visibility limitations. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/48 "2016-05-30T02:11:21Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Atomic bombs at the time needed clear weather to locate the target. That’s why Nagasaki was bombed instead of Kokura. In fact, Nagasaki wasn’t firebombed because they couldn’t locate it at night with ground radar. > > So both types of weapons had their weather and visibility limitations. You need clear weather to accurately drop any bomb. [Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestorm) > [@](#): > > A firestorm is created as a result of the stack effect as the heat of the original fire draws in more and more of the surrounding air. This draft can be quickly increased if a low-level jet stream exists over or near the fire. As the updraft mushrooms, strong inwardly-directed gusty winds develop around the fire, supplying it with additional air. This would seem to prevent the firestorm from spreading on the wind, but the tremendous turbulence created may also cause the strong surface inflow winds to change direction erratically. Firestorms resulting from the bombardment of urban areas in the Second World War were generally confined to the areas initially seeded with incendiary devices, and the firestorm did not appreciably spread outward The air commands of all WWII nations would have LOVED to create them at will. If only that’s how it worked. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/49 "2016-05-30T02:48:13Z")
In cities like Berlin, with multistory buildings, the first wave of bombs were penetrating and designed to open holes that created a draft. This allowed oxygen to easily flow to flame the incendiary bombs. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/50 "2016-05-30T02:58:03Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > In cities like Berlin, with multistory buildings, the first wave of bombs were penetrating and designed to open holes that created a draft. This allowed oxygen to easily flow to flame the incendiary bombs. All cities have multistory buildings, and yet few faced firestorms in WWII despite all nations using incendiary bombs. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/51 "2016-05-30T02:58:28Z")
Really surprised by this thread. Both the number of people essentially saying “It’s war…anything goes” and the number implying that firebombing is not as bad as dropping atomic bombs because the latter is a singular big, scary weapon. Let’s go back to basics. Is there such a thing as a war crime? I would say clearly yes, and if anyone demonstrated the difference between trying to win a military campaign, and just taking the opportunity to commit appalling acts of sadism, it’s the IJA. Is it a war crime to kill civilians? Well, it’s very difficult to avoid killing civilians in a modern war. A line can be drawn between directly targeting civilians, and targeting combatants, military facilities and factories (with civilian deaths being inevitable but collateral). Yes there are edge cases like what if the bad guys have holed up in a densely-populated civilian area? But no doubt that firebombing is at least as bad, and arguably worse than the a-bomb as it knowingly disproportionately killed civilians (japanese homes being more likely to be made of flammable materials than factories). The a-bomb at least was aimed at areas with significant military facilities and factories. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/52 "2016-05-30T03:15:31Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > You need clear weather to accurately drop any bomb. That’s simply not true. They had ground radar in WW-II. The [AN/APQ-13 radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/APQ-13) was a ground scanning radar developed by Bell Laboratories, Western Electric, and MIT as an improved model of the airborne H2X radar, itself developed from the first ground scanning radar, the British H2S radar. It was used on B-29s during World War II in the Pacific theater for high altitude area bombing, search and navigation. Although an important industrial city, [Nagasaki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki) had been spared from firebombing because its geography made it difficult to locate at night with AN/APQ-13 radar.[112] ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/53 "2016-05-30T03:17:44Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > The a-bomb at least was aimed at areas with significant military facilities and factories. The atomic bombs were not dropped on military targets except as pretenses. The bombs had one purpose: to end the war through sheer firepower and destruction. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/54 "2016-05-30T03:22:37Z")
> [@Soulcatcher](#): > > I find the oft cited argument that the Japanese surrendered mostly or even in part due to the Russian declaration of war to be absurd. If the Japanese were willing to hold out in the face of entire cities being incinerated (whether by A-bomb or fire bomb), the successful blockage and starvation of the population, ,the total defeat of their air and naval forces, and the pending invasion of their homeland…how in the hell could losing Manchuria be the tipping point for ending the war? > Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk It wasn’t about losing Manchuria - it was about losing Hokkaido, potentially more. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/55 "2016-05-30T03:25:04Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > The atomic bombs were not dropped on military targets except as pretenses. The bombs had one purpose: to end the war through sheer firepower and destruction. That’s not true. All cities targeted consisted of military and industrial assets. There were much larger civilian targets to choose from. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/56 "2016-05-30T03:27:48Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > It wasn’t about losing Manchuria - it was about losing Hokkaido, potentially more. They were already screwed by that point. It was really down to how bloody they were willing to make it before surrender. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/57 "2016-05-30T03:37:24Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > That’s not true. All cities targeted consisted of military and industrial assets. There were much larger civilian targets to choose from. The bombs were not dropped to knock out any particular war industry. The American planners didn’t care what factories Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) might have had except as cover for dropping the bombs. I have said that dropping the atomic bombs was the correct course of action and can be justified in that it saved lives, including Japanese lives. They were not, however, dropped to destroy military targets. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/58 "2016-05-30T03:51:20Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > The bombs were not dropped to knock out any particular war industry. The American planners didn’t care what factories Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) might have had except as cover for dropping the bombs. Again, there were much larger civilian targets. What they learned in Europe was to go after assets. Hiroshima had 40,000 troops stationed there along with large stockpiles of supplies. The population was reduced because of systematic evacuation and the government was actively tearing down structures to create fire breaks. what cities do you think were better targets and why? ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/59 "2016-05-30T05:33:58Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > The American planners didn’t care what factories Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) might have had except as cover for dropping the bombs. Well that’s a piece of speculation that I doubt we could ever confirm. I did say that firebombing is _at least as_ bad as the a-bomb, with that bit of wriggle room just there because there are certain things we don’t know. If american commanders were indeed sat around a table, discussing the a-bomb, saying “Hey let’s pretend we’re going after factories and ports when really we don’t care and just want shock and awe. Oh, and we know the extent of radiation-related diseases and fatalities, and that’s great too.” then fine, both acts could, maybe, be _equally_ condemned. But I can’t see a scenario where the firebombing campaign comes out as the lesser of two evils. There is no doubt everyone concerned would know 100% it would disproportionately kill, injure and displace civilians, and that the injuries and deaths would generally be slow and agonizing. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2016, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893/60 "2016-05-30T23:59:29Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Although the Operation Olympic invasion was contemplated as threatening high losses to invaders, it was never seriously planned. The larger looming concern is that Japan might surrender to and be occupied by the Soviets who the Allied leadership were already viewing (correctly) as a post-war opponent and likely influenced the decision to end the war decisively with an exclusive US and British presence in Japan to avoid the clustefuck that became the Iron Curtain in central Europe. I genuinely admire the depth of your knowledge **Stranger** , but you are entirely misinformed on this. [Operation Olympic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall) was going to happen on 1 November 1945 had Japan not surrendered, full stop. It wasn’t a contemplation or something “never seriously planned”. Olympic and Coronet were going to be the largest amphibious invasions in history and the preparations were well underway. There was no concern that Japan might surrender to the Soviet Union, with whom it wasn’t even at war with yet, much less that it would be occupied by the Soviet Union. Soviet amphibious sealift capacity in the Pacific was virtually nil; any serious Soviet commitment of ground forces to an invasion of Japan would require US shipping in order to happen. The concern was getting Japan to surrender, which the Japanese military had no intention of doing; they were fully prepared to lead Japan to national suicide before surrendering. The three military members of the Supreme Council for the Direction of the War remained uniformly opposed to surrender _even after both atomic bombs and the Soviet entry into the war_. Japanese diplomatic radio traffic was so thoroughly compromised by Magic that all traffic between Japan and its foreign office in the Soviet Union was being read by the US at the same time as its Japanese recipient. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-bombs-vs-firebombing-of-tokyo/755893.md?page=4)