# Why couldn't the first atomic bomb have been dropped on empty territory? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 10, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588 "2013-11-10T18:19:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/41 "2013-11-11T00:09:52Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > There wasn’t any hurry. Sure there was. The war was costing the US millions of dollars a day, and our people were dieing every day the war went on, if for no other reason than every-day accidents on-board ship. There was every reason to wrap the war up quickly. If that meant a couple of hundred-thousand Japanese had to die, so be it. They should have thought of that on Dec. 6, 1941. ---
**Author:** ![Weeping\_Wyvern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@Weeping\_Wyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weeping_Wyvern)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/42 "2013-11-11T00:32:58Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Sure there was. The war was costing the US millions of dollars a day, and our people were dieing every day the war went on, if for no other reason than every-day accidents on-board ship. There was every reason to wrap the war up quickly. If that meant a couple of hundred-thousand Japanese had to die, so be it. They should have thought of that on Dec. 6, 1941. The “they” who decided to bomb Pearl Harbor were not the “they” who died in Hiroshima. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/43 "2013-11-11T00:37:13Z")
In war it never is. So what? ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/44 "2013-11-11T00:50:20Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > Also, we should have clarified our foolish demand for “unconditional surrender” by explicitly letting the Japanese know that the monarchy would be permitted to continue. Which was what ended up actually happening, of course. But we did a very bad job of communicating it. As I’ve read the history, the United States didn’t originally intend to permit the monarchy to continue. That choice was only made during the negotiation of Japan’s surrender, after the bombs. It went something like this: America: Drops bombs. Calls for _unconditional_ surrender. Japan: Hirohito uses his bully pulpit to convince warlords that the game is up. Japan: Offers to surrender, asking only that “the person and office of the emperor be respected.” America: **What part of _unconditional surrender_ don’t you understand?** MacArthur (stage whisper): Uh, let’s take them up on that. We can work with Hirohito. America: Okay, Japan, we’ll accept your surrender, and we will respect the person and office of the emperor. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/45 "2013-11-11T01:00:07Z")
I don’t think keeping the Emperor was part of MacArthur’s plans until after the unconditional surrender. He pretty much decided after being put in charge of the occupying force. In addition, Japan’s efforts and negotiating a peace were, to put it mildly, pathetic. What they were asking for was for the Americans to go away while they sorted out all the war crimes & demilitarized. Yeah. Right. ---
**Author:** ![Weeping\_Wyvern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@Weeping\_Wyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weeping_Wyvern)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/46 "2013-11-11T01:02:50Z")
Regarding MacArthur, his biographer William Manchester says this: > [@](#): > > …the Potsdam declaration in July, demand[ed] that Japan surrender unconditionally or face ‘prompt and utter destruction.’ MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General’s advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have been unnecessary. > [@silenus](#): > > In war it never is. So what? My point is that we shouldn’t try to shift the blame for their deaths away from us. Japan started the war, yes, but we freely chose to bomb a non-military target. And I think “never” is an awfully strong statement. Innocents certainly get killed, yes, but that doesn’t mean the guilty aren’t killed too. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/47 "2013-11-11T01:11:42Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > My point is that we shouldn’t try to shift **the blame for their deaths** away from us. Japan started the war, yes, but we freely chose to bomb a non-military target. Bullshit. 1. Blame? Fuck that. It’s war. 2. Hiroshima WAS a military target. 3. Even if it wasn’t, so what? Civilian targets are all a part of total war. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/48 "2013-11-11T01:18:04Z")
It’s worth noting that there were some Americans, patriotic Americans, who found the atomic bombing appalling _at the time_. But that said… I mean, August 6, 1945 was a really different time. This was not Afghanistan or Iraq or the invasion of Grenada. It was after years of war unlike anything experienced in the history of man or the living memory of anyone, a war of the most awful savagery and ruthlessness, and as og August 6, 1945, it was not yet clear when the war would end. It looked for all the world like the war could drag on for a year more, and kill millions more after millions and millions and TENS of million had died, geysers of blood spewing all over the world and pain and horror beyond imagining. There were a lot of political and military interests this way and that about the bomb; Macarthur disagreed with Nimitz who disagreed with Marshall and of course the Soviets and blah blah blah, books have bene written about it. But if you think about it, really, all decisions were going to drive them to using the bomb to just try to end it. And wouldn’t you have? At that point so many had died, so many cities razed, if you could just end it with one or two bombs… well, I sure would have. It worked, too, and maybe saved many Japanese lives. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/49 "2013-11-11T01:32:09Z")
It wasn’t just about showing we had the ability. It was about showing that we were willing to use it. Sure, maybe just the first would have been good enough, but do you want to take that chance? Japan may not have had nuclear weapons, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have fought back, and more people would have wound up dead. > [@Musicat](#): > > This has been proposed and discussed many times. You might feel quite differently if you had been around (or killed) at Pearl Harbor and subsequent battles. Saving lives of the enemy was the last thing the US wanted to do at the time. Probably most of the US wanted revenge, too. Dropping a demonstration bomb _might_ have worked, but dropping it on Japan _certainly_ did. You do understand the concept of “enemy,” don’t you? > > War isn’t nice and humanitarian concerns are quite different under wartime circumstances. However, this is all completely stupid. Making big decisions based on how you FEEL is evidence of an unsound mind. I am familiar with what an enemy is, but the civilians who died WERE NOT our enemies. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/50 "2013-11-11T01:44:00Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > However, this is all completely stupid. Making big decisions based on how you FEEL is evidence of an unsound mind. Who would ever go to war in the first place if it were based on pure logic? Many decisions are based on how people feel about the enemy. > [@](#): > > I am familiar with what an enemy is, but the civilians who died WERE NOT our enemies. Oh yes they were. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/51 "2013-11-11T01:50:43Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I am familiar with what an enemy is, but the civilians who died WERE NOT our enemies. You mean the civilians who manufactured the bombs, bullets, guns, explosives, torpedoes, planes, ships, communication and navigation equipment? Who grew the food? Who provided the fuel and transportation for all that to the troops? Innocents, all. ---
**Author:** ![the\_diego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@the\_diego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/the_diego)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/52 "2013-11-11T01:53:30Z")
There was no time to look for alternatives in air war doctrine from Mitchell and Douhet: The primary use of air power is to remove the enemy’s will and capacity to fight. You’re proposing just one of two. ---
**Author:** ![dogbutler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dogbutler/32/428_2.png) [@dogbutler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dogbutler)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/53 "2013-11-11T02:28:14Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > I definitely think that it’s wrong to phrase the debate as one between nuking Japanese cities and launching a conventional invasion. The nuclear show-of-force option seems very logical and ethical to me. But even more fundamentally, there was the option of just recognizing the simple fact that by August 1945 the Empire of Japan was no longer a significant military threat to the Allied nations. There wasn’t any hurry. We should have just stayed offshore with our massively superior fleets, sunk the last pitiful remnants of the Japanese navy, and blockaded them until they came to their senses. > > Also, we should have clarified our foolish demand for “unconditional surrender” by explicitly letting the Japanese know that the monarchy would be permitted to continue. Which was what ended up actually happening, of course. But we did a very bad job of communicating it. > [@Colibri](#): > > Or millions starved to death. A blockade followed by invasion would have resulted in genocide, and the deaths of all the POWs and civilian internees in the Home Islands. That’s the only thing worse than 2 atomic bombs. ---
**Author:** ![RandMcnally](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b782af/32.png) [@RandMcnally](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RandMcnally)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/54 "2013-11-11T02:42:29Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Sure there was. The war was costing the US millions of dollars a day, and our people were dieing every day the war went on, if for no other reason than every-day accidents on-board ship. There was every reason to wrap the war up quickly. If that meant a couple of hundred-thousand Japanese had to die, so be it. They should have thought of that on Dec. 6, 1941. Plus, we had to beat the Soviets. ---
**Author:** ![Otara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a88e4f/32.png) [@Otara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otara)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/55 "2013-11-11T03:13:27Z")
One possibility Ive wondered about is if it might have been a tad embarassing if it hadnt actually gone off and landed essentially intact as has happened with other bombs. As in letting it go off without warning somewhere less inhabited in the right location have prevented it being potentially captured and used back at them. Im sure the chances were low, particularly with Little Boy but its one practical argument that doesnt involve humanitarian reasons as such. Otara ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/56 "2013-11-11T03:19:17Z")
“I tell you, War is all Hell” - Sherman “War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it” - Sherman, again > [@Ranger\_Jeff](#): > > It’s not like any Japanese civilians were harmed in the firestorm raids that used conventional and incendiary weapons, right? > [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Or Germans, in Dresden and Berlin. Indeed. Should we have firestormed a nearby forest as a warning? At that point in the war… tens of millions dead, as fighters or collateral damage or atrocity victims; at least as many displaced and destitute, dozens of nations in chaos, hundreds of cities and towns in smoking ruins, the accumulated treasure of centuries of empires spent… what’s one or two more midsized cities (especially of “those others”) to try and deliver a final strike? Hearts were hardened. As to the alternative to submit them to prolonged blockade/siege… well, that’s an alternative if you find that starving out the whole nation (which we would be doing \*anyway \*for as long as the war would last) is more moral or merciful than directly killing a fraction of them until someone says “enough!”. Meanwhile you would still have needed for the Soviets and Chinese to deal with finishing off the Manchurian Army, and the Allies would have had to turn South to deal with cleaning up the armies marooned in Thailand, Malaya and Indonesia. The concept of nuclear as a special “moral” horror to be avoided at all costs was something that grew _ **afterwards** _ as a result of seeing the effects of the two strikes and the following years of testing. The decision had to be taken \*\*\*before \*\*\*those facts were in hand. ---
**Author:** ![foolscap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9a140/32.png) [@foolscap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolscap)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/57 "2013-11-11T03:25:26Z")
by the time the bombs were dropped by official policy of the government of japan “all of japans people were soldiers except babes in arms” ( thats the way they put it) so, only a handful of civilians died:confused: ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/58 "2013-11-11T03:32:43Z")
> [@RandMcnally](#): > > Plus, we had to beat the Soviets. A thumbnail analysis I have trouble refuting is that Hiroshima was the last bomb of world war 2; Nagasaki was the first bomb of world war 3. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/59 "2013-11-11T05:04:11Z")
“The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility” - British Sea Lord John Fisher ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2013, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588/60 "2013-11-11T06:19:52Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > …My point is that we shouldn’t try to shift the blame for their deaths away from us. Japan started the war, yes, but we freely chose to bomb a non-military target. And I think “never” is an awfully strong statement. Innocents certainly get killed, yes, but that doesn’t mean the guilty aren’t killed too. If you don’t want Hiroshima, don’t start Pearl Harbor. Imperial Japan was forced to surrender. The war was over. The rebuilding and healing could begin. Imperial Japan knew the Allies demanded an unconditional surrender. Imperial Japan knew a massive invasion was coming. Orders had been issued to exterminate POWs and civilian prisoners and hide the evidence. Piston and jet fighter planes were hidden in carved out mountain tunnels. Submarines and mini subs were to be used to sink as many of the invaders ships as possible. Civilians were being trained to fight with sticks and anything else they could use. A dozen battalions had been stationed around western Japan and were expected to fight to their deaths. The Nazis had sent plans for more jet fighters, a jet plane, and yellowcake which was intended for Imperial Japans own atomic weapon. If only the war **lasted long enough** for them to be of use. Ending wars quickly saves lives. When do you think the war should have ended? 1946? 1947? How many more lives lost do you think should have been considered acceptable to the 1945 Allies? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-couldnt-the-first-atomic-bomb-have-been-dropped-on-empty-territory/673588.md?page=4)