Another theory is that the German physicists (especially Heisenberg) kept the fact a secret as they didn't want it to get into the hands of the military.
Meh RKKA could not even invade the Kuriles without loaned landing craft. FFS they were using trawlers to land men, to the point it made Op SeaLowe look professional. The reds were amateurs at Amphib ops .Two days later, a million Ivans poured into Manchuria and smashed the Japanese Kwangtung army.
My granddad, a rodney in the Kwangtung army was there. He obviously didn't go for all that ritual suicide nonsense because he surrendered and spent five years in a Siberian gulag.
I've read that it was the Russian invasion and the destruction of the Kwangtung army that was the real catalyst for the Japanese surrender; not so much the atom bombs.
Did Nuclear Weapons Cause Japan to Surrender? | Carnegie Council for Ethics in International AffairsWard Wilson, senior fellow at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, explains that the Soviet declaration of war and not the Hiroshima nuclear bombing caused Japan to surrender at the end ofwww.carnegiecouncil.org
This is interesting on your topic -Meh RKKA could not even invade the Kuriles without loaned landing craft. FFS they were using trawlers to land men, to the point it made Op SeaLowe look professional. The reds were amateurs at Amphib ops .
Add starvation brought to japan by a horrible harvest and the US Navy & Army Air Forces aptly named Operation Starvation mining and sinking much of the vessel traffic between China and JapanI think it was a combination of that, the nukes, no access to oil and the fact that most of Japan's cities/industry had been torched by conventional bombing that led the Emperor to make the understatement of the 20th century:
"the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage"
I posted this in the snowflake outrage thread but this one seems more suited, this is my lefty mates take on it View attachment 494934
I commented asking if he thinks a ground invasion of Japan would have been preferable considering the total destruction of northern Europe and associated civilian casualties dislodging the Nazis the previous year. He came back with "Look mate, I'm not arguing all day about this, it was murder and anyone who thinks otherwise is just a psychopath who loves f**king war".
There was a US Destroyer USS Turner (DD64which blew up outside NY harbor sub net while a scratch team tried to defuse the hedgehogs while returning them to the magazine before entering portYes the US seaboard was the second Happy time. However, in the rest of the Atlantic things were not as happy. Here's some dull, but surprising numbers I turned up during my spigot research.
A ten pattern spread of depth charges had about 3% chance of a hit (Some sources say 1%, others 6%). In September 1941 we started fitting the Hedgehog Anti-submarine weapon. At its peak it had a hit rate of 28.5%. Doing some shitty maths that would have equated to double figures of U-boats sunk per month, instead of two or three. But due to various reasons it took nearly a year before the Hedgehog scored its first hit. Those issues were all easily fixable, but the UK fucked up. That we did should be one of the biggest scandals of the war, but it was all hidden under operational security at the time.
Those that know about the U-boat war will tell you the Germans would have been finished in a few months by that loss rate.
We were all the way through the war!
The guy who made it has stated he never intended it to be an anti-war film (although he is anti nuke after Fukishima). He wanted it to be a story about children not listening to their elders.Some of my mates were discussing that hentai cartoon thing by studio gibbly - Grave of the Fireflies. I haven't seen it but it's about some kids living in Japan in 45. My mates were saying how sad it was.
You will find most of the Joint chiefs stating they could have won without the bombI've always considered the use of atomic bombs on Nagasaki & Hiroshima abhorrent, but shied away from condemning them outright due to the horrific battles US forces were forced to fight as they Island hopped their way to Japan.
I speculated that maybe the atomic bombings, as horrific as they were, ultimately saved a greater number of lives than they took.
Then I saw this highlighted today, General MacArthur later stating that he disagreed with their use, and I'm all confused again.
View attachment 495130