LogFAQs > #896436179

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicWhy didn't Japan surrender after the first atomic bomb?
K181
02/20/18 12:51:47 PM
#23:


The powers that be were terrified of a Versailles 2.0. They didn't want to let Japan off the hook only to rise again in a couple decades and start an even bloodier conflict. Couple that with their experiences facing fanatical, and often suicidal, defenses by hardline Japanese troops on Iwo Jima, Okinawa, and the Philippines, and you have a situation where American policy planners weren't willing to consider conditional surrender without occupation and wanted to avoid a brutally costly invasion of the Japanese home islands. Even if they decided against an invasion and instead wanted to continue traditional bombing campaigns or implement a blockade, the end result would've been greater casualties in Japan, among Allied servicemen, and among Chinese civilian populations, not to mention allow for the Soviets to establish a more pronounced base of power in China and Korea as well as give them incentive to demand a divided Japan.
---
The poster formerly known as Kakarot181: July 2, 2002 - March 14, 2012.
Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, I could care less.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1