What ways the war could be ended besides the atomic bomb?

Answer 1

Not many really. Japan had bombed the territory of the United States in an attempt to put the entire Pacific Ocean under the control of the Japanese Emperor. As such, the Emperor and his military had to be NOT JUST STOPPED, but also prevented from ever making such an attempt again. The war had been won, but the Emperor refused to surrender and sign an agreement to stop the aggression. Japan had been surrounded, the Japanese navy had been destroyed, the Japanese people were starving and there was no possibility of getting resources to prevent the death of their people. The emperor was willing to let millions die rather than surrender. The emperor felt that the Allied forces could not endure the killing of so many people, so the Japanese citizens had been given sharpened sticks, axes, pitchforks and anything else that might cause harm, and they were told to defend the shores of Japan against invasion. Many millions of innocent citizens would have been killed and were already dying from disease and malnutrition, and still the Emperor refused to surrender. Manufacturing centers were bombed using conventional bombs causing wildfires that burned entire cities and killed hundreds of thousands every time we tried to convince them to surrender. Truman claims that he warned the Japanese that he had a weapon of incredible power and gave a time limit to the surrender, but there is no evidence that this actually occured. When the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan was stunned, but the Emperor still refused to surrender. Truman told him that we have more, but the Emperor still refused to surrender. When the bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, the Emperor finally agreed. In reality, the Emperor wanted the option to regroup and still take on the islands of the pacific and surrender prevented that option. No, there weren't very many options. Estimates were that had the Allied forces invaded Japan in a conventional way, we would have lost as many as a million soldiers, and possibly more. Yes, we would have eventually won, but here is a thought for you to consider. Imagine that your father, brother or uncle or possibly even two or three of your loved ones had been killed trying to stop someone who had attacked your nation. Then imagine how you would feel if you found out that your nations President had a weapon that would have stopped the war and your father, brother, uncle or neighbor died for absolutely no reason. That the war could have been stopped and OUR people did not need to die. How would you have felt? There were alternate plans to droping the atomic bomb. One plan was a diplomatic approch where if Japan surrendered the US would let them keep their "sacred emperor". The emperor was considered a god in Japan. The Japanese people were fighting so hard to the bitter end because they did not want to US to take their emperor away from them. Another plan to end the war involved Russia. If Russia would join the US in the invasion of the mainland the extra man power could be enough to defeat Japan without as many casualties. At the Potsdam conference in Berlin Russia agreed to help the US. But Truman, being pressured by those around him, chose to use the atmoic bomb.

Answer 2

Yes, there were quite a few, actually.

We could have dropped the bombs on a nearby island to demonstrate the power of the bombs.

We could have stormed the city with large numbers of troops. (We sort of did this, anyway.)

We could have participated in diplomatic talks.

i think that the first alternative does have merit in that a demostration of the atomic bomb's power could've persuaded Japan's leaders to cooperate, but the last two alternatives are worthless. First of all, the whole point of dropping the atomic bomb was to create a quick and easy end to the war without losing anymore Allied soldiers, so storming the city would'nt work. Second of all, the U.S. tried to have diplomatic talks with Japan, but Emperor Hirohito refused to reply or acknowledge the U.S.'s attempts at peaceful talks. So, i think the only true alternative here would be an effective demonstration on a nearby island, but then again, the damage on Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved that the bomb's power and effects reached across extensive areas of land wiping out everything in its path, plus the whole radiation sickness deal. So, if they did set off the bomb on a nearby island, there still would be a chance that people could get hurt both by radiation and the force, but not at all as horrifically and voluminously as when directly dropped in the cities.

Answer 3

Invasion. Would have been costly in both human life and in resources. Pack up and go home... only to allow Japanese leaders to make another attempt to take the islands of the Pacific LATER, after they had rebuilt their military. Continue to carpet bomb the entire nation and allow the Emperor to let his people sacrifice their lives for HIM. The U.S. was running out of bombs and that option was far too expensive. Also, to negotiate peacefully with Japan. this would save lives, but japan would not co-operate None of the options were acceptable. all answers above found in "quest for identity: America since 1945" by randall bennett woods

Answer 4

At the end of World War II, few questioned Truman's decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Most Americans accepted the obvious reasoning: the atomic bombings brought the war to a more timely end. They did not have a problem with over one hundred thousand of the enemy being killed. After all, the Japanese attacked America, and not the other way around. In later years, however, many have begun to question the conventional wisdom of "Truman was saving lives," putting forth theories of their own. However, when one examines the issue with great attention to the results of the atomic bombings and compares these results with possible alternatives to using said bombs, the line between truth and fiction begins to clear. Truman's decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan was for the purpose of saving lives and ending the war quickly in order to prevent a disastrous land invasion.

Answer 5

Invasion of Japan.

A more costly option (in terms of human lives) for both sides.

The blockade of Japan would continue for longer. So people would starve to death.

The deaths during combat would have been very high, both of armed forces personnel and civilians caught up in the fighting.

Suicides might also have been higher if the Emperor hadn't ordered a ceasefire and more people felt they couldn't endure the disgrace of failing the emperor in defending Japan. If the emperor could accept defeat, that set an example to others.

Answer 6

The alternative to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was Operation Downfall, which was basically a D-day like invasion by the United States on Japan.

The operation had two parts: Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet. Set to begin in October 1945, Operation Olympic was intended to capture the southern third of the southernmost main Japanese island, Kyushu, with Okinawa to be used as a staging area. Later, in spring 1946, Operation Coronet was the planned invasion of Kanto.

In layman's terms, the alternative was to invade Japan from the south, using recently captured islands as airfields.

Casualties range heavily, but most contend that American casualties range from around 200,000~300,000 while Japanese Casualties range in the millions.

For example, In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.

*NOTE: the Olympic campaign and Coronet campaign are all part of Operation Downfall.

In addition, the U.S. also considered using chemical weapons, but that was probably a worst case scenario (likely not going to happen)

Answer 7

The atom bomb usage was risky. It was hoped the Allied forces, the US, Australia and the USSR, did not have to invade Japan once Emperor Hirohito and the Japanese military saw the destruction done by the two atom bombs.

The invasion of the island of Honshu (main island of Japan) would have involved the probable deaths of over a million Japanese, Americans, Australians, and Russians. Japanese would have fought to the last man.

The best way to have avoided both the atomic bombing and the Allied Forces invasion would have been for the Japanese Military to concede to the idea they had lost and it was time to surrender. The term "surrender" was not in their minds, hearts or vocabulary. They did not want the Emperor to surrender. Some Japanese military personnel carried out a plot to prevent the Emperor from surrendering to the Allied Forces. They were defeated and Hirohito was able to broadcast the surrender over the radio waves.

Answer 8

The only left was attacking Japan's main land.

Answer 9

War would end once an invasion of the Japanese Mainland was successful by defeating the Japanese armed forces .