Was dropping the second atomic bomb at Nagasaki necessary to end World War 2?

Answer 1

Was Nagaski Necessary for SurrenderYes. Both atomic bombs were necessary. The Japanese were not planning their surrender after Hiroshima.

This is not true. There is written proof that Emperor Hirohito was planning on surrendering after the bombing of Hiroshima. The U.S. did not give enough time for them to officially surrender. Although i will not argue about the necessity of the bombing of Hiroshima, the bombing of Nagasaki was unnecessary. Not only did it ruin more innocent lives, it was just done for a demonstration of power, which everyone knew the U.S. already had. The Japanese couldn't take much more strain and Hiroshima's bombing was the straw to break the camel's back. Nagasaki's bombing was an unnecessary move and created the ferocious image of the U.S. being a nuclear beast. The U.S. is absorbed in its nuclear power, uncaring of the enviromental problems or the casualties of innocent people. They could have killed the army men at least to end the war instead of innocent people. The military men were voluntarily putting themselves out there to die. My personal opinion, and the generally accepted opinion, is that the second atomic bomb was unnecessary.

Well...

The truth is, we'll never know. After the Hiroshima bombing (August 6th), what had happened did not become known to the Japanese High Command until mid-day on the 7th. Before that, all that was known was that something horrible had happened.

The Japanese War Council (comprised of 4 Military and 2 Civilian leaders) voted that night to continue the war effort, with all military members voting for war, and the civilians against. The Emperor was silent.

During the next two days, and intense diplomatic effort was attempted by the civilian council members, to contact the Allies to discuss surrender, convince the military members to accept a surrender, and persuade the Emperor to intervene.

Historically, the likelihood of a diplomatic solution being acceptable to the Japanese civilian leadership and the Allies is high, but such an agreement would almost certainly have been rejected by the military members of the council, and, as they had the deciding majority on the council, no surrender.

Efforts by the civilians to persuade the Emperor had been ongoing for several months, as the inevitable loss of the war had become apparent by late Spring. The Emperor had remained outside politics, as he had practically all his reign.

The hitch is here: by dropping the 2nd bomb on August 9th, the US did two things to the above processes.

Firstly, it didn't allow for the full effects of the Hiroshima bombing to be comprehended. There simply wasn't enough time to fully appreciate the complete devastation that it caused. Such devastation could have been used by the civilian members to more successfully press the military and Emperor to surrender. But that's theoretical, and we'll never know if more time would have allowed them to be successful in lobbying for surrender, or if the additional time instead would have allowed the military faction to argue more persuasively for further resistance.

Secondly, the immediate bombing of Nagasaki gave the Japanese the impression that US had a significant supply of these weapons, and that further resistance would result in genocide of the Japanese people within the month. Ultimately, this is what appears to have changed the Emperor's mind about intervention (Hirohito specifically mentioned this in post-war interviews, that the possible annihilation of all of Japan suddenly was presented as a distinct possibility, and was what made him speak out then).

As much of the Japanese government records were destroyed shortly after the 9th, intentionally during a coup attempt (and kidnapping attempt of the Emperor) and incidentally in the chaos afterwards, and most of the members of the council were tried on war crimes charges (and executed), there is very poor documentation on the actual conversations had, and little in the way of reliable witness statements.

The end result is this: we simply don't know if another bombing was necessary. Moreover, we don't know if more time between bombings would have helped either (i.e. if we'd threatened to repeat the Hiroshima on say the 20th, would Japan have then surrendered?) There's simply not enough hard evidence to make much of a case either way. The sole hard piece we have is the Emperor's word that it was the 2nd bombing that changed his mind, and caused him to intervene. But, once again, was this due to the timing of the second bombing, or would have a greater interval cause him to reconsider the opinion he'd held even immediately after Hiroshima?

We know the second bombing worked (i.e. forced the immediate surrender). What we don't know was if there were other alternatives that might also have worked.

Answer 2

Yes. After Nagasaki and Hiroshima, 2 days earlier, even the most fanatical of the Japanese military realized that it was pointless. With the threat of 5 more cities being bombed, and the remaining cities being destroyed by conventional means, it was time to surrender.

Answer 3

President Truman stated that he needed to end the war and to collapse Japan's means to make war ever again.

Answer 4

yes