Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb

I totally disagree with Professor Takaki. I am a Japanese American like he is and I was subjected to racial discrimination just after Pearl Harbor perhaps not as much as he had (if he was born then) because I lived in Hawaii and not sent to internment camp. Nevertheless I felt the sting of discrimination. I was a military member of the military intelligence service assigned to ATIS a division of General MacArthur's G2 or Intelligence Section.

We saw many highly classified documents at the headquarters and involved in numerous translations of enemy documents. We were also sent on temporary duty assignment on special missions to the frontline units and engaged in scouting and capturing enemy soldiers and interrogating them. I had experience at the lowest and the highest level. Therefore, I have my own perspective of why the A bomb was dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The casualties for both cities exceeded 210,000 people. The strategic bombing of Japan in six months exceeded 300,000 casualties and millions homeless. Invasion planners stated blockade of Japan chokes but does not kill. The bombing destroys cities but not the army. General Eisenhower agreed. General MacArthur was for the invasion and use of the A bomb for tactical purpose. Subsequent data showed he was wrong.

Operation Olympic the invasion of Kyushu was to be launched in November 1945. I was scheduled to be assigned to the 1st Corps to invade Miyasaki, Kyushu by the 6th Army under Gen. Krueger. The XI Corps to land at Ariake Bay to the South and the Marine V Amphibious Corps to land on the southwestern shore. We would have faced 790,000 Japanese versus our 550,000 troops. Operation Coronet was the invasion of Kanto Plain near Tokyo with an invasion force twice as large as Olympic and scheduled for April 1946.
.
Postwar: I read Ketsugo the Japanese defense plan. The Japanese had not only the kamikaze aircraft, but piloted bombs, piloted torpedoes, suicide speedboats in the thousands, mini suicide submarines and four thousand scuba divers to blow up the troop transports . The beaches were mined, spiderweb network of machine gun nests, hidden artillery behind 50 meter high hills. There were 12700 kamikaze aircraft to be launched from partially hidden runways from underground installations. The Japanese estimated about 50% of our troops to be killed. Our estimate was between 20% and 30% but postwar information revealed it to be much higher. The cave networks were designed from lessons learned in the Pacific war. General Marshall estimated a million Americans would perish. Omaha World Herald in their editorial stated, "These plans that called for the invasion of Japan paint a vivid description of what might have been the most horrible campaigns in the history of man." Prince Fumimaro Konoye said Japan would be a nation without cities. A whole nation and culture would vanish.

The Supreme Council of Japan felt that unconditional meant the elimination of the Emperor. The Emperor also felt that he would be eliminated. President Truman felt less than unconditional would result in future problems if the Japanese armed forces were not eliminated. They may rise again like the Germans. The bomb also saved Japan from being divided into north and south like Korea with Russian participation.

I was one of the first to occupy Japan. I saw caves and caves everywhere and other fortifications. Civilians began to appear two weeks later and I asked what are those caves for? They all said to hide in them and attack us at night. I asked with what? They showed me bamboo spears, bows and arrows, pitchforks, knives, samurai swords, sickles, etc., etc. There were 28 million civilians in a unit called the National Volunteer Combat Force. They were trained in guerilla warfare and attack at night. Women and children ages 15 to 50 were recruited. Everyone I interviewed told me that they will fight for the Emperor and not for the military. They consider him a descendent of God. The history of Japan would show this. This sentiment to save the Emperor was unanimous. Millions of Japanese would have died and that is not counting the suicides expected like in Okinawa. President Truman was concerned with history repeating itself. His decision was based on saving lives both Americans and Japanese and not based on racial prejudice. President Truman and his cabinet although not perfect were honorable men. It is incomprehensible that racial hatred was the basis for dropping the bomb. I was there, I saw and talked to the people. The bomb saved me and my fellow soldiers and millions of Japanese. Takaki is dead wrong including those that said the bomb should not have been dropped. These are people who were not involved and based their conclusions on assumptions and had not read Ketsugo nor saw the fortifications and talked to the people.

This review is concise because of limitation on number of words; otherwise, it would have filled five pages.

Biased, poorly researched book related to the boombing of Hiroshima. The bias begins on the dust cover (insinuating that Truman knew this would be the start of the Cold War). The book goes downhill from that point. selecting the low estimates of US losses and providing a revisionist view of the bombing (guess what--the Japanese approach to existance where the country supercedes self was real hence kill the 'Round Eye' who are invading our country) and would have resulted in horrible US losses. As is often true about revisionist history, no real attempt is made to project what would have happened if the war draged on and the Soviets participated in the proposed invasion of Japan. It is hard to comprehend how such a poorly written book made it past any editorial staff.

This book is worth buying for many reasons; mostly because it opens your eyes to the truth which people have been either ignoring or shielding themselves from.

I plan to lend my neighbor (and friend) my copy, because she has grown up reading "All-Anerican" text books. In a place of no diversity seen for miles and miles; I couldn't expect any less.

Everyone is taught about the Attack on Pearl Harbor, and how cruel the Japanese were to do this. But what about Americans? The textbooks kids study from today are all biased and corrupts minds. If everyone has bad-sides then why not show Americas? They obviously don't have a problem showing 'bad sides' of Japanese, Iraqis, Koreans, etc.

We're always portraying ourselves as al-mighty and most level headed, as well as most powerful. Is it true? Of course not.

We never show kids what we did to the Japanese; and how creul we were. Just show an example of today's world (rasict against Muslims).

If kids are exposed to such racism and prejudism at a young age, their minds will be set; which will make them close-minded in the future.

I reccommend everyone to read this extraordinary book. It is the great (to some harsh) truth about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing.


-16 years.

Ronald Takaki has written a book which presents the "Revisionists" view of why the U.S used the atomic bombs on Japan in the waning days of World War II. His thesis is that the bombs were dropped because Americans in general and Harry Truman in particular were racists. The bombs were in effect a racially motivated revenge attack on innocent Japanese civilians. His second thesis is that Harry Truman, insecure and bullied as a child because he wore glasses and played the piano now had the ultimate weapon to prove his manhood.
Takaki uses as his sources for these conclusions, magazine articles, letters to editors and anecdotal conversations with "real" Americans.
The value of Takaki's book is as a readable counterpoint to mainstream historical writing - it might provoke discusion and thought. The reader should bear in mind that Takaki has "an axe to grind."
If you are looking for a more balanced view on the topic of why the atomic bombs were used on Japan try J. Samuel Walker's "Prompt and Utter Destruction." In his book Walker cuts through the political posturing and tries to present the facts and his opinions in a logical, balanced way. Historian Gar Alperovitz (another revisionist historian) dismisses Walker's book as "a mere 110 pages" - that in itself recommends the book as an interesting read.

I see that most of those making arguments against this book are relying on "two wrongs make a right" fallacies and other logical fallacies. One of those arguing against this book states that he would like to have dropped more nuclear devices, thus showing himself to be mentally unstable.

I've yet to hear a single good argument for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan. After reading the arguments against this book presented here, I've still not seen a single good argument in favor of dropping nuclear weapons on Japan or anywhere else.