Operation Downfall

[f-22 "raptor" ace]

If we didn't use the A Bomb we would have had to invade Japan. It is interesting to note that over 5000 Kamikaze aircraft were stockpiled in Japan in preperation of the expected allied invasion.

[Cyberlizard]

And there was a plot by the Japanese ministry of war to assassinate Hirohito called the Kyujo Incident to prevent his surrender after the first two atom bombs.  And if it succeeded, we would have dropped seven.  Yes...  SEVEN more bombs on Japan.  And then send in several million Allied troops from the US, Australia, New Zealand, England, and Canada just two days after.  With NO radiation protection.  Because lets face it, when we first used the A-bomb we didn't have a CLUE about its effects!  Just think, if several million Allies went into a radiation-ridden nuclear wasteland with NO protection against it and came back to start the baby boom, at least a third of us would either never exist due to grandpa's sterility or possible death, or we'd probably wind up as mutated hairless freaks with tumors on our faces like those mutants in the 2006 remake of The Hills Have Eyes!

[Mumbling]

Yea. I pretty much think the atom bombs and their affect was really quite cruel (especially if you still see pictures nowadays).

Interesting fact you mentioned there Cyberlizard, I did not know that they were going to attack Japan just like that.

[F-14 Ace]

Yea. I pretty much think the atom bombs and their affect was really quite cruel (especially if you still see pictures nowadays).

Interesting fact you mentioned there Cyberlizard, I did not know that they were going to attack Japan just like that.

I'm sorry but after reading some of the crap the Japanese did to the people of countries they occupied, as well as the human experiments they conducted, I find it difficult to have sympathy.  People complain about how we dropped a couple of A bombs on two cities, but how many millions of civilian deaths were the Japanese responsible for?  Funny how nobody ever complains about that.  <_<   They were every bit as bad, if not worse, than the Nazis.  They started the mess and we finished it.

[f-22 "raptor" ace]

Looking at the pacific war you can see why we used the A-bomb. An invasion of japan would be more costly the tha battle of Okinawa.
American:
12,513 killed
38,916 wounded,
33,096 non-combat losses
Japanese:110,000 killed
7,400–10,755 captured

Estimated 42,000–150,000 civilians killed.

the losses for an invasion of Japan would have been too much.

[The Chronicler]

Yeah, I remember from a history class back in high school about the decision to drop the A-bomb. The A-bomb was a very new weapon and no one had any idea what the long-term effects of using it would be. On the other hand, an invasion of Japan was expected to have massive casualties, with American casualties expected to be about 500,000 or even a million, if I remember correctly. Besides, by dropping the A-bombs on Japan, the world was able to see the true devastation that nuclear weapons could cause, and I think that it was a good thing for the Cold War because everyone knew what would happen if someone used a more powerful nuclear weapon and they would almost certainly do whatever they could to prevent such devastation from happening. If those bombs hadn't been dropped, well let's just say that World War III between the U.S. and Russia could have been more likely.

[f-22 "raptor" ace]

You do have a point there Chronicler it is a possible that may have happened if we didn't use the A-bomb. In terms of Japanese casualties they would probbaly be in the tens of millions. It would have been in two operations Operation Olympic would take Ky?sh? and was to start on November 1 1945. Operation Coronet would have started March 1, 1946 and would have been the largest amphibious invasion of all time. The target was Honshu in the KantÙ Plain area which was just south of Tokyo 25 divisions were to be in the initial operations compared to the 12 division of D-Day in the initial landings. Also High school children were issued awl's and were told to aim for the abdomen.  Some of the japanese defense soilders were issued muzzle loading muskets longbow and spears! If we had invaded Japan it would have been the most costly battle of the war. 500,000 purple hearts were made for the expected invasion there are still 120,000 left in stock from those 500,000.

[Malte279]

We have pretty much had this topic before.
History can rarely be so simply judged as in terms of right or wrong and moralist debates on the rights and wrongs in many cases just deteriorate into opinion based arguments which is why I hadn't responded in this thread so far.
There are valid points to support the view that the use of the nuclear bomb(s) (putting the s in brackets because personally I find it rather questionable whether this claim can be upheld about the second bomb on Nagasaki as well as on the first on Hiroshima) may have prevent a higher death toll in a possible invasion of Japan or even in the continuation of the conventional bomb warfare.
However, statements such as this one:

I'm sorry but after reading some of the crap the Japanese did to the people of countries they occupied, as well as the human experiments they conducted, I find it difficult to have sympathy. People complain about how we dropped a couple of A bombs on two cities, but how many millions of civilian deaths were the Japanese responsible for? Funny how nobody ever complains about that. dry.gif They were every bit as bad, if not worse, than the Nazis. They started the mess and we finished it.

confirm my view that not much is to come from this debate here. In this statement revenge (rather than the wish to end the war soon) is accepted as a valid point in favor of the use of the bomb. It doesn't matter here who is hit by the bomb so long it is just Japanese because they (collective guilt?) had it coming
The huge majority of the population of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not involved in any war crimes. Bombs do not pick the "guilty" only. Korean forced laborers as well as American POWs were among the victims of the atomic bombs, but the worth attached to individual lives decreases a lot in a war in which human lives have been sacrificed at an inflationary rate.
The claim that nobody was complaining about Japanese crimes of war is just untrue and they are dealt with both in scientific as well as public discourse (the movie "John Rabe" being a recent example). It is true that it would be desirable if that discourse was as active in Japan where indeed dealing with Japanese crimes of war is still much of a taboo while some Japanese war criminals are still honored for example at the Yasukuni Shrine.
However, I am not much into a debate that so far seems to be primarily filled by a moral question of right and wrong and further fueled by the need of vindicating actions by the own nation. This debate had been there before and it is too emotionally heated and the posts so far already show that historical examination and debate is not likely to get the better of it which is why I am not too keen to join.