The A-bomb was unnecessary

Unlike Mr. Silverman, I am delighted to read that many young people question the morality of using the Atom bomb on Japan. In fact I am horrified at Mr. Silverman’s casual acceptance of its use. In my view, corroborated by accurate historical data, the use of the A bomb caused unnecessary and inexcusable destruction and death.

The justification for using the atomic bomb was that it ended the war, or at least ended it sooner and thereby saved countless American-and Japanese-lives. But had it? Had Japan not been defeated and was she not already on the verge of surrender? What circumstances justified this fateful decision?

The bombs that fell on Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not forestall an invasion of Japan because no invasion was necessary. The Japanese were on the verge of surrender and American military leaders knew that. General Dwight Eisenhower, briefed by Secretary of War Henry Stimson on the imminent use of the bomb, told him “Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary.”

After the bombing, Admiral William D. Leary, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, called the atomic bomb “a barbarous weapon,” also noting that: “The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.”

The Japanese had begun to move to end the war after the U.S. victory on Okinawa, in May of 1945, in the bloodiest battle of the Pacific War. During the middle of June, six members of the Japanese Supreme War Council authorized Foreign Minister Togo to approach the Soviet Union, which was not at war with Japan, to mediate an end to the war “if possible by September.”

Togo sent Ambassador Sato to Moscow to feel out the possibility of a negotiated surrender. On July 13, four days before Truman, Churchill and Stalin met in Potsdam to prepare for the end of the war (Germany had surrendered two months earlier), Togo sent a telegram to Sato: “Unconditional surrender is the only obstacle to peace. It is his Majesty’s heart’s desire to see the swift termination of the war.”