Search Results
8/2/2025, 8:32:33 PM
>>64066773
I know this is bait, but i will reply anyway.
It was the bombs.
Specifically, it was that the nuclear bombs represented a way for the enemies of japan -america, specifically- to entirely circumvent the land invasion and the casualties it would mean.
The japs famously would've fought to the last, and the scale of casualties a land invasion of the mainland would bring was (at least to japanese beliefs) beyond what their enemies could stomach relative to what they would gain, letting the japs negotiate a much more favorable peace.
But the ability for a single bomber to do more damage in an instant than what an entire airfleet could during months effectively meant that the americans -or the soviets- wouldn't have to deal with the fortified home islands. It meant that the americans could wipe out large, fortified, resisting areas in a single strike.
No mass casualties on the allies = no position to negotiate from = no reason to keep trying.
Did the soviets help? Sure, they took out the shit left in mainland asia and provided a good way to make the army stand down (as >>64066811 and >>64066827 posted) but the alleged threat of a soviet invasion simply didn't weigh much when the home islands were already poised to make any ground invasion bleed beyond reasonable costs, not to mention the much weaker soviet naval forces when compared to the US.
Tldr - the soviets were a decent scapegoat for the army to surrender, but the threat of mass atomic warfare capability was what broke the remaining will to fight in the government.
I know this is bait, but i will reply anyway.
It was the bombs.
Specifically, it was that the nuclear bombs represented a way for the enemies of japan -america, specifically- to entirely circumvent the land invasion and the casualties it would mean.
The japs famously would've fought to the last, and the scale of casualties a land invasion of the mainland would bring was (at least to japanese beliefs) beyond what their enemies could stomach relative to what they would gain, letting the japs negotiate a much more favorable peace.
But the ability for a single bomber to do more damage in an instant than what an entire airfleet could during months effectively meant that the americans -or the soviets- wouldn't have to deal with the fortified home islands. It meant that the americans could wipe out large, fortified, resisting areas in a single strike.
No mass casualties on the allies = no position to negotiate from = no reason to keep trying.
Did the soviets help? Sure, they took out the shit left in mainland asia and provided a good way to make the army stand down (as >>64066811 and >>64066827 posted) but the alleged threat of a soviet invasion simply didn't weigh much when the home islands were already poised to make any ground invasion bleed beyond reasonable costs, not to mention the much weaker soviet naval forces when compared to the US.
Tldr - the soviets were a decent scapegoat for the army to surrender, but the threat of mass atomic warfare capability was what broke the remaining will to fight in the government.
Page 1