DVD Talk
Aug. 6,1945 Hiroshima [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Aug. 6,1945 Hiroshima


dvd-4-life
08-07-05, 05:37 PM
Why was Hiroshima chosen over other cities such as Tokyo for the bombing?Was Germany ever considered for the A-bomb?What did Russia do to help defeat Japan?What parts of the surrender agreement with Japan are still in place today?

DVD Polizei
08-07-05, 05:39 PM
Ask classicman2.

Foole
08-07-05, 05:40 PM
From what I understand, Fukuoka was actually the primary target for the first bomb, but bad weather over that city on 6AUG1945 forced the Enola Gay to drop the bomb on its alternate target, Hiroshima.

Funny how a twist of the wind can change history....


And if Tokyo was bombed, do you think the Japanese would EVER surrender the war? I bet not. Why kill the very leadership that you're trying to get a surrender out of?

resinrats
08-07-05, 05:40 PM
Germany surrendered before the bomb was complete so they didn't get it. I've heard that if Germany was still fighting, they would have gotten nuked as well.

Nagasaki sort of got screwed even besides being nuked. Hiroshima gets all the fame and all the comparisons to how big explosions are.

Th0r S1mpson
08-07-05, 05:42 PM
Ever heard of a history book? ;)

Foole
08-07-05, 05:44 PM
I take back my previous post. Here's an excerpt from http://www.asianewsnet.net/level3_template4.php?l3sec=5&news_id=43549


On July 25, the United States decided on four cities--Hiroshima; Kokura, Fukuoka Prefecture; Niigata, and Nagasaki--as possible targets for the world's first atomic bomb attack. US President Harry Truman on Aug 2 chose Hiroshima as the primary target. One reason Hiroshima was chosen as the first target was because it was the only city believed to have no prisoner-of-war camps.

Three B-29 bombers took off on the morning of Aug 6. The Enola Gay carried the atomic bomb. A second bomber carried scientific equipment and the third had photographic equipment. Receiving the report that the skies over Hiroshima were clear, the Enola Gay headed straight for the city.

The target was the Aioi Bridge in the city center. At 8:15am, the bomber released its load from an altitude of 9,600 meters. The bomb detonating about 300 meters southeast of the bridge.

NCMojo
08-07-05, 05:47 PM
From what I understand, the Japanese leadership was basically ready to give up after Hirsohima, but Truman and the US Army wanted to basically make a show of strength to the Russians -- convince the Soviets that we had more bombs than we really did.

OldDude
08-07-05, 05:59 PM
Why was Hiroshima chosen over other cities such as Tokyo for the bombing?Was Germany ever considered for the A-bomb?What did Russia do to help defeat Japan?What parts of the surrender agreement with Japan are still in place today?

1) Tokyo was already burnt. We had been firebombing all major cities except a list of 5-6, since March 1945, and Japan had become a target-poor environment. Hiroshima was one of the six; it was the target list for "the bomb." General LeMay was strictly ordered not to bomb the cities on the list with either firebombs or high explosives. Some of these raids involved 1000 bombers with 3-4 tons of firebombs each. Several were worse than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The atomic bomb was strictly about "one plane, one bomb, all that."
(Tons of info if you Google)

2) Germany had already surrendered before the Trinty test (first atomic bomb test) in New Mexico, July 1945, so that war was over . Otherwise, maybe?? Trinity tested the "Fat Man" style bomb used on Nagasaki. "Little Boy", used on Hiroshima was untested, but the scientists were more certain it would work. Also, used first, little harm was done if it failed. We used our most reliable (and last) bomb on Nagasaki, after warning them. Fortunately, they surrendered as we were out of nuclear weapons for a while, which they didn't know of course.


3) Days before, they finally declared war (they had actually been an ally of Japan but not Germany, which was awkward, and stayed out until the last days). They engaged Japanese troops on Asian soil, and may have invaded some remote northern islands. They were only in the war with Japan for about two weeks before surrender, so not much.

4) I don't know but I doubt anything.

wildcatlh
08-07-05, 06:01 PM
From what I understand, the Japanese leadership was basically ready to give up after Hirsohima, but Truman and the US Army wanted to basically make a show of strength to the Russians -- convince the Soviets that we had more bombs than we really did.

Yes and no.. they were "ready to give up", but not unconditionally -- they wanted to keep the emperor in power. The allies were insisting on unconditional surrender.

Plus remember the fact that even after Nagasaki, there was a fairly decent population -- especially some of the higher ups in the military -- who didn't want to surrender, and there was very nearly a military coup to that effect.

OldDude
08-07-05, 06:04 PM
From what I understand, the Japanese leadership was basically ready to give up after Hirsohima, but Truman and the US Army wanted to basically make a show of strength to the Russians -- convince the Soviets that we had more bombs than we really did.

That's not true. We pamphlet bombed them, warning them of the 2nd bomb and urging them to surrender before a deadline, very specifically. They didn't, so we did.

Hiroshima got a very vague warning, because we had never tested a Little Boy bomb, and if we had given a crystal clear warning, a dud would have been embarassing.

Mutley Hyde
08-07-05, 06:20 PM
That's not true. We pamphlet bombed them, warning them of the 2nd bomb and urging them to surrender before a deadline, very specifically. They didn't, so we did.

Hiroshima got a very vague warning, because we had never tested a Little Boy bomb, and if we had given a crystal clear warning, a dud would have been embarassing.

Yup.

TO THE JAPANESE PEOPLE:

America asks that you take immediate heed of what we say on this leaflet.
We are in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by man. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s can carry on a single mission. This awful fact is one for you to ponder and we solemnly assure you it is grimly accurate.

We have just begun to use this weapon against your homeland. If you still have any doubt, make inquiry as to what happened to Hiroshima when just one atomic bomb fell on that city.
Before using this bomb to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, we ask that you now petition the Emperor to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better and peace-loving Japan.

You should take steps now to cease military resistance. Otherwise, we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war.

BJacks
08-07-05, 06:56 PM
Interesting. Thanks for posting that text; I've never seen it before.

DVD Polizei
08-07-05, 07:30 PM
Petition the Emperor. Yeah, that'll work.

Cameron
08-07-05, 09:53 PM
obligatory

http://www.occhionudo.it/dedalo/pixelnudo/img/Strangelove.gif

MartinBlank
08-07-05, 10:35 PM
I was really disheartened the other day when my local paper ran an article about the anniversary of the bombing. If one had just landed on Earth from Mars, one would have been lead to believe that we dropped the bombs for no apparent reason. Absolutely no reference was made as to WHY the attacks were made.

If you think about it, it's actually worked out well for everyone involved.....we destroy Japan and give them money to re-establish their country/infrastructure, and today, they make some of the world's finest automobiles. Think about it....no Fat Man and Little Boy....no Fast and the Furious.

General Zod
08-07-05, 10:38 PM
If you think about it, it's actually worked out well for everyone involved.....we destroy Japan and give them money to re-establish their country/infrastructure, and today, they make some of the world's finest automobiles. Think about it....no Fat Man and Little Boy....no Fast and the Furious.
In a weird and twisted way our dropping the bomb actually probably saved millions more lives than it took.

shaun3000
08-07-05, 11:08 PM
If you think about it, it's actually worked out well for everyone involved.....we destroy Japan and give them money to re-establish their country/infrastructure, and today, they make some of the world's finest automobiles. Think about it....no Fat Man and Little Boy....no Fast and the Furious.Exactly. My girlfriend just bought a Mazda3, damn nice, zippy little car. The Mazda plant that makes the 3 is located in Hiroshima.

DVD Polizei
08-07-05, 11:09 PM
Is it "bomb"?

shaun3000
08-07-05, 11:13 PM
You could say that it is the bomb. ;)

Myster X
08-07-05, 11:19 PM
Petition the Emperor. Yeah, that'll work.

Millions of Japanese were ready to commit suicide had the emperor ask them to do so. That would suck, because Kurosawa will never be known to the world. Even Kurosawa admitted that he too would commit suicide if told to.

darkflounder
08-07-05, 11:32 PM
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall. Operation Downfall was two operations. Operation Olympic, the invasion of Southern Kyushu and Operation Coronet, the invasion of Honshu and Tokyo.

A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.74 million American casualties, including 400,000800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.

There were several other studies done estimating the projected casualties. Every single study has listed projected casualties (American and Japanese) no lower than twice the number that died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And all of those studies were underestimating the actual defensive strength on the islands, which we now know to be at least twice the projected numbers.

There were three available choices for ending the war. The atomic bombs, the invasion, and a proposed blockade of the mainland. The blockade was considered the safest, but also the least likely to work, considering Japan was already under extreme rationing due to the destruction of the transportation network (trains and ships) by B-29 raids, and any further effect by a blockade wouldn't have made much of an impact.

This was truly choosing the lesser of two evils. The choice was made based on minimizing the casualties to either side, no matter what the history revisionists have said in the intervening 60 years.

Atomic Bombs were inevitable (the work on them started years before the war started). At least they were used to stop a war, rather than start a new one. The fact that they've been used and we've seen the effects has probably prevented them from being used in anger ever since.

Tommy Ceez
08-07-05, 11:43 PM
My grandfather, and hence I, lived BECAUSE of the two bombs.

He survived most o0f the Pacific, but the invasion of Japan was suicide. Based on those figures above, theres probably tens of millions of americans alive today BECAUSE of the bomb

Trelach24
08-08-05, 12:05 AM
Possibly a dumb question - is there a difference between an "atomic bomb" and a "nuclear bomb"? If not, when and why did the chosen term make the switch?

Rockmjd23
08-08-05, 12:22 AM
Possibly a dumb question - is there a difference between an "atomic bomb" and a "nuclear bomb"? If not, when and why did the chosen term make the switch?
an atomic bomb is a type of nuclear bomb. An A-bomb gets its power from nuclear fission, splitting the nucleus of an atom. Another type of nuclear bomb is a hydrogen bomb, which gets its power from nuclear fusion, where two nuclei form and release energy.

kvrdave
08-08-05, 12:23 AM
Very interesting is that the bridge that was the target in Hiroshima was one of the few structures still standing.

Th0r S1mpson
08-08-05, 09:42 AM
From wikipedia:


The simplest nuclear weapons derive their energy from nuclear fission. A mass of fissile material is rapidly assembled into a critical mass, in which a chain reaction begins and grows exponentially, releasing tremendous amounts of energy. This is accomplished either by shooting one piece of subcritical material into another, or compressing a subcritical mass into a state of supercriticality. A major challenge in all nuclear weapon designs is ensuring that a significant fraction of the fuel is consumed before the weapon destroys itself. <b>These are colloquially known as atomic bombs.</B>

More advanced nuclear weapons take advantage of nuclear fusion to derive more energy. In such a weapon, the X-ray thermal radiation from a nuclear fission explosion is used to heat and compress a capsule of tritium, deuterium, or lithium, in which fusion occurs, releasing even more energy. <b>These weapons, colloquially known as hydrogen bombs, can be many hundreds of times more powerful than fission weapons.</B> The so-called "Teller-Ulam design" is thought to be responsible for megaton range thermonuclear weapons.

More exotic nuclear weapons also exist, designed for special purposes. The detonation of a nuclear weapon is accompanied by a blast of neutron radiation. Surrounding a nuclear weapon with suitable materials (such as cobalt or gold) can result in the production of exceptionally large quantities of radioactive contamination. A nuclear weapon may also be designed to permit as many neutrons as possible to escape; such a weapon is called a neutron bomb. Hypothetical antimatter weapons, which would use matter-antimatter reactions, would not technically be nuclear weapons (as they would not be using energy derived from either nuclear fission or fusion), but bear noting due to a potentially higher potential energy by weight than conventional or nuclear explosives.

al_bundy
08-08-05, 10:07 AM
it's been a long weekend, but NYC is still here

VinVega
08-08-05, 10:11 AM
I watched several shows on the History Channel the other night. They were pretty balanced with opinions for and against the dropping of the bombs from a historical perspective. One opinion that was rather interesting was that before we dropped the bombs, we were demanding unconditional surrender and probably would have tried the Emporer for war crimes. The Japanese main demand in peace talks was that the Emporer be allowed to remain on the throne. Now after we dropped the bombs, we get a surrender that in all reality is not unconditional. The Emporer gets off scott free and basically the same agreement that was proposed BEFORE the bombs were dropped is agreed to. How much does the scaring the Russians motive factor into this? How much does the fact that we spent $2 billion on the Manhattan Project factor in? Tough questions. Like many things in life, there is a lot of complexity to this issue.

Myster X
08-08-05, 10:54 AM
It's almost to change the thread title to "Aug. 9, 1945 Nagasaki"

kvrdave
08-08-05, 11:13 AM
I watched several shows on the History Channel the other night. They were pretty balanced with opinions for and against the dropping of the bombs from a historical perspective. One opinion that was rather interesting was that before we dropped the bombs, we were demanding unconditional surrender and probably would have tried the Emporer for war crimes. The Japanese main demand in peace talks was that the Emporer be allowed to remain on the throne. Now after we dropped the bombs, we get a surrender that in all reality is not unconditional. The Emporer gets off scott free and basically the same agreement that was proposed BEFORE the bombs were dropped is agreed to. How much does the scaring the Russians motive factor into this? How much does the fact that we spent $2 billion on the Manhattan Project factor in? Tough questions. Like many things in life, there is a lot of complexity to this issue.

IIRC from one of those shows, they wanted the emporer to remain in power, and we decided that he could remain on the throne (not be tried for crimes), but was subject to our authority.

VinVega
08-08-05, 11:13 AM
It's almost to change the thread title to "Aug. 9, 1945 Nagasaki"
This is true. A little trivia: What was the name of the B-29 that dropped the Nagasaki bomb?

weargle
08-08-05, 11:17 AM
Bock's Car.

VinVega
08-08-05, 11:23 AM
Bock's Car.
Good job <s>Google</s> weargle! :up:

http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/8228/bockscar2jt.jpg

edstein
08-08-05, 01:00 PM
I watched this (http://dsc.discovery.com/schedule/episode.jsp?episode=0&cpi=24927&gid=0&channel=DSC) show this past weekend on discovery channel. I thought it was very good. I didn't realize that there were survivors from the blast still alive today. The military did not buy into a surrender even after the second bomb. The Japanese military attempted a coop but failed. The highest ranking general killed himself.

OldDude
08-08-05, 01:17 PM
I didn't realize that there were survivors from the blast still alive today.

Sure. It was 60 years ago. A young kid would be in his 60's, a young soldier in his 80's. I'm sure there was some excess mortality from the radiation even decades later, but not enough to kill them all. Japan has pretty high life expectancy.

weargle
08-08-05, 01:20 PM
Good job <s>Google</s> weargle! :up:

http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/8228/bockscar2jt.jpg

Puhleeze, I owns me some Trivial Pursuit.

crazyronin
08-08-05, 05:27 PM
From what I understand, the Japanese leadership was basically ready to give up after Hirsohima, but Truman and the US Army wanted to basically make a show of strength to the Russians -- convince the Soviets that we had more bombs than we really did.

Actually this is the political crap that passes for education in government schools. In actuality not only did the Japanese Army dither on whether or not to surrender, but members of it actually tried to kidnap the emperor and try to force Japan to fight to the last person. Note I did not say the last man. Women, children and the elderly were given bamboo stakes and were told that they were expected to take down at least one enemy soldier when the invasion came.

Expected casualties KIA during invasion

Allied Forces 1,000,000
Japanese 10,000,000+

Another historical note, the actual first target was to be German.