Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just two more cities destroyed whether the attack required one bomb or thousands didn’t much matter. had firebombed more than 100 Japanese cities. The atomic bombings, terrible and inhumane as they were, played little role in Japanese leaders’ calculations to quickly surrender. and get Stalin’s help negotiating better surrender terms. In quickly routing Japan’s Kwantung army, the Soviets ruined Japan’s diplomatic and military end game: keep inflicting military losses on the U.S. Instead, it was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese colonies that began at midnight on Aug.
It was not the atomic evisceration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that ended the Pacific war. He told former President Hoover that if the United States had assured the Japanese that they could keep the emperor they would have gladly surrendered in late May. The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan.” MacArthur went further. Leahy, who was Truman’s personal chief of staff, wrote in his memoir that the “Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender…. Nor did the bombs succeed in their collateral purpose: cowing the Soviets. William Leahy, Chester Nimitz, Ernest King and William Halsey - later called the atomic bombings either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both. Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur and Henry Arnold, and Adms.
Seven of America’s eight five-star officers in 1945 - Gens. Truman exulted in the obliteration of Hiroshima, calling it “the greatest thing in history.” America’s military leaders didn’t share his exuberance.
More dangerously, it shapes the thinking of government officials and military planners working in a world that still contains more than 15,000 nuclear weapons. This erroneous contention finds its way into high school history texts still today. Most Americans have been taught that using atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 was justified because the bombings ended the war in the Pacific, thereby averting a costly U.S. Truman’s decision to use atomic bombs, has opted to remain silent on the issue. Obama, aware that his critics are ready to pounce if he casts the slightest doubt on the rectitude of President Harry S. atomic bombings of Japan - one largely suppressed since the Smithsonian canceled its Enola Gay exhibit in 1995. Rightly it received not a single award nomination.President Obama’s visit to Hiroshima on Friday has rekindled public debate about the U.S. Given these two superb renderings of the genuinely world shattering story I cannot imagine how "Enola Gay etc" came to be conceived let alone made.
Even better was the 1980 mini series "Oppenheimer" with Sam Waterston in the title role. David Strathairn excellent as Oppenheimer.
Day One seemed to give absolute full and accurate measure to the characters and events - the first IMDb review on it is particularly worth reading. I contrasted it with the superb Emmy-awarded "Day One" with Brian Dennehy as General Groves, a military bulldozer whose responsibility it was to drive the immense project forward often in the face of the sophisticated scruples of the brilliant scientists he had no choice but to work with. How could such a huge, dramatic and sombre story receive such treatment? It was not simply incompetent but given the gravity of the subject matter, distasteful. The scene exactly resembled that in those many many comic movies set the armed forces - from Operation Petticoat to Sargeant Bilko. In a knockabout comic scene in "the john" a security man disguised as a plumber has been caught by the aircrew listening in to their conversations. In real life the recording of the plane intercom picked up the reaction of one of the crew: "My God, what have we done?" I assumed that I'd seen an unrepresentative section so watched a repeat. A extraordinary miscasting was Patrick Duffy, Dallas's Bobby Ewing, as the Enola Gay's pilot - bland and soft showing no evidence of stress or emotion that even the grittiest (and gritty the pilot must have been) would have shown. On first viewing I caught just the section of the bomb drop and was surprised at the fumbling and utter flatness of the treatment of what for the world, let alone the crew, was such a momentous event.