U.S. options limited in when first using nuclear bomb

This is in response to John Laforge’s opinion about the use of nuclear weapons at the end of World War II. 

As with the conventional bombing of Dresden, this has been a controversial topic for 80 years. Mr. Laforge conveniently ignores facts about casualty estimates and Japanese politics and policies.  In all wars, the enemy’s ability to make war and willingness to make war must be broken.  Japan’s military was weakening in summer 1945, but continued refusing to surrender when proposed.  Every day the war continued, servicemen were killed or maimed.  Japanese treatment of POWs was exceedingly cruel and caused much physical and mental suffering.

It was estimated that 1 million casualties would be realized if an invasion of Japan were to be necessary.  The Japanese Army was training all citizens to fight to the death for the emperor. 

By using nuclear weapons, the immediate number of Japanese casualties was about 200,000; more coming later due to radiation poisoning.  The use of nuclear weapons totally prevented Allied casualties all of whom were someone’s son, father, uncle, brother, etc. 

Japanese citizens were radicalized by the government to kill American invaders by any means they could.  Knowing these things, I wonder if Mr. LaForge would have volunteered to be in the first wave off the landing craft in 1945 when the enemy still had plenty of guns, ammunition, mines, artillery, and were defending their home soil.

It’s easy to be an armchair strategist 80 years after the fact when no hard decisions are necessary.  Decision makers had no good choices at the time due to an unreasonable enemy.  Use of the atomic weapons shortened the war and provided a net savings of American and Japanese lives.