I've listed some potential US Presidents who could have been in Harry Truman's stead in 1945 and if they would have used the atomic bomb against Japan in the August of that year assuming the strategic situation in World War II was broadly similar to OTL.
Which of these potential US Presidents in 1945 would have used atomic bombs against Japan?
- Thread starter Marius Mazzini
- Start date
You left out James Byrnes, generally thought to be the front runner to replace Wallace in 1944.
I would think all of them, though I've not ticked the three whose names I don't recognise.
Why would they not?
Why would they not?
All of them. There wasn't a debate over whether to use it or not - the Manhattan Project wasn't developed for the goal of not using it.
Every one of them. It would be politically suicidal not to end the war as soon as possible (even if no invasion were required).
Although many people assume that Henry Wallace would not have used nuclear weapons had he been in Truman's place, in fact he never criticized Truman's decision to drop the bomb.
"'I just don't remember how I felt at the time,' Wallace later commented. 'Perhaps these massive events maybe numbed me — I just don't know what it is.' He was 'terrifically interested' in the atomic bomb project, he said, but his primary concern, was 'that the darn thing went off.'
"To his credit, Wallace did not criticize — either then or later, publicly or privately — Truman's decision. Present at the inception of the project, Wallace had helped persuade Roosevelt 'it was something to put money into.' To have second-guessed Truman when the weapon was actually used would have been intellectually dishonest..." John C. Culver and John Hyde, American Dreamer: A Life of Henry A. Wallace, pp. 396-7. https://books.google.com/books?id=rgp2CQAAQBAJ&pg=PA396
Although many people assume that Henry Wallace would not have used nuclear weapons had he been in Truman's place, in fact he never criticized Truman's decision to drop the bomb.
"'I just don't remember how I felt at the time,' Wallace later commented. 'Perhaps these massive events maybe numbed me — I just don't know what it is.' He was 'terrifically interested' in the atomic bomb project, he said, but his primary concern, was 'that the darn thing went off.'
"To his credit, Wallace did not criticize — either then or later, publicly or privately — Truman's decision. Present at the inception of the project, Wallace had helped persuade Roosevelt 'it was something to put money into.' To have second-guessed Truman when the weapon was actually used would have been intellectually dishonest..." John C. Culver and John Hyde, American Dreamer: A Life of Henry A. Wallace, pp. 396-7. https://books.google.com/books?id=rgp2CQAAQBAJ&pg=PA396
TDM
Kicked
OK with the caveat that I don't really know much about some of those names.
In general I'd say the atomic bombs were just seen as a big efficient bomb that force multiplies your bombing wing*. So no real issue in using it so long as you are already OK with bombing campaigns in general.
*and thus might reduce air crew and plane losses
In general I'd say the atomic bombs were just seen as a big efficient bomb that force multiplies your bombing wing*. So no real issue in using it so long as you are already OK with bombing campaigns in general.
*and thus might reduce air crew and plane losses
Last edited:
To quote Thomas Childers from the WW2 Great Courses class "The debate which incidentally was not much of a debate in 1945, or 1946 whether this awful weapon should have been utilized, in many ways it's am ahistorical argument. To be the president of the United States with a war weary population, facing the prospect of an invasion of the home island of Japan. Where the worst case scenario was a million American deaths, who knows how many millions of Japanese would have perished in such an invasion. What choice might one say, did Harry Truman really have?"
Not dropping the Atomic bombs would have been political suicide. As many people here have already stated there really was no decision to drop the atomic bombs. Once they were ready they were going to be used.
Not dropping the Atomic bombs would have been political suicide. As many people here have already stated there really was no decision to drop the atomic bombs. Once they were ready they were going to be used.
After reading Hoover's analysis?
And the increasingly grim projections coming out of the War and Navy Departments? Not just regarding Allied (mainly American) losses, but Japanese civilian deaths and the estimates that 100,000 civilians in Japanese occupied territory were dying every month?
After getting briefed in the Magic intercepts of Japanese diplomatic traffic?
After getting briefed on the Magic intercepts that showed the Japanese had made a policy decision to kill ALL the PoW?
All of them. In a New York minute.
And the increasingly grim projections coming out of the War and Navy Departments? Not just regarding Allied (mainly American) losses, but Japanese civilian deaths and the estimates that 100,000 civilians in Japanese occupied territory were dying every month?
After getting briefed in the Magic intercepts of Japanese diplomatic traffic?
After getting briefed on the Magic intercepts that showed the Japanese had made a policy decision to kill ALL the PoW?
All of them. In a New York minute.
And this was all coming off the cuff of the Battle of Okinawa where half of the civilian population was wiped out and was was seen as "The Dress Rehearsal" for the invasion of Japan.
Truman had former president Hoover, give him a no BS analysis of how many american soldiers would die in an a Invasion of Japan, as Hoover was an excellent statistician and engineer who saved like 10-15 million civilians in Europe from Starvation, and the report laid out that an invasion would coast 500,000-1,000,000 American deaths and this was seen as a conservative estimate....
Especially considering he greenlit operation meetinghouse where 100,000 people were killed in a firebombing raid in Tokyo.
Precisely. Japanese (and until very recently Germans) were eing killed in bombing raids by the tens of thousands. If it's ok to do this with several thousand HE bombs, why not wth one A-Bomb? It doesn't kill them any deader.
Last edited:
Actually the one that surprises me is Byrnes. He was ALL IN on stomping the Empire flat.
Yep, and this was at a time when JCS was expecting it to be not noticeably worse than Okinawa (40,000 KIA, 150,000 WIA) for BOTH Olympic and Coronet and estimates gave the Olympic landing/follow-on force a numerical advantage.