Pacific war ending variables

In OTL Japan surrendered just after the 2nd Atom bomb and the USSR declared war. (Ed Murrow suggested at the time that it was not clear which event caused the surrender.

However

1) WI the bombs were available a month earlier.

2) WI Japan had not surrendered despite both the bombs and the Soviet Union.

3) WI Japan had surrendered conditionally some time before August.

4) WI the bomb had not been available until say September.
 
In OTL Japan surrendered just after the 2nd Atom bomb and the USSR declared war. (Ed Murrow suggested at the time that it was not clear which event caused the surrender.

However

1) WI the bombs were available a month earlier.

2) WI Japan had not surrendered despite both the bombs and the Soviet Union.

3) WI Japan had surrendered conditionally some time before August.

4) WI the bomb had not been available until say September.

1. The war would have ended a month earlier.

2. Truman and the entire War and Navy Departments were very reluctant to invade, given the experience of the meat grinder on Okinawa. Don't get me wrong, they would have done it if it was necessary, but no one looked forward to it. Given the presence of the bombs, we would have continued to nuke the home islands until they did surrender, or until there was nothing left. The Soviets would have taken at least part of Hokkaido.

3. I heartily agree with the above post. It was far, far too late for a conditional surrender. FDR would have never accepted it.

4. Conventional air raids and the naval blockade would have continued until the bombs were available, then they would have been used. There is a small possibility that the Japanese government would have collapsed given an extra month, however, the political situation in Japan was very dynamic at the time and it is virtually impossible to accurately speculate on what might have happened. It is my personal opinion that without the shock value of the bombs the Japanese would have fought on until there was nothing left.

Dave

www.pigboats.com
 
3. I heartily agree with the above post. It was far, far too late for a conditional surrender. FDR would have never accepted it.

4. Conventional air raids and the naval blockade would have continued until the bombs were available, then they would have been used. There is a small possibility that the Japanese government would have collapsed given an extra month, however, the political situation in Japan was very dynamic at the time and it is virtually impossible to accurately speculate on what might have happened. It is my personal opinion that without the shock value of the bombs the Japanese would have fought on until there was nothing left.
I'm inclined to disagree on both. FDR wasn't irrational, & he might've been willing to agree to Japan keeping the Emperor (the one irreducible demand) in exchange for an end to the war. Byrnes seems to have wanted to used the Bomb as a threat to the Soviets. More, IMO, the Soviet declaration of war on Japan seems to have been the bigger shock; recall, Hiroshima predated, & surrender followed, this declaration. Of course, there's probably never going to be a way to know for sure.
 
3. I heartily agree with the above post. It was far, far too late for a conditional surrender. FDR would have never accepted it.

Oops. I have to correct myself. Truman would have never accepted it (FDR died in April 45), and neither would have the American people. I agree that the President and the public were not irrational, however they were supremely pissed at Japan and any form of conditional surrender would have smacked of a deal with the devil. President Truman was walking a fine line with the public in just allowing the Emperor to keep his head, much less his throne. Any additional concessions would have enraged the American people after all the sacrifices we made and Truman probably would have been run out of town on a rail. Despite being a good and honest man, Truman was above all a politician and the first commandment of a politician is Thou shalt not piss off thy constituents.

Dave

www.pigboats.com
 
I'm inclined to disagree on both. FDR wasn't irrational, & he might've been willing to agree to Japan keeping the Emperor (the one irreducible demand) in exchange for an end to the war. Byrnes seems to have wanted to used the Bomb as a threat to the Soviets. More, IMO, the Soviet declaration of war on Japan seems to have been the bigger shock; recall, Hiroshima predated, & surrender followed, this declaration. Of course, there's probably never going to be a way to know for sure.

The Soviet declaration was a shock definately almost Barbarossa like but it wasnt the reason the Japanese surrendered as the High Command didnt know how badlt their Asses were being whupped in Manchuria if 2. or 4. happen you'll end up with a Soviet Hokkaido and a united Korea under Kim Il Sung.
 
Truman would have never accepted it (FDR died in April 45), and neither would have the American people.
Actually, by 4-5/45, there was pretty wide support for an end to the war. It would've taken some selling to let Japan keep the Emperor (& might've required Hirohito to abdicate, in favor of a brother), but it wasn't out of the question; OTL, he stayed, despite a desire in a sizable portion of the U.S. public he be tried as a war criminal...
 
Top