Invasion of Japan

in Invasion

Paul further argues that the invasion of Japan, if it would have occurred, would have cause tremendous amount of death to not only American army but also to British assault troops, whose estimated causality figure for the invasion was around 200,000 men. Paul also mentions in his article that further invasions would have caused even more damage to Allied forces and could have cause the "biggest massacre of the war" (Fussell) In his words

And not just a staggering number of Americans would have been killed in the invasion. Thousands of British assault troops would have been destroyed too, the anticipated casualties from the almost 200,000 men in the six divisions (the same number used to invade Normandy)  (Fussell).

And

Assigned to invade the Malay Peninsula on September 9. Aimed at the re-conquest of Singapore, this operation was expected to last until about March 1946 – that is, seven more months of Infantry fighting. "But for the atomic bombs," a British observer intimate with the Japanese Defenses notes, "I don't think we would have stood a cat in hell's chance. We would have been murdered in the biggest massacre of the war. They would have annihilated the lot of us (Fussell).

 While Paul justify the savings of hundreds of thousands of armed soldiers who were trained and equipped to kill their enemies, he mention nothing at all about hundreds of thousands of civilian lives that Hiroshima bombing and its fall out took over several years. Hence Paul fails to justify the preference of killing civilians over soldiers.

In this justification for the Hiroshima bombing, Paul also questions the allegiance of those who argues against the bombing by quoting Winston Churchill. In his paper Paul mentions

"And Winston Churchill, with an irony perhaps too broad and easy, noted in Parliament that the people who preferred invasion to A-bombing seemed to have "no intention of proceeding to the Japanese fronts themselves" (Fussell).

However, the most important fact to note is it that even some of the top government officials and military brass was against the bombing and felt horrified at the even. Dwight E. Eisenhower, who was one of the leading US politicians at that time wrote in his report to the Congress titled "Mandate for Change" that

I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face (Long).

 

Author Box
Brian John has 1 articles online

Please visit http://www.termpaperqueen.com for custom term papers, research papers, thesis and essays.

Add New Comment

Invasion of Japan

Log in or Create Account to post a comment.
     
*
*
Security Code: Captcha Image Change Image
This article was published on 2011/09/27