I agree. Since there was no way to end the fight without a fight then a bomb would be better than invading.

__________________
"Hard work without talent is a shame, but talent without hard work is a tragedy." -fortune cookie

They couldn’t produce much because we were bombing the hell out of them. Are you advocating continuous bombing of their military, industrial and civilian centers as an alternative to killing civilians with Fat Man and Little Boy? I’m having a real hard time following your proposed strategy.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

at least now i have got you to admit their ability to produce much in 1945 was dwindling fast.

they could not produce much because they were out of resources (thats why they attempted expansion). If they were low on supplies prior to war with the united states, one can only imagine how exhausted they were in a resource sense by 1945. consider that the entire time they were fighting the island and naval wars with the US, they have one million men in China. In fact, they attempted to invade the pacific rim just so they could keep supporting their war in china.

continual bombing of their population may not have been required to maintain their inability to wage offensive warfare. Islands are easy to shut down externally from miles away.

__________________

in all practical purposes, the fight was over prior to an invasion or the bomb.

__________________

The thing that bothers me is that, by every estimate I’ve heard, the bombs saved lives, both American and Japanese. The Defense Department still hasn’t run out of the Purple Heart medals they had made in anticipation of the casualties expected from an invasion of Japan.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

Yes, certainly a bomb would be better. I just don't like how they used it. They could have bombed a less populated area killing less people, but still bringing the same fear.

__________________
"Hard work without talent is a shame, but talent without hard work is a tragedy." -fortune cookie

I am about the opposite. If the bomb was to be used, it was used the right way. This was the frontier of unranium usage, and the bombs were not mass producable yet. It had to be used in a big way. Dropping it small may have allowed the Japanese elite to believe that the US was scared, not committed, etc.

However, i believe the bomb was not neccessary at all, and i have made the case throughout this thread.

__________________

That's why I believe they should threaten to bomb a larger target each time.

__________________
"Hard work without talent is a shame, but talent without hard work is a tragedy." -fortune cookie

I never denied the war took a heavy toll on Japan’s manufacturing capabilities, I never even questioned it. Certainly they were hurting for resources, but they were hardly at the point where they’d be forced to capitulate. Despite the intense bombing campaign, they were able to produce nearly 50 warships and thousands of aircraft in the final year of the war. Considering the fanaticism and ferocity they displayed in the other battles they fought, that doesn’t sound like a nation that’s going to give up anytime soon.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

We only had two bombs at the time.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

Make more . Couldn't we?

__________________
"Hard work without talent is a shame, but talent without hard work is a tragedy." -fortune cookie

My argument does not involve whether or not they were or could have been forced to capitulate w/o the bomb or an invasion. My argument rests on the fact that Japan could not wage offensive warfare in 1945. period.
Once again, their fanaticism is not the issue. Its whether or not they possessed the resources to project that fanaticism on anyone but themselves. My argument is no. No oil, no offensive warfare. No means to sustain an offensive campaign. The military fanatics can have a circle jerk on the island.

__________________

Eventually. The only ones we had (Fat Man and Little Boy) were prototypes, it isn't like we had a production line set up. We didn’t even know if they’d work. I can’t find production rates, but I think it’s safe to assume it would have taken months at least to produce another bomb, and weeks to ship it to Okinawa.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

If that's the truth then I guess the only rational way to end the war was to drop the bomb. If it isn't then I still believe there were better ways to handle the situation.

It would have been too late if we waited for "eventually".

__________________
"Hard work without talent is a shame, but talent without hard work is a tragedy." -fortune cookie

No, we couldn't. The process for purifying the material for a bomb - enriched uranium - was being developed at the same time as the bomb. There was not enough to "just make more" bombs. As no production yet existed other than pilot scale, any uranium that was enriched was used and used in a bomb not for testing.