|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 10:45 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
This is the second time I've read (on here. never heard of it anywhere else) that Japan surrendered because the Soviets declared war on them and not because of the atomic bombs. Can anyone point to a source for this?
It doesn't seem to make much sense to me. The US already achieved total air and naval supremacy, and utterly destroyed Japanese infrastructure (not to mention reducing the local population) with fire bombing by the time they dropped the A-bombs. Why would another nation declaring war on them be the reason the Japanese surrender. Also the Soviets were already engaged with the Japanese in Manchuria before the surrender.
Sure the Soviets joining the fray would have added to the pressure but calling it "the reason" seems far fetched to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| who Korea has to thank for it's independance....Russia, the USA, Canada, NZ.... |
Incidentally, 3 out of those 4 have the USA to thank for THEIR independence. Also the USA has France to thank.
The point is that at some point you can't hold markers anymore.
That and as I've said, if you want credit for grandpa liberating some other country, you have to take the blame for grandpa putting up a sign that says "No Negros or Irish".
| Quote: |
| This is the second time I've read (on here. never heard of it anywhere else) that Japan surrendered because the Soviets declared war on them and not because of the atomic bombs. |
Pretty much what I posted on another thread, if you want an alternative theory and explanation.
Here it is, slightly edited-
If you look at war as being the violent action of interests and economics, you begin to understand how it was the Soviet invasion that was the decisive event. The Soviet invasion allowed the Japanese to secure the best possible terms with the Americans. It also forced the Americans to settle rapidly. They could no longer wait out the Japanese and force more constrictive terms. Everyday the Soviets were in the war against the Japanese was a day in which they garnered more influence in East Asia.
The Japanese weren't stupid, nor were they suicidal. They knew the war was lost at that point. The issue was how to secure the best possible terms. Previously, they had sought to renounce colonial possessions, while preventing occupation and the demise of the military government. That was unacceptable to the United States. Without the Soviet action, they would wait out for the invasion of the Japanese islands and hope that the cost in blood would move the US to the negotiating table. Given their own nuclear ambitions, they had to understand the limited availability of the Atomic Bombs and that there would likely be a significant delay before they were deployed again. However, Soviet invasion of Manchuria meant that for both sides, the jig was up. It was either surrender now and while "the board of directors" would go to the tribunals, the "shareholders" and the Emperor would retain control. The company would not be completely sacked under the boot of the Iron Sickle. For America, they prevented another carving of Europe, at least until 1949, and got sole dominion over the Japanese. Free from dramatic revolutionary upheaval and division into Soviet and American partitions (like Germany), which a settlement involving the USSR as well would have entailed, the Japanese and Americans were free to develop Japan's economy to work on rebuilding and turn it into a major ally.
Also, while Japan sent its best to fight the United States, it sent the bulk of its manpower and resources into fighting in the CBI.
But make no mistake, it was the Soviet invasion and what that represented to both sides and the opportunity it offered and the situation it forced that brought about an end to that war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 07, 2013 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| who Korea has to thank for it's independance....Russia, the USA, Canada, NZ.... |
Incidentally, 3 out of those 4 have the USA to thank for THEIR independence. Also the USA has France to thank.
The point is that at some point you can't hold markers anymore.
That and as I've said, if you want credit for grandpa liberating some other country, you have to take the blame for grandpa putting up a sign that says "No Negros or Irish".
| Quote: |
| This is the second time I've read (on here. never heard of it anywhere else) that Japan surrendered because the Soviets declared war on them and not because of the atomic bombs. |
Pretty much what I posted on another thread, if you want an alternative theory and explanation.
Here it is, slightly edited-
If you look at war as being the violent action of interests and economics, you begin to understand how it was the Soviet invasion that was the decisive event. The Soviet invasion allowed the Japanese to secure the best possible terms with the Americans. It also forced the Americans to settle rapidly. They could no longer wait out the Japanese and force more constrictive terms. Everyday the Soviets were in the war against the Japanese was a day in which they garnered more influence in East Asia.
The Japanese weren't stupid, nor were they suicidal. They knew the war was lost at that point. The issue was how to secure the best possible terms. Previously, they had sought to renounce colonial possessions, while preventing occupation and the demise of the military government. That was unacceptable to the United States. Without the Soviet action, they would wait out for the invasion of the Japanese islands and hope that the cost in blood would move the US to the negotiating table. Given their own nuclear ambitions, they had to understand the limited availability of the Atomic Bombs and that there would likely be a significant delay before they were deployed again. However, Soviet invasion of Manchuria meant that for both sides, the jig was up. It was either surrender now and while "the board of directors" would go to the tribunals, the "shareholders" and the Emperor would retain control. The company would not be completely sacked under the boot of the Iron Sickle. For America, they prevented another carving of Europe, at least until 1949, and got sole dominion over the Japanese. Free from dramatic revolutionary upheaval and division into Soviet and American partitions (like Germany), which a settlement involving the USSR as well would have entailed, the Japanese and Americans were free to develop Japan's economy to work on rebuilding and turn it into a major ally.
Also, while Japan sent its best to fight the United States, it sent the bulk of its manpower and resources into fighting in the CBI.
But make no mistake, it was the Soviet invasion and what that represented to both sides and the opportunity it offered and the situation it forced that brought about an end to that war. |
Confederation of British Industry? This thread is opening my eyes  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
