You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
What I do think a balanced account of the timeline indicates, though, is how inadequate the simplistic "two bombs and surrender" version of the story is. It's much more complex than that, much less straightforward, and doesn't lean into easy propaganda one way or the other.
Bottom line: if your vision of historical events tends to render your historical conclusions as being very simple (and coincidentally they overlap with your present-day political views), you're probably leaving a lot of important stuff out. Real history is complicated and messy.
Further reading: for timeline issues, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa's Racing the Enemy is great, and even if you don't totally go along with his overall argument, it's worth the read for a balanced look at the US, Japanese, and Soviet perspectives at the end of the war.
On the Japanese pre-planning about the invasion by the USSR, the work of Yukiko Koshiro has been eye-opening for me. On the timing of the bombs and etc., see esp. @GordinMichael 's "Five Days in August."
the thing that really drove it home for me was reading the wikipedia pages in english and in japanese (via google translate) for these bombing events and others (like the firebombing of tokyo). there are names of individual murdered schoolchildren in the japanese articles.
I appreciated this thread: however, I do have some quibbles with the focus on the Soviet role. If Manchuria was such a strategic bargaining chip, why was the Kwantung Army so stripped to support other theaters? Why did Tokyo push Ketsugō, if it wanted a negotiated peace?
Tokyo was relatively well-informed about Allied amphibious capabilities, and the idea of a successful Soviet invasion of the Home Islands prior to Downfall was fanciful given the lack of Soviet sealift, etc. The Japanese focus seemed to be on the Home Islands.
The point of Ketsugō was to bleed the Allies white, no matter the cost (e.g. "100 million dead"). What the nuclear bombs demonstrated was that the Allies could inflict these 100 million deaths without incurring significant losses, and do so rapidly.
The bottom line is that the bombs not only widened the casualty ratio gap to an overwhelmingly unacceptable level, they did so in a compressed period of time. There is what I call a "Time Value of Attrition" - a play on the Time Value of Money concept.
Thank you, very much, for this. Excellent work on a terrifically difficult subject.
@threadreaderapp unroll
Hallo please find the unroll here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1027581988843282432.html …
Talk to you soon. 
I think this can be applied to pretty much EVERY historical engagement... really enjoyed this thread! Thank you for the posts! :)
Dude, just write a blog post next time
Thank you for this. Until tonight you were not on my radar. I look forward to more of your insights.
I need a book, or books, that cover this as well as your tweets. Suggestions?
Super interesting thread; thanks!
Wow, thank you for this.
BLESS YOU this is the best thing on my timeline all day.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
