War was over in Europe. By this time, just about every American was touched by the war. Perhaps he was under the impression it would destroy a military base? Doing so not possible w 1 bomb at the time? By the time he did understand it was a city too late?
NEW BLOG POST: What newly-utilized documents — five drafts of a radio address written by Truman himself in August 1945 — tell us about his changing views on the bombing of Hiroshima. | A “purely military” target? Truman’s changing language about Hiroshima:http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2018/01/19/purely-military-target/ …
-
-
-
To utterly destroy a military base with one bomb was not possible prior to atomic weapons, no. My argument is he only understood it was a city on 8/8/45. I don't think he knew 2nd strike was happening on 8/9.
-
As for collateral damage — I don't think he expected casualties in the hundreds of thousands of civilians, no. There is collateral damage and there is collateral damage. For what it is worth, even the scientists who knew it was a city did not expect the casualties to be so high.
-
Thank you. It was well written. Easy for me to understand. And that's not easy to do. Old and slow.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Great work, Alex. As you know, my website has been emphasizing this issue for more than 20 years. http://www.dannen.com/decision/
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@_samstopps some light reading you may find interesting
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
No worries, I took a look at it on the off chance as it’s not something I’d normally read. Very interesting!
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
That got me too, and the fact that he wasn’t told the 2nd was going to be dropped in advance
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Really happy to see more content! Thanks!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.