Japanese surrender

Discussion on World War 2 in general.
Posts: 8458
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:42 pm
Location: Luton, UK

Japanese surrender

Postby Ricky » Sat Apr 02, 2016 6:44 pm

I thought we could have a discussion on this - not on whether the bomb was justified, but on how influential the Soviet involvement was.

I have always been happy to acknowledge that the sudden and dramatic entrance into the war by the northern enemy did have a big impact upon the Japanese. But just recently I thought - they were fighting America and the British Commonwealth. They were expecting and preparing for an invasion of Japan itself, with preparations including measures which would effectively kill off most of their population. So why would an invasion of Manchuria suddenly make them reconsider?
"Study the past, if you would divine the future"

"I am pedantic, I'm just being overshadowed by Ricky so it isn't as noticable as it would else have been"

User avatar
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
Posts: 1291
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:59 am
Location: Rockledge, Florida, USA

Re: Japanese surrender

Postby canambridge » Thu Apr 07, 2016 1:11 am

well one reason might be that the Japanese were trying to use the 'good offices' of the USSR to negotiate peace terms withe Western Allies. Having scrupulously followed the letter of their agreements with the Soviets, the Japanese may have felt they had something of advocate if not friend in the USSR. Having stripped Manchuria to defend against the Western Allies, they must have been shocked when the Soviets repudiated the neutrality pact (on the same day Nagasaki was bombed).

Or it may just have been Cold War propaganda and had little or nothing to do with the Japanese surrender. The Bomb was explicitly mentioned in the Imperial surrender transcript, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria (and Sakhalin) was not.

Return to “World War 2 in General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest