Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)
Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:10 PM Sep 2012

Can Netanyahu explain why Japan surrendered in WWII?

In his Meet the Press interview...


...Netanyahu explained that Iran is, unlike the old Soviet Union, not deterable because of Iran's level of fanaticism. "They have suicide bombers"

Okay. Why did Japan surrender in World War II? Japan had suicide bombers aplenty. It was a fanatical operation all around.

So why did the prospect of the nuclear destruction of more cities (beyond Hiroshima and Nagasaki) cause Japan to surrender, unconditionally.

The atomic bomb had no deterrent effect in July 1945 because nobody in Japan knew it existed. And had we announced it, it would not have been believed.

But as soon as Japan was aware of the nature of the retaliatory threat she surrendered.

I find it very unlikely that any state would nuke a heavily nuclear-armed rival when the knowable result would be the utter destruction of the attacking nation. The USSR and USA could not have been utterly annihilated because both are so large and not entirely urbanized. Iran, however, is somewhat smaller and very urbanized.

An individual might do something like that. A individual running state would not. India and Pakistan have failed to nuke each other, and their enmity is not joke. North Korea is the ultimate autocracy and could very easily nuke Seoul, but hasn't. Apartheid South Africa went to black control without ever using the nukes they were always said to have. (Did they? Come to think of it, I never heard anything about that.) The Soviet Union went down without launching anything, though it was tense for a while.

There are many reasons to disfavor a nuclear Iran, but the idea that they would just commit suicide as soon as they had a bomb (which attacking Israel would be) is not obvious.

Oddly enough, the greatest threat of an Iranian bomb to Israel might be that it would greatly increase Israel's chances of being nuked by Saudi Arabia someday. (SA would build a bomb if Iran does and can afford to do so. And if the ruling class in SA ever falls they will be replaced by fanatics of an extremity that would make Iran blush.)
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Can Netanyahu explain why Japan surrendered in WWII? (Original Post) cthulu2016 Sep 2012 OP
Japan was trying to surrender before the bomb, actually Scootaloo Sep 2012 #1
As much as the Middle East has experienced war it is hard to imagine the unimaginable. gordianot Sep 2012 #2
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
1. Japan was trying to surrender before the bomb, actually
Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:22 PM
Sep 2012

The reason it wasn't accepted was because the US wanted unconditional surrender; the Japanese wanted a few conditions, such as a guarantee that the Emperor would remain seated.

Screaming "THEY'RE ALL CRAZY FANATICS! THEY'LL ALL KILL THEMSELVES TO HURT US!!!" is basic dehumanization. Used throughout history whenever someone wants to justify their urging for the killing of others, falling back on the "get them before they get us" line. And yes, it was used during the cold war by hawks against Russia and Cuba, and is the reason we killed so many people in southeast Asia, and caused such harm in Latin America.

gordianot

(15,234 posts)
2. As much as the Middle East has experienced war it is hard to imagine the unimaginable.
Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:38 PM
Sep 2012

It finally took American and Soviet scientist to come up with the idea of nuclear winter. In the late 1970's there were some who still thought you could survive nuclear war then came up with the idea of limited nuclear war. Mutual assured destruction was more than a policy of war planners and it seems would be easy to achieve without trying for a so called limited nuclear war. Even a small exchange will wreck a national economy caring for the victims and dealing with the fried infrastructure. Add the birth place of most of the worlds religious fanatics (wide variety) it will be difficult to convince them otherwise. Lots of cold blooded stupid out there.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Can Netanyahu explain why...