Were killed or listed as missing. 140,000 people were injured. Of these, 43,000 were badly hurt. The city was unbelievably crushed. Of its 90,000 buildings, over 60,000 were demolished. But definitely remains were aptly described as vapor and ashes. Man had torn from nature, one of her innermost secrets, and with a newfound knowledge of instrument im not annihilation. Menacing implications of this extraordinary weapon were frightening to everyday people. What do you think of that bomb would drop him jazz mr. Glen . Oh isnt it terrible all those people killed. Three days later, another b 29 brought an improved bomb on the major japanese seaboard of nagasaki. A highly congested industrialized city, posting the best harbor in kenya cuckoo. An extensive naval facilities. But this bomb exploding over the north tragic district took the lives of 42,000 persons and injured 40,000 more. It destroyed 39 of all the buildings sanding and nagasaki before the calamity. The japanese described their complete mutilated city, as a graveyard with not a tombstone standing. These two terrifying blows were struck in japan, only after profound considerations of all the human military factors involved. The atomic bomb were dropped to end the war quickly and they did. And the war quickly. We. Richard frank is author of downfall japanese empire. Talk to us further about the 75th anniversary of a drop of the atomic bombs by the u. S. Allege a pant. Richard frank thanks for joining us. Thank you for having me. In that last clip that we just heard, military film from 1946, its said pretty definitively that atomic bombs were dropped and the work quickly. And they did and the war quickly. This was the right decision to make bombs the reasons at the end of the war . The short answer is yes, they were dropped overwhelmingly to end the war as quickly as possible save lives of both american japanese one thing i think is really, critical to get through right at the start is to understand the context of this. From my study i have two basic principles that have to follow, once to count all of that and second is the treat all the dead and by that the japanese as well. And basically the asia pacific war, one from 30 7 45, resulted in the death of about 19 million not commence. Of that number of japanese non combatants who died was maybe 1 million 1. 2 million about 25 a print of them work is atomic bombs. More of that were due to 1945. That matt tells you immediately that every japanese noncompetitive died in the whole war between 17 and 18 not commence died. Overwhelmingly other agency are chinese. And by the summer of 1945, most of the 1718 of non combatants of japanese are already dead. They were dying at a rate of end. 200 that is the context in which this takes its important we dont overlook, or dehumanizes japanese. Whats equally is important that we understand, the total context of this, where the deaths are taken place, and that primarily not japanese. Richard frank is with us for half an hour as we look back further, at the 75th anniversary of the u. S. Atomic bomb drops a hiroshima. And nagasaki, we will take your calls. After a couple minutes a conversation, look at the phone numbers on the screen now for our guest, if you look at the Eastern Central time zone, will go to seven for eight 8000 is your number if you live out West Mountain and pacific to a 2001. We have to separate sunday lines this morning, one is for world war ii veterans and their families. 2 02 seven four eight, eight zero zero two. Japanese americans, 2 02 seven four eight eight zero zero three. Look forward to talking with you and talking to our guest Richard Frank more perspective here. How widespread in 1945 was support for president truman and his decision to use atomic weapons . Has that changed over time . The support and 1945 and afterwards was extremely high. Numbers, ive seen above 80 . Its changed over the years because the narratives have been employed over the years have changed very much. One of the things that really concerns me about this is, i dont question that we should talk about this and it should be controversial. But i find it astonishing that this conversation takes place in which alternatives are advanced in lieu of the atomic bombs. What is conspicuous is, they never talk about what the cost of these alternatives are. When you get down and start doing the costs of the alternatives, you understand why mr. Truman, in his decision, not make a good choice, he basically was making choices between the astonishingly awful to the horrendously horrific, and he chose what secretary of war stimson would call the least important choice. Abhorrent choice. This is the anniversary of the nagasaki bombing. August 16 the first one, hiroshima. What was different between those three days and what was the Truman Administration looking at . The destruction and hiroshima, what made them decide to drop a second bomb . There was no specific decision on the second bomb. The authorization order released the people to start dropping bombs and keep dropping bombs. We talk about the two bombs, this is another aspect that people, i think, dont understand. The problem with the notion that one bomb would have done it or a demonstration would have done it is this have to look at the japanese side. Their reaction was based upon the fact that they had an Atomic Bomb Program which had not produced a bomb, but it had educated japanese leadership in the fact that producing vision fissionable material was difficult. The Imperial Army immediately responded, well, we can see they have one bomb. The Imperial Navy took the track that, they may have one bomb, they cant have that many, they cant be that powerful. Basically, what the japanese leadership was looking at was not fear of one bomb, it was that the u. S. Had an arsenal of nuclear weapons. As it happens, that is exactly what the nagasaki bomb did. It convinced the top leadership, and in fact the u. S. Didnt have a bomb, we had an arsenal of atomic bombs. John allow me, was a war master it was a second powerful man in japan. He had been adamant for continuing the war after the hero shutdown about. After the nagasaki bomb, he went around telling members of the leadership, that the americans have 100 atomic bombs, and the next target is gonna be tokyo. How far along with the u. S. At the time of the dropping of the bombs, in its planning for an invasion of japan . Very good question and very different from what it is usually presented. There had been a plan to invade japan on november 1. Mr. Truman had approved that on the 18th of june, 1945. He was reluctant, but presented with a scenario in which we were going to have overwhelming superiority going into southern kyushu. And therefore american casualties would be acceptable. What we now know, radio intelligence had uncovered the fact that the japanese had exactly anticipated that the First American invasion was going to take place on southern kyushu. They built up over 10,000 airfare aircraft. 7000 troops. Instead of us going on with overwhelming superiority, our salt would be facing 700,000 japanese. We now know a senior naval officer had never wanted to invade japan. He had been biding his time and by the ninth of august, 1945, with the intelligence he was prepared to bring on this showdown with the army over whether there should be any invasion. Only the japanese surrender at off before it reached the level of mr. Truman having another review. Lets take a call from tom. You are on with Richard Frank. We are talking about the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombings in japan. Good morning. I am age 60 and i remember the howard zinn lectures of my college years, of how history is being rewritten so much right now with people with agendas. Im hearing on talk radio that the only reason we bombed progressive talk radio, that is the only reason we bombed japan, because they were not europeans. In other words, there were people of caller, which is nonsense because we bombed dresden in germany. That was a purpose of demoralizing the german people, for them to surrender. It is unfortunate what happened with the dropping of the two bombs. It did open up pandoras box, but on the other hand it saved millions of japanese lives who would have been caught in the crossfire, as well as american lives and casualties. Am i wrong on that . No. Basically, you have to bear in mind that until the end it was assumed the bombs were going to be used against germany. It turned out from a tactical standpoint they didnt have bombs ready in time to use against germany. The first bomb, a test bomb, was detonated in july 1945. Let me come back again to a basic point. It is not that the argument time advancing says we dont care about the japanese who died. I wrote graphically about that in my book. Both the fire rated and hiroshima. What i have been going over these many years now is the fact that our narratives we have been using simply talk about japanese deaths, the fact that japanese were asians. I dont mention we were in the war because not abandon china. Our American People at that time, reading the New York Times had been reading it day by day to the whole war. There were well aware of how horrific the war was in asia. We have completely blotted that out. That is why those narratives are so powerful. People simply do not realize how horrific the asianpacific war was. How have japanese textbooks for Young Students portrayed the war . Has that approach changed over the years . That is a complex question. The larger issue, i think, for japan was the. The period of world war ii was an area not forthrightly discussed, still not forthrightly discussed. There is a tendency in japan to view themselves as the greatest victims of the war. If you have been dealing with historians and people from other asian nations, you really get a full flavor of how infuriated that makes people in china and elsewhere. I was sitting in a conference once with a representative from the peoples republic of china. The argument was made along the lines of the critical literature. I see him going from bafflement to fury as he realizes that this narrative entirely omits, it does not count and doesnt treat chinese, vietnamese, indonesians, koreans as sharing a common humanity with japanese civilians in two cities. Let me add further, basically when the soviet union enters the war, according to john dower, they capture between 1. 6 million and 1. 7 million japanese nationals. When they the repatriation process is over, they only returned 1. 2 million. No from soviet archival documents about 61,000 are japanese soldiers. Basically between 300 40000 and 440,000 japanese noncombatants died in soviet captivity after the end of hostilities. Those are higher numbers than died in the atomic bomb attacks. We go to rick. It is in phoenix. Good morning. Good morning. Just want to add my voice. Not sure what had been discussed earlier, my father, who barely survived the war in europe, was being prepared to transfer to japan. That would have eliminated my brotherslife after that date. And many other mens lives. Also it wouldve been criminal, and you add everything up here, it wouldve been criminal for truman not to drop that bomb, not just the rape of nanking, socalled. Hundreds of thousands of chinese massacred, as you say. The russian threat that would have taken japanese territory and greatly complicated the postwar era. There are so many reasons why truman had to do that. What was the alternative . I heard generals saying they were going to blockade japan until they gave up. What . Could you address those points that you havent yet . Thank you, rick. Richard frank . That is a really excellent point. On the american side there was an unstable compromise between the army and the navy over a strategy to end the war. The army thought the critical issue was time. Therefore, they advocated invasion because they believed invasion would be the swiftest way to end the war. The navy, one of the fundamental premises of that study was that invading the islands would produce politically unacceptable casualties. The navys alternative was blockade. What doesnt get mentioned in these discussions as it should and this was basically the policy the Navy Officers lined up behind this get back to the very basic point i made about counting the dead. Blockade was aimed at ending the war by starving to death millions of japanese, mostly noncombatants. That is what blockade was about. In view of the limited power of the atomic weapons and other conventional weapons at that time compared to what we have today, a blockade was actually the most ruthless strategy the u. S. Was prepared to employ. That was the direction we were going in august 1945. If the invasion was off, then we do blockade. And we do try to kill millions of japanese noncombatants. By the way, those asians who are not japanese, who are dying every single day, at their deaths on top of the japanese done. The death tolls for these alternatives when you sit down and contemplate them are sickening, mindboggling. We have lynn on the line from west virginia. Good morning cspan and mr. Frank. I am the sun of an okinawa veteran who was trained to go to japan. Of course, he never had to go because president truman had the sense to do it he did. What he did. For those who criticize truman, im going to tell you what my dad said. Let every one of those critics go to the families of people, american gis who work saved from invading japan and tell them that truman did the wrong thing. I know you dont have the guts to do that. Thank you, mr. Frank. Thank you for calling. Richard frank, has history been fair to president truman . In my view, no. Let me add another dimension to this. Mr. Truman, you know, he famously said he didnt lose any sleep over the decision and various comments like that. If you go through everything he actually said, in his mind he had a whole area in two compartments. One was, that i make the best decision of what was presented to me . He always believed that if you understood all of the alternatives, he made what secretary stimson called the least abhorrent choice. As bad as the bombs were, the alternatives were actually worse. On a personal level, truman was never in different to the deaths of japanese that his order had caused. In fact, shortly after he was shima we intercept this message from the Japanese Navy reporting that 100,000 japanese had died he was shima. Mr. Truman clearly was reading that. He talks at a Cabinet Meeting and says, the hiroshima bomb killed 100,000 people. And all those kids. He has various other comments he is making about the fact that this was horrendous, the consequences may have been right, but the consequences were horrendous and he felt that very deeply. You know, once again, when you deal with people from other asian nations were trapped in japans empire or americans saying were two bombs necessary . A common comment from them is, why only two . From their perspective, that is so incomparable between the japanese and these other people that they find the american struggle over this to be baffling. We have a little bit more of the history. Hiroshima happens on august 6. On august 9 the u. S. Dropped the atomic bomb on nagasaki same day, soviets declared war on japan. Six days go by, august 15, the emperor announced japans unconditional surrender. It happened . Walk us through those six days to get the emperor to the point of surrender. A little context here. What you have to understand is, to get japan to surrender was two steps. Someone with legitimate authority had to decide that pan with surrender. In japans armed forces had to comply with that surrender. Neither one of those steps was a certainty through most of 1945. The emperor makes the critical decision. He makes it on the afternoon of august 8 he talks to the foreign minister and says, the war must end now. This is after hiroshima. This is before soviet intervention. There were other factors on his mind including his loss of faith in the strategy to meet the invasion. Concern about the japanese people reaching revolutionary state in the fall. These are played into his mind. He announces that decision before the inner circle of leadership, and the Early Morning hours of august 10. We have the diary entry of the number two man, a general named koabe. One of the other officers comes to him and says, i dont think the overseas commanders will comply. Right on cue, two of the three overseas commanders send a message saying, we are not going to comply with the surrender order, even from the emperor. There is more backandforth in the tokyo. They send their first message, which is really the first serious message about ending the war that has this language in it that says, the precondition they want is that the prerogatives of the emperor, the sovereign ruler, not be compromised in surrender. The American State Department officials immediately realized that what this is, this is a demand that the u. S. Make the emperor supreme, not only over the government, but over the occupation authorities. So he has a veto over the occupation. Of course, send a message back saying, clearly the emperor is going to be subordinate to the occupation commander. That causes more turmoil in japan. The emperor insisting that japans surrender, and he gets the government to agree. Then we still have a very fraud. Fraud period where Japanese Armed forces, going on 7 million to surrender. One of the admirals later tells interrogators that the most fraught days he spent with these days worrying about whether the armed forces were going to comply with the emperors order. I described this as a miraculous deliverance that we actually got the government and armed forces to surrender in august 1945. Lets hear from steve now in fredericksburg, virginia. Good morning. My father served in world war ii. I would like to ask professor frank if he reads japanese . I would like to ask him if he has read the overwhelming number of comments just after the war by japanese generals and admirals that it was not the two nuclear attacks, but the entrance of the soviet union into the war. They had invaded manchuria and they were occupying the islands, which they still occupy to this day, and they were threatening al qaeda hokkiado. Thank you. Thank you, steve. Let me unpack that at several levels. First of all, in terms of the impact of soviet intervention, when the impure the emperor is at that imperial conference, the chief of staff of the Imperial Army tells the emperor in a classic understatement that soviet intervention is unfortunate that doesnt negate the plan to counter the american invasion. If you go through all of these other statements i have been through, yeah. The notion all of these japanese officers are talking about soviet engine intervention being the key reason, it is simply not true. It is certainly not true of the inner cabinet. Soviet intervention does play an important part. It is important in terms of getting compliance of all of the Japanese Armed forces, particularly those on the asian continent, for whom soviet intervention is a direct menace, unlike the atomic bombs, state either understand nor did the u. S. Have a viable target. Not going to drop an atomic bomb on singapore or some chinese city to convince the japanese to surrender. Soviet intervention is important and getting compliance of all of the armed forces, but it does not move the key decisionmakers to move the government and eventually japan to surrender. On to san diego now. Barbara is in san diego. Good morning. I am very interested in this subject because i am an australian. I was a small child at the time of the second world war. My father was a coast watcher and we lived in north queensland. The japanese had been coming down through the islands and we were terrified. We had huts set up in the mountains, ready to evacuate. I always say, i want to thank america saving australia. We could not have done it alone. We had such a small population. All of our men were fighting in other areas. Anyway, that is about all i want to say. Except, it is easy to be an armchair quarterback. All of these years later. They dont remember how it was, how intense the fighting was. Barbara, thank you very much for calling. Your reaction to that . The australians, we tend in our histories to overlook the australians. There were valuable allies and carrying on the main burden of fighting in new guinea. The Australian Military deaths in the part of the war fighting against japan numbered about 17,000. Of those, about 8000 of those australians died as prisoners of war of the japanese. There were mostly captured on singapore and other locations early in the war. That is just one part of the whole thing with japan. Herbert backs bix points out that at the end of the war, the japanese have been fighting in china for eight years. They have killed at least 8 million Chinese Military personnel. They are supposed to turn over all of the prisoners of war. They turn over 56 individuals. After eight years of killing millions. 56 pows. That is part of the savagery of the war that was driven by the terms by which the japanese insist of the war before upon. Richard frank is the author of downfall. Thank you for your time, your insight on the 75th anniversary of the bombings in japan. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Next, peter kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies institute talks about the 75th anniversary of the u. S. Dropping of the atomic bomb on nagasaki, three days after hiroshima. First we have this excerpt from a shown for my film shot in 1945 and 1946 by japanese film crews documenting the aftermath of the bombings for scientific purposes. Here is a look. [video] music tragedy visited hiroshima. The ninth of august 1945. The hot summer sun shone upon the city. An area alarm was on. Then it was lifted. For 2. 5 hours, the warning continue to prevail. At 11 00, two super fortresses appeared over the city. Flying at high altitude. The first plane dropped three objects attached to parachutes. At 11 02, a second plane dropped an object. Then came a blinding flash. Followed by an explosion and a blaze. The destruction was the greatest ever wroght the bomb missed the center of the city and detonated above a canyon to the north. Let us now view the general seen of devastation from the top of one of the hills. On the others of the hills, left of the harbor, lies the city. These hills on both sides of the city where the brakes which intercepted the atomic blast and pretended and prevented the devastation from reaching the harbor and the heart of the city. All buildings, save those of reinforced concrete, or demolished. The whole of this neighborhood, wench teeming with houses and factories factories, denuded of everything. Our guest is peter kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies institute at the american university. Thank you for joining us. As we look back at the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombings on japan, did harry truman make the right decision . No. He made the absolute wrong decision. He defended it throughout the rest of his life. He said i never lost a minute of sleep over that decision. He said he had no remorse, but he made the absolute wrong decision. The United States, in the official mythology, the official narrative, is that the United States dropped the bombs because that was the only way to force japans surrender without an american invasion. If the u. S. Invaded, truman says in his memoir, that marshall told him 500,000 boys would have been killed. Years later, they add to that the fact that many japanese would have also been killed. The reality is there were two ways to the war without using the atomic bomb. The first was to change the surrender terms. The main obstacle to japanese surrender was the u. S. Demand for unconditional surrender. The emperor would be tried as a war criminal and probably executed. As Douglas Macarthurs southwest command said in the briefing, execution of the emperor would be like the crucifixion of christ to us. They would fight to die. The understanding was pervasive among the advisers around truman. Secretary of war stimson, almost all of his close advisors all of trumans close advisors, urged him to change the terms of surrenders. The biggest impediment was burns. From the day truman becomes president until names burns secretary of state, he is relying on burns for advice. And burns tells him that he will be politically crucified if they allow the japanese to keep the emperor. Admiral lahey said their m there may be no way to get the japanese to surrender if we demand unconditional surrender. From togo telegrams from togo to the ambassador in osaka. Cable traffic went back and forth, and it went like this. Majesty, mindful of the fact that the present war brings cradle greater evil and sacrifice, hopes that it may be quickly terminated. Unconditional surrender is the only obstacle to peace. What did truman understand about that . He refers to the telegram as the telegram from the chaplain per asking from peace telegram from the jap emperor asking for peace. Aboard gusto, admiral lahey, the president , and burns agree that the japanese are looking for peace. They knew that. When we got those cables and wrote the codes, not only truman, but also far stall and deploy and others, all the great with that assessment. That the japanese know they are defeated. In fact, the japanese knew they were defeated since the battle of site tan and july of 1944. And in february 1945, the threetime foreigner Prime Minister sent a memo to the emperor saying i regret to inform you, but defeat isnt evident will. Japanese knew that, and the americans knew that. The second way to force the surrender, was to wait for the soviet invasion. From the day after pearl harbor, president roosevelt had been urging russia to commit to the pacific war. But the russians were busy fighting against the nazis, throughout most of the war. The u. S. And the british were facing ten german divisions combine, and the soviets were facing 200 german divisions. So they had their hands full. But at delta, and february of 1945, stolen agrees to come into the pacific war, three months after the end of the war in europe. Which would be around august 8th, or august 9th. What did american intelligence say, joint Intelligence Community reported on april 11th quote, if it any time ussr should enter the war, all japanese will realize that absolute defeat is inevitable. I can give you more case of july 6th, a lot of these reports the pots that meeting, make the same point. Over and over. That once the soviet center, the japanese are finished. What did truman understand . Truman said he went to potsdam in mid july, to make sure the russians were coming in. He had lunch with stalin, on july 17th. Afterwards he wrote in his diary stalin will be in the job war by august 15th. Funny jabs when that occurs. He writes home to his wife the next day, the russians are coming in, will end the war each year sooner now. Think of all the kids wont be killed. So then the question is, why does the United States drop the bomb . And this is where historians really was the bomb necessary to end the war . Absolutely not. Was it the most human way to do it . Absolutely not. Not only the suffering of the hundreds of thousands of japanese who were killed and the hundreds of thousands more who are gonna suffer from that for the rest of their lives. But truman knew he was beginning a process that could ultimately and life on the planet. He gets his first real briefing on the balm on april 13th, from burns. Teachers memoirs, burns said this weapon was great enough to destroy the whole world. On july 25th, truman gets a full briefing about the bomb. Writes then, burroughs and simpson said that within four months, were gonna have a weapon one of which, could destroyed entire city. The way this is handled, determined the future of future civilization. Peter cousin it, let me jump in and take a phone call. We have plenty of callers waiting to talk to you. Peter cousin is director of the Nuclear Studies institute, at the american university. We have naval in new york, its jeff for peter christening. Go ahead jeff. Thank you for taking my call. Mr. Crews nick, i totally agree with everything that you say. I actually anticipated the entry in the last percentage question. There is also a moral depravity that should be spoken about. With the use of an atomic weapon. Its not just a new weapon, there is a certain grimness to the way the decision was made. Not only what they understood that in the future this may be a problem with nuclear war Going Forward. But it was even thought at the time that they could cause a Chain Reaction in the atmosphere of the earth and destroy the world. With just one weapon, which is the one weapon more powerful than the ones they had tested in the desert in your states. To take that type of chance, without knowing, that type of it really speaks to how, how can people rationally make a decision about using a weapon like this they are taking the chance to destroy the earth. Not to mention Going Forward, giving license to everybody else to use a weapon, when they develop it, which they knew they would, as soon as they had it. Its just astounding to me that you can do such a thing. Jeff thank you for calling, peter cousin . That was a point i was starting to make. Truman knew this is not a bigger more powerful weapon. When he gets the briefing at potsdam on how powerful the bomb tests were on july 16th, he writes in his diary, we discovered the most terrible arm in human history. This may be the fire destruction prophesy and euphrates valley era after noaa and is fabulous arc. Not a bigger bomb, the fire of destruction. He says this on a number of occasions. He was in the only one oppenheim or brief the interim committee may 31st. The leaders military political leaders, and warned them that within three years, the of the likely have weapons between 700 and 750,000 times powerful as the hiroshima bomb. The scientists were warning about this. When you get to the moral you have to remember that seven of americas eight five star admirals and generals in 1945, were on record on saying that the atomic bombs were either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both. And the most outspoken about this, was admiral william leahy. Lay he shared the meetings of the joint chief of staff, and it was trumans personal chief of staff. And that he wrote, the japanese were ready to feed it, and ready to surrender. The use of this barbarous weapon in hiroshima and nagasaki was of no materialists in a war against japan. And being the first to use it, we adopted an ethical standard common to barbarians of the dark ages. We have similar comments by eisenhower, mcarthur, king, i mean they all knew it wasnt necessary. And some of them recognize the moral and significance of using it. Because as you are saying, we knew there was no secret to the bomb. And that other countries would be developing them, scientists thought it would take the soviets between three to five years to catch up. And so if we are setting this example, that we can use the bomb, the other thing about that is that the soviets knew that the bomb was unnecessary. Because the japanese have been trying to get them to intercede, to get better surrender terms. In early may, ambassador for japanese former Prime Minister he wrote the, said several times malik. Malik writes back to the kremlin and says the japanese are desperate to surrender. So when the United States drop the bomb, the soviets knew better than anybody that there was no military reasons to do it. And they interpreted exactly the way some of the scientists had warned they would. They were the real target, not the japanese. And that was a reaction of stalin as you call it, and other in the kremlin. Lets hear from lets hear from richard. Richard thank you for waiting, youre on with cosmic . Yeah this is how years old when i really got the bomb. I remember ahead he to the United States, we had a gentleman from our little town we we was tickled to death of a drop the bomb and stop the war. They told us and stop the bore, and we were happy that they did. The other two American People the kamikaze pilots and all this weve seen all the. Nothing is too bad to do to the japanese at the time. But you know i think mcarthur actually truman, he was in war himself. He seemed war was. And, i think mcarthur one time, wanted to drop the bomb and korea. When it was just getting heart of their. The bombs, its an awful thing, but if we did not have bombs, will there be more wars now . We all know that everyone has a bomb, were all playing chicken with it. Maybe stopped some more by having bombs. Richard thank you. Peter cosmic . U. S. The American Public was told exactly what richard was saying. That the bombs ended the war, and save lives. Susan rice might be our next vice president. Road in a hotbed in the you know at times. That truman saved her fathers life. That he was ready to deploy to the pacific. And that dropping the atomic bomb ended the war and force the japanese to. Surrender thats the mid. Obama basically said the same thing when he was in hiroshima. When it was world war ii here is brittle and in hiroshima and nagasaki. 85 of the American People, according to the gallup poll in 1940 fives supported dropping the atomic bomb. A robot poll that came out absolute after 1945, said that 22. 7 of the American People wish the japanese had not surrendered so quickly, so they couldve dropped more atomic bombs on them. 30 in the southwest. So that was the attitude. Was it racism . By de facto a little bit. Japanese were evil ambitious. The death march in 1942 doesnt get known in the u. S. Until january 44. What the japanese did was horrific. What the japanese were doing throughout the pacific was horrific. So that was not up for debate. We are not debating about that. We are debating about whether the dropping the bomb was the right thing. And what the consequences were. Because as the scientists and others warned, it did lead to uncontrollable arms race. And were lucky that to survive since then. From that day, the sort of down cases been hanging over the head of all humanity. The thing is that, truman was not bloodthirsty. He is not evil. Truman went into this with his eyes wide open. Knowing he was beginning this process, and knowing that the way we did it, which has been warned about, triggered the exact response from the soviet union, that we had predicted. At the time. And the soviets, had their own crash bomb program. They test their bomb, and in august in 1949, and then 1952, United States test a Hydrogen Bomb. Soviets tests are so prototype Hydrogen Bomb in 53. And the bulletin atomic scientists moved to hines the Doomsday Clock at that point to two minutes before midnight. Now its at 100 seconds before midnight. The closest its ever been. We are at a very dangerous situation, and there are many instances during the cold war, and since where we have survived, a true blind. Including the cuban missile crisis. Uticas nick, you have led student groups for roughly 25 years now. Every summer to japan, to attend the annual memorial services. What have you learned, from the japanese over that period of time. What is their perspective, and has it changed over the years about the bombings . One of the things that makes my student chips so interesting is that when we travel with japanese student professors, so we get to see the war through the american eyes, and through the japanese eyes. Theyre always reminded that theyre asians on the trip. So they have a very different perspective, then the japanese. And we go to the commemorative events, and hiroshima and nagasaki. We go to the atomic bomb museums in hiroshima nagasaki. But we also study the japanese war in the pacific, and one of the purse places i take my students to is the oak a masahiro museum and nagasaki. And that museum is entirely dedicated to japanese atrocities. Some two americans, but most are to other asians. People have to keep in their minds, is that the japanese were victims but they were all sir victimize ares. As well as american students, participate, have to deal with their guilt about what the u. S. Did in world war ii. The japanese have to deal with their guilt, and their sense of responsibility, and near the American Government nor the japanese government has dealt well with their history. One country that has taken responsibility for their past, in a much more conscience way is germany. The japanese have not done it, especially not under and the United States is not done it. We saw what happened when this most smithsonian tried to have an honest historical in 1995. Maybe were getting ready to have the discussion in a way that we did. Go to brian, brian is in massachusetts. Good morning. Good morning, thanks for letting me speak. So i have a question for your guest about some of the personalities. And yalta conference, we see a very ill Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. I was wondering if they had made the decision to drop than, or was it still in the planning stage . And was stalins surprise in the manhattan project, did he know exactly what was going on . And the other question i have, considering personalities, what about the generals and the admirals that win or closer to frontlines what about the admirals where they briefed on what would happen before those bombs were dropped . Did they have knowledge of that . Go ahead brian friendship. He finally had an image of open high, minted open time or have a chance to talk to truman about what was gonna go on if they drop this month . Thank you brian, several different points there. When was the decision may do you think peter cousin it to drop that first bomb . The meeting on may 5th 1943. They decided there that japan will be the target, and not germany. The project began under the urging of the emigrates scientists who had fled from nazi occupied europe. After they see the german split uranium adam in december of 1938, they emigrate physicists were very alarmed about prospects of hitler developing an atomic bomb. And they went to einstein, and then einstein got roosevelts attention. He wrote the first of three letters to roosevelt, urging the u. S. Began a bomb project. Not to drop on japan, as a deterrent against the japanese bomb. So that is in the project i gets around very slowly. It doesnt really get momentum until 1942. So the the admirals and generals, some of them were briefed about the use of the atomic bomb. And he mentioned policy, and minutes, both of whom are on record saying the atomic bombs were not necessary. To end the war. But even someone like eisenhower, under eisenhowers presidency, Americas Nuclear arsenal increases almost 30 fold. A little more than 1000 bombs, president cyclist finished, we have almost 30,000 bombs. Eisenhower says, that it potsdam we were gonna drop the bomb, eisenhower said, somebody told me they were gonna drop the bomb of the japanese. Because after all my war was over in europe, and it wasnt up to me. I was getting more and more depressed just thinking about it. Any asked for my opinion, so i told him im against it on two counts. First, the japanese are ready to surrender, and it wasnt necessary to hit him with that awful thing. Second, i hate to see our country be the first to use such a weapon. Mcarthur says, in exchange with former president hoover, who had written to truman urging him to change the surrender terms it may, what causes it out of truman had followed your wise advice, the japanese wouldve said rendered and happily. Mcarthur as early as may. The possibility, if we had told the japanese they had be able to keep the emperor, which we let them do it after its anyway. We told him we have a horrible new weapon. We told them we couldve ended the war possibly a month or two earlier. And save more lives. American lives, japanese lives, chinese lives, vietnamese lives. But so, instead, we drop a bomb on august 6th. In order to prevent an invasion, that was supposed to begin november 1st. And an invasion which many of the military leaders, dont want to see happen at all. Especially the naval leaders. So the logic behind this, escapes me. Briefly peter crews nick, did stalin know do you think according to that last colors question . Yes. There were two or more prominent people who were giving intelligence to the soviets. Flicks, you dont call, where the two most prominent. We were doing so. And so stalin knew the americans would develop the bomb. He did not know exactly when he knew it was gonna be tested. He did not know the results, until truman finally told him, at potsdam, through the end of the conference, that the United States had a terrible new weapon. Stalin was poker faced, truman thought that he did not get it. Stolen did not understand. Stolen knew exactly what that meant. Marvin, calling from tuscaloosa alabama. Welcome to the program or even. Thank you, i think youve played a little fast and loose and the facts. I dont think youve given enough credit to the great sacrifices that americans put into this, and the fact that it was, it was germany japan and italy and the dictators hitler tokyo and mussolini who started the war. I think youve ignored the fact of all the atrocities committed by the japanese, you mentioned them, but we dont hear a lot about them. Those atrocities were proven at the tokyo war trials. For example, you mention the tan death march. The rape of man king. The killing all those slaughter and tortured of american p. O. W. One and three died in prison. The Burma Death Railway that was built. I think you plane fast and loose with the facts, because truman had the facts, and he made a reasonable decision. Im not gonna go into all that detail, i think we owe it to americans on the 75th anniversary of the end of world war ii to just say to the americans and the families that died including my two uncles and my father that honoring glory to all of those people. All of the families in all the americans who died of world war ii. And i feel like you arent fair, and are not putting this in context. I definitely disagree with their statement, that we had atrocities just like the japanese. Thats rewriting history, and that is wrong sir. Marvin, lets get a response from peter coups nick. Marvin, you werent listening very closely. Now first of all, i think that world war ii was a necessary war. I think the United States was on the side of the angels. In world war ii. I am happy we won world war ii. That is not a question for debate. The debate is, and i certainly dont play japanese atrocities or german atrocities. The issue is something very very different. It is for that reason, that you entire history of the cold war, and the Nuclear Arms Race is not something that we can ignore. The dropping the bomb was instrumental in starting. That cold war. The thing about it, so many people we should be quoting, admiral leahy for example, said i wasnt able to see any justification of a National Defense point of view for an invasion of the already thoroughly defeated japan. So now, if you are saying that we shouldve drop the bomb, to get revenge on the japanese, thats a different question. And thats one that, truman in his initial statement, said that were repaying them back for pearl harbor and their atrocities. But that is not the argument that is made by historians. The argument is whether or not the bomb was necessary to end the war. And ill quote Brigadier General who was in charge of repairing the magic summaries. He said we brought them down to an abject surrender, through accelerated sinking of their merchant murray, and hunger long. We did not need to do it. And we knew we did not need to do it. And they knew we knew we did not need to do it. We use them as an experiment, for two atomic bombs. Now why would we do that . United states was not in a moral country. We are fighting a good war, and we had to win. General groves, in charge of manhattan project, said there was never for about two weeks from time i took charge for this project, any illusion on my part that russia was our enemy, and the project was conducted on that basis. General grows future Nobel Peace Prize winner, in march of 1944 he said, you realize of course, that the main purpose of this project is to subdue the russians. James burns, one of his closest advisers, said the same thing to leo lizard when they south carolina. On may 28. He said this is our way to make the russians more manageable in europe. Now, if you think that that is a justifiable reason for killing of hundreds of thousands of people, then there is almost no limit to what you can justify now. Then you can justify using atomic bombs today. If its gonna give us some way thats gonna achieve some moral purpose. Fortunately, that is not the attitude that the world has adopted. Under the current u. S. Of the trump administration, from february 2018, weve lowered the threshold with the use of nuclear weapons. Were developing two more usable Smaller Nuclear weapons, and the world is really precarious situation now. Peter cousin it as we wrap up, what is the legacy in view of the bombings hiroshima and nagasaki . Legacy. I think it undermines americas claims towards exceptionalism. The United States, we like to think ourselves as americans, as different from all the other countries. As more moral, more just. We go out to the world and do this, we want to spread freedom and democracy. At the heart of that, at the heart of that understanding, is this it begins with the cold war really. It begins with our victory in world war ii. World war ii was a good war, as close as we ever come to a good war. But there is no such thing as a good war really, and the use of the bomb certainly compromises our moral position around the world. And we have to look honestly at our past because if we dont study the past honestly, we are gonna commit the same mistakes or new mistakes Going Forward in the future. And the world is just too dangerous for us to have that luxury. Peter cousin is director of the Nuclear Studies institute at the american university, thanks a lot for your time and your insight this morning much appreciated. Thank you. Next on the presidency, we hear from michael neiberg, were studies chair at the u. S. Army war college, about the personalities and stakes involved at the 1945 potsdam conference convened near the end of world war ii. President truman had just assumed office after the death of franklin the roosevelt and he met with britains Winston Churchill and the soviet unions joseph stalin. It was during these meetings from july 17 until august 2 that mr. Truman informed his soviet counterpart about the new u. S. Super weapon. It would soon be unleashed on the japanese cities of hiroshima and nagasaki. The Truman Library institute provided this video. We are at the 75th