Leahy's position seems pretty clear . . . so I won't argue with that, but I will argue w how much weight he carried w Congress. This was a time of Eisenhowers, MacArthurs, and even Lemays (in the 50s)
the rest:
Nimitz was quoted by his widow.
Byrd was a rear admiral.
Strauss was a paper-pusher.
Arnold's words hardly support the position that he was against the bomb.
Lemay and macarthur . . . their actions speak louder than any words they might have uttered.
Finally, hindsight is 20-20. Truman, changed the way the game was played . . . and he did it for more reasons than the obvious ones.
Generals can only persuade Congress. They have no constitutional powers otherwise affecting it. But that’s irrelevant b/c Congress already declared war and the decision to drop nuclear bombs on Japan was Truman’s and his alone.
Nimitz was quoted by his widow??? She's was an obvious liar taking full advantage of hearsay. I'm kidding. I appreciate it that you took the time to check the sources I posted. Here’s a direct quote of Nimitz on the matter:
Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, in a public address at the Washington Monument two months after the bombings stated:
"The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima and before the Russian entry into the war. . . .The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan. . . . "
As for Arnold, he gave other statements to the public reasserting that the Japanese were ready to surrender.
"The Japanese position was hopeless even before the first atomic bomb fell, because the Japanese had lost control of their own air." (full quote already listed in this thread)
In his 1949 memoirs Arnold observed that "it always appeared to us that, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse."
* Arnold's deputy, Lieutenant General Ira C. Eaker, summed up his understanding this way in an internal military history interview:
Arnold's view was that it [the dropping of the atomic bomb] was unnecessary. He said that he knew the Japanese wanted peace. There were political implications in the decision and Arnold did not feel it was the military's job to question it. [THE DECISION, p. 335.]
Eaker reported that Arnold told him:
When the question comes up of whether we use the atomic bomb or not, my view is that the Air Force will not oppose the use of the bomb, and they will deliver it effectively if the Commander in Chief decides to use it. But it is not necessary to use it in order to conquer the Japanese without the necessity of a land invasion. [THE DECISION, p. 335.]
http://www.doug-long.com/ga1.htmThese generals do not mince words. They were against the bombing b/c they viewed Japan as vanquished.
