The article you quoted via sandinista is an opinion piece. There are claimed statements from US military men, but no citations or links to the original documents.rEvolutionist wrote:
requoted so that gawdzilla can read it. There's yet more quotes in there from the very top of the military commanders in the US saying how the bomb wasn't necessary for japanese surrender. Can you address those quotes directly?
In any case, there was immense rivalry between various factions of the US military towards the end of the war; opinions by a naval man, for example, may be an attempt to belittle the attempt by the Army Air Force to become a separate service.
The opinions of many other commanders that I have read (e.g.. Field Marshal Slim, of Burma fame, in "Defeat into Victory") was that the Japanese Army, both in Japan and in the occupied territories, was ready and willing to go down fighting, to the last man if needed. It was a perfectly reasonable expectation for military commanders on the ground that the continuation of the ground war, in SE Asia, China, and finally Japan, would be a drawn out, bloody affair. The hints that Pilger et al make about Japan putting out serious peace feelers are just that - hints and hearsay, with no clear citations (which is what you wanted to see, I believe)
As I've said earlier, the fact that cynical US politicians were looking for a side benefit in terms of impressing Russia doesn't alter the argument that using the bombs prevented many more casualties than they caused.
