Why were the atomic bombs dropped on civillian cities as opposed to military targets in WW2?

Question

is there a specific reason?

Answer 1

to scare the pants off the rest of the world?

Answer 2

Hiroshima and Nagasaki did have legitimate military targets in them. Civilians were not specifically targeted. They were large manufacturing centers, and also had command and control centers. They also hadn't suffered any conventional bombing so they were used to be able to gage more accurately the destructive force of the bombs. (No, not a coincidence.)

Answer 3

The same reason we carpet bombed cities: to shock and demoralize civilians.

But we had an extra bonus by using nukes: We saw what they did to real people in a real city. With the cold war obviously looming, we wanted to know what this weapon could do to an actual target. So, although we didn't need to use it at all, we did.

Answer 4

By 1945 all sides in World War II had lost whatever inhibitions they may have had about attacking civilian populations.

The German Luftwaffe had bombed London and other population centers in the U.K., the Royal Air Force and the U.S. 8th Air Force had conducted raids by 1,000 heavy bombers against numerous German cities, including the infamous raids on Dresden in February 1945. The death toll is uncertain, but certainly ran into tens of thousands.

Air Chief Marshall Arthur "Bomber" Harris, the chief of the RAF's Bomber Command, was very frank during and after the war about deliberately targeting civilian populations. These attacks were policy approved at the highest levels, not mistakes.

When high-altitude bombing of Japan proved inaccurate and ineffective, American Gen. Curtis LeMay loaded his B-29 Superfortress bombers with incendiaries and sent them on devastating low-level attacks against lightly constructed and highly flammable Japanese cities such as Tokyo. The Superforts ignited firestorms that rose to thousands of feet. Thousands died, probably more than in the nuclear raids just a few months later.

In his postwar book "The First and the Last," Adolf Galland, former general of the German fighter arm and one of Germany's best fighter pilots, describes the attacks by the Allies on the center of German cities as "terror raids." The view is understandable. Numerous photos exist of dead German civilians, many of them women, old men and children, lined up for burial. The raids were meant to kill the civilians who worked in Germany's war industries.

So do the ends justify the means? Were the Allies right to bomb civilians to "end the war?" Only a few year earlier, the same Allied leaders had decried similar German raids. The argument goes on.

Answer 5

Hiroshima was a civilian target, but Nagasaki was a military HQ. The reason they bombed Hiroshima was for intimidation. Nagasaki was just because it was a major military HQ

Answer 6

I was in Europe when the bombs were dropped. My entire outfit was glad they were dropped. We were packing up to go to the South Pacific  theatre as we had won our was in Europe.God only knows how many of us would have been killed. I understand the civilians were warned by leaflets to vacate the cities. Thats more than they did for us at Pearl Harbor.

Answer 7

Well after Japan attack the U.S., the U.S. was bombing Japan with fire bombs and there were many cities that were bombed, the U.S. could have easily have dropped the A-bomb on an important military base or any other part that would affect Japan's military, but they chose to drop it on these 2 civilian cities for two reasons, 1) because they had not bombed these two cities and 2) it would cause civil problems with in Japan, it would have shown that Japan was not helping its people therefore causing a civil war.

Answer 8

I'm sorry to dissapoint you, but both Nagasaki and Hiroshima were military targets. One contained an army HQ, the other an important logistics center.

So there was no specific reason to target exclusively civilians. Had there not been any military targets, other cities would have been vaporised.

Answer 9

After the end of the war in Europe the Soviet Union was about to enter the war against Japan and it was important for the USA to finish off Japan before the Soviets could occupy any territory so they chose the targets to gve the most horrifying results and force the Japanese to surrender quickly.

Answer 10

Some knew of the Japanese "peace feelers", others did not. Given the decisions and the forces pushing and pulling the situation at the time, the fact that a Russian invasion of Northern Japan was imminent, that Siapan and Okinawa did leave high casualty rates, the decision to use the bomb is understandable.

Now let us discuss the concept of "total war" ... the idea of winning the war is essential. It is absolute. If we fail we die. There are no substitutes.

Civilians at the beginning of war are always held in high esteem, except in "total war." When the "chips" are down and atrocities are encountered, the game and the rules change. War is not a static event. Both morally and strategically.

In a war, there are so many questionable things done... Where was the morality in the bombing of Coventry, or the bombing of Dresden, or the strategic air campaign using incendiaries against Tokyo, Kobe and German cities, or the Bataan death march, or the Rape of Nanking, or the bombing of Pearl Harbor?"

If you have a weapon, and you are fighting for survival, you will tend to use it. Only later are you judged for the consequences of your actions.

At the time, a total war was underway, no 39th parallel, no line in the sand or air space to be denied us....some information was known, other information was filtered or unknown. Various groups were racing to influence decision makers to ensure that the bomb was used (eg. Groves), others were racing to prevent the bomb from being used (eg. Szilard, Einstein).

Sitting in our easy chairs 60 years later, we've had to think of the spectre of nuclear holocaust embedded into our brains, influencing our view of the a-bomb attacks and our leaders' every political decision since then.  In 1945, the black spectre of global suicide was non-existent, only the growing lists of casualties posted at the local towns and cities were the only reality....

Answer 11

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both important ports and industrial centres. Hiroshima was the training centre and arsenal of the IJA for more than fifty years when it was bombed.

Unlike European cities, Japan's war time industry was much more dispersed-small workshops doing piece work scattered throughout the city rather than a large easily identified (and hence bombable with minimal civillian losses ) industrial district.

Fukuoka was the second city targetted, but heavy cloud forced the plane to divert to it's secondary target, Nagasaki. Both had been selected on a number of criteria, including susceptibility to fire damage, war related industry and relatively untouched by earlier bombing raids.

Be thankful that one of the seven cities on the shortlist was removed after the intervention of Winston Churchill as it was a cultural mecca with literally hundreds of temples, gardens and shrines with ireeplacable wooden statues and other icons of Japanese culture-Kyoto!

BTW, by mid 1945 there weren't many millitary units left to bomb! The IJN had a few scattered ships left, mostly marooned in port for lack of fuel. Total War means total war-you can't pull back at the end and bomb some off shore island-it shows you're not fully committed.

The bombs were a way to show the Japanese junta that the Allies were prepared to nuke the country until it glowed, robbing them of their chance for an everlasting glory - last stand - "go down swinging" fight to the death; so coming to the peace tables would be a good idea.