What if Kyoto had been Nuked (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Zipper730

Chief Master Sergeant
4,319
946
Nov 9, 2015
While I don't think it would have been a good idea: I'm curious what the aftermath would have been if the USAAF had dropped one of its A-bombs on Kyoto? It was at the top of the target-list and Henry Stimson had applied a lot of pressure to get it taken off.
 
M mjfur ,
I could have told you that: I'm curious on what effect it would have had on Japan post war and other historical effects.
 
It would have needed rebuilt and everything else would be the same as it is today.
 
Nara would have been the most popular town in Japan.
I love Nara including residents' old fashioned exclusive temperament.

Nara.jpg

Source: 【2021年】奈良の人気観光スポット48選!ジャンル別に厳選してご紹介 | たびこふれ
 
While I don't think it would have been a good idea: I'm curious what the aftermath would have been if the USAAF had dropped one of its A-bombs on Kyoto? It was at the top of the target-list and Henry Stimson had applied a lot of pressure to get it taken off.
Almost everything would have been destroyed, as with Hiroshima and Nagasaki but much was detroyed in other cities by conventional bombing.
 
While I don't think it would have been a good idea: I'm curious what the aftermath would have been if the USAAF had dropped one of its A-bombs on Kyoto? It was at the top of the target-list and Henry Stimson had applied a lot of pressure to get it taken off.

_84695045_mushroom_16_gettyimages-513666223.jpg
 
I'm halfway through reading "Enola Gay" by Gordan Thomas and Max Witts, which was written in 1977. I'm getting the impression that Stimson, who was Secretary of War for Roosevelt and Truman, recognised that the atomic bomb was much more a political weapon then military. He saw that the post war optics were more important than the shock of destroying a cultural treasure. General Groves who was the director of the Manhattan Project, favored Kyoto in part because it was better suited to measure the potential damage of the atomic blast while Hiroshima was smaller in area. On the other hand, Hiroshima was the command center for the defense of the southern island of Kyushu.
 
The targets were not picked at random.


That resulted in the selection of 5 possible targets for the first mission - Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokura, Niigata and Kyoto. The last was ruled out by Stimson. Hiroshima was picked as the primary target. For the second mission, Kokura was the primary target but by the time the B-29 Bockscar reached it, smoke for fires elsewhere were covering the aiming point. So the aircraft diverted to the secondary target, Nagasaki.

Once Truman gave the order to drop the bombs, actual target selection and timing was in the hands of the military. Planning for a third drop was underway with aircraft of the 509th back in the USA collecting components. They were planning that third drop for around 19 Aug.

With negotiations with the Japanese beginning around 10 Aug, Truman rescinded the previous orders and took full control of all future A bomb missions on 12 Aug, suspending plans for the third drop.
 
The targets were not picked at random.


That resulted in the selection of 5 possible targets for the first mission - Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokura, Niigata and Kyoto. The last was ruled out by Stimson. Hiroshima was picked as the primary target. For the second mission, Kokura was the primary target but by the time the B-29 Bockscar reached it, smoke for fires elsewhere were covering the aiming point. So the aircraft diverted to the secondary target, Nagasaki.

Once Truman gave the order to drop the bombs, actual target selection and timing was in the hands of the military. Planning for a third drop was underway with aircraft of the 509th back in the USA collecting components. They were planning that third drop for around 19 Aug.

With negotiations with the Japanese beginning around 10 Aug, Truman rescinded the previous orders and took full control of all future A bomb missions on 12 Aug, suspending plans for the third drop.
Hiroshima 1949
0023_Reinforced Concrete Building Near Atom Center, Hiroshima.jpg
 
I'm halfway through reading "Enola Gay" by Gordan Thomas and Max Witts, which was written in 1977. I'm getting the impression that Stimson, who was Secretary of War for Roosevelt and Truman, recognised that the atomic bomb was much more a political weapon then military. He saw that the post war optics were more important than the shock of destroying a cultural treasure. General Groves who was the director of the Manhattan Project, favored Kyoto in part because it was better suited to measure the potential damage of the atomic blast while Hiroshima was smaller in area. On the other hand, Hiroshima was the command center for the defense of the southern island of Kyushu.
Bomb factory near Hiroshima, 1949
Bomb factory near Hiroshima.jpg
 
I figure because there were many priceless writings and artifacts that wouldn't have easily been replaced (such as the buildings): It would have been seen as something that irrevocably destroyed part of their culture, something they'd never get back.

I'd imagine that there'd be more acrimony in the post war period.
 
I figure because there were many priceless writings and artifacts that wouldn't have easily been replaced (such as the buildings): It would have been seen as something that irrevocably destroyed part of their culture, something they'd never get back.

I'd imagine that there'd be more acrimony in the post war period.
I presume Japan did what most countries did, valuable art works were taken down and hidden.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back