America had the bomb. Now what?

Keloid is an overgrowth of scar tissue on the wound surface of a thermal burn during the reparative stage. It forms an irregularly shaped protrusion that resembles the shell and legs of a crab, thus the term “keloid” (from Greek for crab), in contrast to a simple heaping up of scar tissue (hypertrophic scar). The latter is usually caused by a secondary burn, and a keloid results from a primary thermal burn. Plastic surgery was performed on many to remove keloid scars, though recurrence of these scars was not uncommon.

—secondary (scorch, contact, and flame burns)

 *Figure 12. Cumulative death rate of atomic bomb victims. (, p. 86. Fig. 12)

*Keloid scars on a woman’s back. (HPMM)

“The German Army at this time was probably the most formidable and effective fighting machine since the Roman legions. Immensely battle-experienced in Poland, the fall of France, North Africa, Italy and, above all, Russia; superbly well-equipped, intensely fanatical and, above all, literally fighting for their lives and future…”

*Close-up of previous photo. (HPMM)

327.] * Private interview notes taken by Walter Whitehill summarize King's feelings quite simply as: "I didn't like the atom bomb or any part of it." [THE DECISION, p.

—secondary injuries sustained from flying debris, burial under rubble, and blast compression

Samuel Walker,Chief Historian of the U.S.

Bieri, suggests that prior to the bombing King and his staffseemed to believe the war could be ended before Russia entered inAugust; and the well-informed and well-connected naval historianE.B.

NEWS AND WORLD REPORT) published astrongly worded two-page editorial:

334.] (In this connection, as weshall discuss in Part III, it is commonly forgotten that by thetime Hiroshima was bombed orders had already been given to altertargeting priorities so as to down-play city bombing.

(See, for instance, Uday Mohan, H-DIPLO, Oct.

As also noted above, in hismemoirs Arnold stated that "it always appeared to us that, atomicbomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge ofcollapse." [THE DECISION, p.

3, 1996.) II: MILITARY NECESSITY.

Potter explains the brevity of a 1945 planning meeting inSan Francisco between King and Nimitz in this way: It may wellhave "reflected the near-conviction in the minds of both Nimitzand King [even before the atomic test] that neither Olympic norCoronet would ever take place." [THE DECISION, pp.

Immediate disorientation and coma occur with 10,000 rads, and death follows within hours.

Part IV takes up certain additional issuesinvolved in the debate.

As noted, in his postwar memoirs King saidthe bomb was unnecessary because he believed a blockade strategywould have ended the war without an invasion.

*Frequency of A-bomb cataracts in Hiroshima victims exposed in infancy. (, 208)

Indeed, many raised important andinsightful points.

Some military analysts insist that Japan was on its knees and the bombings were simply unnecessary. The American government was accused of racism on the grounds that such a device would never have been used against white civilians.

*Crude incidence of leukemia among A-bomb survivors and controls, in 1950-1971 sample. (, 130).

[Emphasis added; DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, Vol.

328-9.] Such indirect information suggests it is not unreasonable tothink that King's judgment prior to the bombings may well alsohave been that the war could be ended early on without aninvasion and without the atomic bomb.