美國政府文件承認廣島和長崎的原子彈轟炸對於結束第二次世界大戰來說並不是必要的。日本當時正處於投降的邊緣。這是美國冷戰時期對蘇聯的首次打擊
西方政府和媒體告訴世界其他國家要害怕朝鮮及其核武器，或者擔心伊朗有一天可能擁有核武器，這是很常見的事情。It is very common for Western governments and media outlets to tell the rest of the world to be afraid of North Korea and its nuclear weapons, or to fear the possibility that Iran could one day have nukes.
但現實是，人類曆史上隻有一個國家對平民使用過核武器——而且不是一次，而是兩次：美國。But the reality is that there is only one country in human history that has used nuclear weapons against a civilian population - and not once, but twice: the United States.
1945年8月6日至9日，美軍向日本廣島和長崎投下了原子彈。大約20萬平民被殺。On the 6th and 9th of August, 1945, the US military dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Around 200,000 civilians were killed.
近 80 年後的今天，許多美國政府官員、記者和教育家仍然聲稱，華盛頓別無選擇，隻能用核武器攻擊日本，迫使其投降，從而結束第二次世界大戰。一些人認為，這種可怕的暴行實際上是一種高尚的行為，它挽救了更多在隨後的戰鬥中可能喪生的生命。Today, nearly 80 years later, many US government officials, journalists, and educators still claim that Washington had no choice but to nuke Japan, to force it to surrender and thus end World War Two. Some argue that this horrifying atrocity was in fact a noble act, that it saved even more lives that would have been lost in subsequent fighting.
這種說法雖然廣為流傳，但卻完全錯誤。This narrative, although widespread, is utterly false.
美國政府文件承認，日本在 1945 年核打擊之前就已經處於投降邊緣。根本沒有必要使用原子彈。US government documents have admitted that Japan was already on the verge of surrendering in 1945, before the nuclear strikes. It was simply not necessary to use the atomic bomb.
美國戰爭部（20 世紀 40 年代後期更名為國防部）進行了一項名為“戰略轟炸調查”的調查，分析其在第二次世界大戰中的空襲情況。The US Department of War (which was renamed the Department of Defense later in the 1940s) conducted an investigation, known as the Strategic Bombing Survey, analyzing its air strikes in World War II.
1946年發表的《Published in 1946, the 戰略轟炸調查》Strategic Bombing Survey stated非常明確地指出，“即使不投原子彈，日本也會投降”： very clearly, "Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped":
......似乎很清楚，即使沒有原子彈襲擊，對日本的製空權也可以施加足夠的壓力，以實現無條件投降並消除入侵的需要。... it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.
基於對所有事實的詳細調查，並得到幸存的日本領導人證詞的支持，調查組認為，當然在 1945 年 12 月 31 日之前，並且很可能在 1945 年 11 月 1 日之前，日本甚至會投降Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, 。如果原子彈沒有被投下Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped，即使俄羅斯沒有參戰，即使沒有計劃或考慮入侵。, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.
對日本進行核打擊是美國的一項The nuclear strikes on Japan represented a 政治political決定，直指蘇聯；這是冷戰時期的第一次襲擊。 decision taken by the United States, aimed squarely at the Soviet Union; it was the first strike in the Cold War.
1945年8月，蘇聯準備入侵日本，推翻與納粹德國結盟的法西斯政權，蘇聯紅軍剛剛在歐洲戰區擊敗了納粹德國。In August 1945, the USSR was preparing to invade Japan to overthrow its ruling fascist regime, which had been allied with Nazi Germany - which the Soviet Red Army had also just defeated in the European theater of the war.
華盛頓擔心，如果蘇聯像在柏林那樣擊敗日本法西斯主義並解放東京，那麽日本的後法西斯政府可能會成為蘇聯的盟友，並可能采用社會主義政府。Washington was concerned that, if the Soviets defeated Japanese fascism and liberated Tokyo like they had in Berlin, then Japan's post-fascist government could become an ally of the Soviet Union and could adopt a socialist government.
因此，投在廣島和長崎的原子彈與其說是針對日本法西斯，不如說是針對蘇聯共產黨。The atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, therefore, were not so much aimed at the Japanese fascists as they were aimed at the Soviet communists.
這一對日本使用核武器的明確政治決定實際上遭到了幾位美國軍方高級官員的反對。This expressly political decision to use nuclear weapons against Japan was in fact opposed by several top US military officials.
作為美國軍事史上最著名的將軍之一，德懷特·艾森豪威爾領導了歐洲戰場的行動，並監督了隨後對前納粹德國的占領。As one of the most famous generals in US military history, Dwight Eisenhower led operations in the European theater of the war and oversaw the subsequent occupation of what was formerly Nazi Germany.
艾森豪威爾後來繼對日本進行核打擊的美國領導人哈裏·杜魯門之後成為美國總統。Eisenhower later became president of the United States, following Harry Truman, the US leader who had nuked Japan.
艾森豪威爾因其在歐洲反法西斯鬥爭中的領導地位而聞名於世。但鮮為人知的是，他反對美國對日本進行核攻擊。Eisenhower is renowned worldwide for his leadership in the fight against fascism in Europe. But what is little known is that he opposed the US nuclear attacks on Japan.
離開白宮後，艾森豪威爾出版了一本名為After leaving the White House, Eisenhower published a memoir titled 《變革的命令》Mandate for Change的回憶錄。在這本 1963 年出版的書中，這位前高級將軍回憶了 1945 年 7 月他與時任美國戰爭部長亨利·史汀生的一次爭論。. In this 1963 book, the former top general recalled an argument he had in July 1945 with then US Secretary of War Henry Stimson.
史汀生通知他華盛頓正計劃用核武器攻擊日本，艾森豪威爾批評了這一決定，稱他有“嚴重的疑慮”，並堅信“日本已經戰敗，完全沒有必要投下原子彈”。Stimson had notified him that Washington was planning to nuke Japan, and Eisenhower criticized the decision, stating that he had "grave misgivings" and was convinced "that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary".
該事件發生在 1945 年 [7 月]，當時戰爭部長史汀生訪問我在德國的總部，告訴我我國政府正準備向日本投擲原子彈。我是那些認為有許多令人信服的理由質疑這種行為是否明智的人之一。……但是，國務卿在向我通報新墨西哥州成功進行炸彈試驗以及使用該炸彈的計劃後，詢問我的反應，顯然希望得到我的大力同意。The incident took place in [July] 1945 when Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ... But the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.
在他講述有關事實的過程中，我感到一種壓抑的感覺，於是During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so 我向他表達了我的嚴重疑慮I voiced to him my grave misgivings，一是因為, first on the basis of 我認為日本已經戰敗了，投彈完全沒有必要my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary，二是因為我認為日本已經戰敗了，投彈完全沒有必要。因為我認為我們的國家應該避免使用一種武器來震驚世界輿論，我認為這種武器的使用不再是拯救美國人生命的強製性措施。我相信，日本當時正在尋求某種投降方式，以將“麵子”損失降到最低。國務卿對我的態度深感不安，幾乎憤怒地反駁了我為快速得出結論而給出的理由。, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of "face". The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude, almost angrily refuting the reason I gave for my quick conclusions.
對廣島和長崎的這些“完全不必要”的核襲擊造成約 20 萬平民死亡。但他們有一個政治目標，針對蘇聯。These "completely unnecessary" nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed some 200,000 civilians. But they had a political goal, aimed at the Soviet Union.
日本原子彈爆炸背後的政治原因已得到美國能源部曆史辦公室的公開承認，該辦公室運營著一個網站，提供有關The political reasons behind the atomic bombing of Japan have been publicly acknowledged by the US Department of Energy's Office of History, which runs a website with educational 曼哈頓計劃information about the Manhattan Project（開發原子彈的科學倡議）的教育信息。, the scientific initiative that developed the bomb.
美國政府網站承認杜魯門政府對日本發動核武器的決定是出於政治動機，並寫道：The US government website conceded that the Truman administration's decision to nuke Japan was politically motivated, writing:
在哈裏·S·杜魯門總統收到三位一體測試成功的消息後，他在對日戰爭中對蘇聯幫助的需求大大減少了。蘇聯領導人約瑟夫·斯大林承諾在 8 月 15 日之前加入對日戰爭。杜魯門和他的顧問們現在不確定他們是否需要這種幫助。如果使用原子彈可以在不入侵的情況下取得勝利，那麽After President Harry S. Truman received word of the success of the Trinity test, his need for the help of the Soviet Union in the war against Japan was greatly diminished. The Soviet leader, Joseph Stalin, had promised to join the war against Japan by August 15th. Truman and his advisors now were not sure they wanted this help. If use of the atomic bomb made victory possible without an invasion, then 接受蘇聯的幫助隻會讓他們參與有關日本戰後命運的討論。accepting Soviet help would only invite them into the discussions regarding the postwar fate of Japan.
......
其他曆史學家認為，即使不使用原子彈，日本也會投降，而事實上，Other historians argue that Japan would have surrendered even without the use of the atomic bomb and that in fact 杜魯門和他的顧問使用原子彈隻是為了恐嚇蘇聯。Truman and his advisors used the bomb only in an effort to intimidate the Soviet Union.
......
杜魯門希望避免與蘇聯“分享”日本的管理權。Truman hoped to avoid having to "share" the administration of Japan with the Soviet Union.
主流曆史學家也承認這一事實。Mainstream historians have acknowledged this fact as well.
倫敦智庫英美安全信息委員會的研究員沃德·威爾遜2013年在華盛頓的精英外交政策雜誌上發表了一篇文章，題為“原子彈沒有打敗日本，而是斯大林做到了Ward Wilson, a researcher at the establishment London-based think tank the British American Security Information Council, published an article in Washington's elite Foreign Policy magazine in 2013 titled "” The Bomb Didn’t Beat Japan. Stalin Did。”.
他寫道：“雖然這些炸彈確實迫使戰爭立即結束，但日本領導人無論如何都想投降，而且很可能在美國計劃於 11 月 1 日入侵之前就這樣做了。因此，沒有必要使用它們。”"Although the bombs did force an immediate end to the war, Japan’s leaders had wanted to surrender anyway and likely would have done so before the American invasion planned for Nov. 1. Their use was, therefore, unnecessary", he wrote.
威爾遜解釋說：Wilson explained:
如果日本人不關心一般的城市轟炸或特別是廣島的原子彈爆炸，那麽他們關心什麽？答案很簡單：蘇聯。If the Japanese were not concerned with city bombing in general or the atomic bombing of Hiroshima in particular, what were they concerned with? The answer is simple: the Soviet Union.
......
即使是日本政府中最強硬的領導人也知道戰爭不能繼續下去。Even the most hard-line leaders in Japan’s government knew that the war could not go on. 問題不在於是否繼續，而在於如何以盡可能最好的條件結束戰爭。The question was not whether to continue, but how to bring the war to a close under the best terms possible.
......
判斷是廣島原子彈爆炸還是蘇聯入侵並宣戰導致日本投降的一種方法是比較這兩個事件對戰略局勢的影響。8 月 6 日廣島遭到轟炸後，這兩種選擇仍然存在。......轟炸廣島並沒有排除日本的任何一個戰略選擇。One way to gauge whether it was the bombing of Hiroshima or the invasion and declaration of war by the Soviet Union that caused Japan’s surrender is to compare the way in which these two events affected the strategic situation. After Hiroshima was bombed on Aug. 6, both options were still alive. ... Bombing Hiroshima did not foreclose either of Japan’s strategic options.
然而，蘇聯宣戰並入侵滿洲和庫頁島的影響卻截然不同。一旦蘇聯宣戰，斯大林就不能再充當調解人了——他現在是一個交戰國。因此，外交選擇被蘇聯的舉動消滅了。對軍事局勢的影響同樣巨大。The impact of the Soviet declaration of war and invasion of Manchuria and Sakhalin Island was quite different, however. Once the Soviet Union had declared war, Stalin could no longer act as a mediator — he was now a belligerent. So the diplomatic option was wiped out by the Soviet move. The effect on the military situation was equally dramatic.
......
當俄羅斯人入侵滿洲時，他們摧毀了曾經的精銳軍隊，許多俄羅斯部隊直到耗盡汽油才停下來。When the Russians invaded Manchuria, they sliced through what had once been an elite army and many Russian units only stopped when they ran out of gas.
......
蘇聯的入侵使軍事決戰戰略失效，正如它使外交戰略失效一樣。日本的所有選擇一下子就消失了。The Soviet invasion invalidated the military’s decisive battle strategy, just as it invalidated the diplomatic strategy. At a single stroke, all of Japan’s options evaporated. 蘇聯的入侵具有戰略決定性——它排除了日本的兩種選擇——而轟炸廣島（兩者都排除了）則不然。The Soviet invasion was strategically decisive — it foreclosed both of Japan’s options — while the bombing of Hiroshima (which foreclosed neither) was not.
......
將戰爭的結束歸因於原子彈在多個方麵符合日本的利益。但這也符合美國的利益。如果原子彈贏得了戰爭，那麽美國軍事力量的認知就會增強，美國在亞洲和世界的外交影響力就會增加。Attributing the end of the war to the atomic bomb served Japan’s interests in multiple ways. But it also served U.S. interests. If the Bomb won the war, then the perception of U.S. military power would be enhanced, U.S. diplomatic influence in Asia and around the world would increase.
......
另一方麵，如果蘇聯參戰是導致日本投降的原因，那麽蘇聯可以聲稱他們能夠在四天內做到美國在四年內無法做到的事情，並且認為蘇聯的軍事力量和外交影響力將得到增強。一旦冷戰開始，斷言蘇聯的加入是決定性因素就等於向敵人提供援助和安慰。If, on the other hand, the Soviet entry into the war was what caused Japan to surrender, then the Soviets could claim that they were able to do in four days what the United States was unable to do in four years, and the perception of Soviet military power and Soviet diplomatic influence would be enhanced. And once the Cold War was underway, asserting that the Soviet entry had been the decisive factor would have been tantamount to giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
因此，在第二次世界大戰結束之前，美國就對其表麵上的“盟友”蘇聯發起了冷戰，並反對社會主義在世界各地的潛在傳播。Thus, before World War II was even over, the United States launched a Cold War against its ostensible "ally", the Soviet Union - and against the potential spread of socialism anywhere around the world.
美國間諜機構開始US spy agencies began 招募前法西斯分子和納粹合作者recruiting former fascists and Nazi collaborators。美國官員將日本甲級戰犯從監獄中釋放出來，其中一些人後來成為東京政府的領導人。. US officials freed Class A Japanese war criminals from prison, some of whom went on to lead the government in Tokyo.
其中許多人物都參與了右翼自民黨 (LDP) 的創建，該黨自 1955 年以來基本上以一黨製國家的形式執政日本（不包括僅僅五年的反對黨統治）。Many of these figures were involved in founding the right-wing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which has essentially run Japan as a one-party state since 1955 (excluding a mere five years of opposition rule).
教科書上的一個例子就是臭名昭著的戰犯岸信介，他統治著日本帝國的偽滿洲國傀儡政權，並與納粹勾結，目睹了種族滅絕暴行。他曾被短暫監禁，但後來被美國當局赦免，並在華盛頓的支持下於 20 世紀 50 年代升任日本首相。A textbook example of this was Nobusuke Kishi, a notorious war criminal who ran the Japanese empire's Manchukuo puppet regime and oversaw genocidal atrocities in collaboration with the Nazis. He was briefly imprisoned, but later pardoned by US authorities and, with Washington's support, rose to become prime minister of Japan in the 1950s.
岸信介與法西斯有聯係的家族仍然對日本政治擁有重要控製權。他的孫子安倍晉三是東亞國家曆史上任職時間最長的首相。Kishi's fascist-linked family still commands significant control over Japanese politics. His grandson, Shinzo Abe, was the longest-serving prime minister in the East Asian nation's history.
今天，糾正關於這段曆史的廣泛流傳的神話仍然很重要，因為它們對流行文化有著深遠的影響。Today, it remains important to correct widespread myths about this history, because they have a profound impact on popular culture.
2023年7月，好萊塢上映了獲獎導演克裏斯托弗·諾蘭執導的賣座電影《奧本海默》。這部電影取得了巨大的商業成功，但也因其政治問題而受到批評。In July 2023, Hollywood released a blockbuster film, "Oppenheimer", by award-winning director Christopher Nolan. The movie was a huge commercial success, but was also criticized for its politics.
這部電影將負責曼哈頓計劃洛斯阿拉莫斯實驗室的同名物理學家 J·羅伯特·奧本海默 (J. Robert Oppenheimer) 人性化，他通常被稱為“原子彈之父”。The film humanized the eponymous physicist who directed the Manhattan Project's Los Alamos laboratory, J. Robert Oppenheimer, commonly known as the "father of the atomic bomb".
晚年，奧本海默對自己在開發這種武器中所扮演的角色感到後悔，並發起反對核擴散的活動。Later in life, Oppenheimer came to regret the role he played in developing the weapon, and he campaigned against nuclear proliferation.
諷刺的是，奧本海默也成為美國政府麥卡錫主義的受害者，並因與左翼團體的聯係而受到迫害。Ironically, Oppenheimer also became a victim of the US government's McCarthyism, and was persecuted for his links to left-wing groups.
然而，盡管這部電影因描繪奧本海默複雜的內部鬥爭而受到讚譽，但它卻被指責粉飾了美國廣島和長崎原子彈爆炸的殘酷性。But while the movie was celebrated for depicting Oppenheimer's complex internal struggles, it was accused of whitewashing the brutality of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
在這些完全不必要的襲擊中喪生的 20 萬日本平民卻詭異地The 200,000 Japanese civilians who lost their lives in these totally unnecessary attacks were eerily 缺席了影片absent from the film。.
通過不斷地重複謊言，即用核武器攻擊 20 萬人是讓日本投降的唯一途徑，美國官員已經將這種消除不必要的、出於政治動機的戰爭罪行的平民受害者的行為常態化了。
（穀歌翻譯：Atomic bombing of Japan was not necessary to end WWII. US gov't documents admit it）
