They used the bomb immediately after it was built. There was a single test, Trinity, then the next bomb went to Japan. How could they choose Japan years in advance when they used the bomb the second it came off the assembly line???

The US nuked Japan because a land invasion was projected to kill millions on both sides. Because Japan is mountainous and its people were prepared to fight till the bitter end, which was proven by the number of kamikaze attacks.

The US wanted the war to end quickly without losing a lot of their troops. The Japanese Emperor had to be convinced the war was unwinnable. The Atom bomb was the easiest way to do that. The US also avoided bombing Kyoto to preserve Japanese cultural heritage. If they wanted to to do maximum damage, they could have done worse.

It should be remembered that it was Japan that attacked the United States, which was at the time a neutral power. They, like Germany, brought the war and destruction upon themselves.

Somehow you twist a war that was started by Japan into "The US is racist". As an American, I find that incredibly offensive.

Not that the US wasn't, and isn't, still virulently racist against Asians in many ways, but we didn't undertake the entire Manhattan Project because of racism or just to show up Stalin, that's absurd.

You can study the initiation of the Manhattan project if you will. But once the bomb was built, it had to be used. And America at that point was already planning for the world after it had defeated the Axis powers and that is where the dark racist geopolitcs comes in.

It's a repudiation of the premise that "They (the US) chose Japan because its people were not white." Had the war in the Pacific ended first, the US would have dropped the bombs on Germany. Simplistic reductionist arguments like that only risk turning what could be interesting discussions into race-baiting flamewars.

As far as dropping the bombs as a display of power to Stalin goes, it's a conspiracy theory without hard evidence. I'm sure the US was aware of the wider geopolitical context of what they were doing, but if all they wanted was to show Stalin they had a working bomb, they could have dropped one on Alaska or anywhere. The US' primary concern at the time was ending the war.

There's probably an actual argument to be made for it being motivated by racism but what you have posted here is not doing much for the case.

“Always” the target?: While U.S. bomb scientists were racing against Germany, military planners were looking toward the Pacific

By Arjun Makhijani

As for racism; well it was a different time. But look at the vilification of the Japanese and the American internment camps during the war. Plus the subsequent wars in Korea and Vietnam.

the japenese killed americans in a surprise attack while US was not involved in the war. civillians were sacrificing to support the war effort. its not some mystery why the US would be eager to bomb japan and end the war. similarly, the japenese internment camps in the US were hardly inexplicable. when youre at war with people X, its reasonable to be at war with ALL people X, not just the ones in uniform. spycraft is a thing, and people often bear allegiance to their homelands. there are subtle types of sabotage that any enemy can perform.

you have to prove the US wanted to kill the japanese becuase of their race, instead of the much more obvious and well-supported claim that US wanted to get revenge and end the war in the same blow.

On the racial undertones, I am not the only who sees them - this is from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Japanese_sentiment_in_the...

Strategic bombing of Japan

Author John M. Curatola wrote that the anti-Japanese sentiment probably played a role in the strategic bombing of Japanese cities,[22] which began on March 9/10, 1945 with the destructive Operation Meetinghouse firebombing of Tokyo to August 15, 1945, with the surrender of Japan.[23] Sixty-nine cities in Japan lost significant areas and hundreds of thousands of civilian lives to firebombing and nuclear attacks from United States Army Air Forces B-29 Superfortress bombers during this period.[24] According to Curatola and historian James J. Weingartner, both firebombing and nuclear attacks were partially the result of a dehumanization of the enemy,[22] with the latter saying, "[T]he widespread image of the Japanese as sub-human constituted an emotional context which provided another justification for decisions which resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands" across Japan.[25] On the second day after the Nagasaki bomb, President Harry S. Truman stated: "The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them. When you have to deal with a beast you have to treat him like a beast. It is most regrettable but nevertheless true".[10][26]

Japan was already defeated when those bombs were dropped but they were seriously planning to fight to the last man/woman/child. There were plans by the state of mass suicide if they failed.

Now you may think dropping 2 nukes on them is an atrocity of the worst kind by the white man but consider you don’t know as much as the people making the decision.

However everyone goes into war thinking they have god on their side. Reality is that wars are won by having resources and being nasty.

To that point, the enemy will only surrender if they know you will accept their surrender and treat them decently rather than torturing and/or killing them. War-crimes make it harder to win wars by convincing the enemy they have nothing to lose,

(from other thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26867366)

As always, it's quite more a complex factor of several events than a simple story line.