Theer was no third bomb at the time Japan surrendered.
But there was a third bomb a week after they surrendered.
Theer was no third bomb at the time Japan surrendered. Not only that, the plutonium for a third bomb had not been shipped to Tinian. If it had been shipped, then a bomb might, might have been dropped as early as August 20th. However, although authorities disagree about whether it was Oppenheimer, Groves or Marshall who vetoed the shipment, they all agree that shipement of the plutonium had been halted. Late August or early September whould have been the soonest a third bomb could have been dropped, if Truman had immediately authorized the shipment--something he didn't do.
When we received Japan's conditional surrender offer on August 10, Truman ordered a halt to the A-bombing to give them some breathing room.
General Groves took that farther, and ordered a halt to shipping the plutonium pit.
On August 11, the plutonium pit was just going out the door at Los Alamos to be flown out to the Pacific theater when they got the order to halt shipping. It didn't make it any farther than the Los Alamos parking lot before being recalled.
Had Japan not made that surrender offer, there would have been no halt to the shipping, and the A-bomb drop date would have been August 17-18.
Around noon on August 14, Truman decided that enough time had passed, and ordered the pit to be shipped anyway. But that was halted once again a few hours later when Japan surrendered for real.
Had the shipment resumed on August 14, the A-bomb drop date would have been August 20-21.
Therefore, your statement that it's a good thing Japan surrendered when they did, so that we did not drop a third bomb on them is bullshit.
Not really. They missed the third bomb by about a week.
There was no third bomb to drop at the time Japan surrendered.
Yes. But there was a third bomb a week after Japan surrendered.
EDIT: Leaving aside that i'll take Tibbet's testimony over yours any day,
That is an error. With all the information that has been declassified and is now publicly available, I am more informed about the subject today than Tibbets was in 1945.
However, the difference between what I say and what Tibbets said is not very significant.
Going by Tibbets' statement, Japan surrendered about two weeks before the third A-bomb.
Going by my statement, Japan surrendered about one week before the third A-bomb.
One week verses two weeks.... A distinction without a difference?
you're making more things up.
Nope. You cannot show a single thing I've ever even gotten wrong, much less have made up.
At the end of 1945, there were only two bombs in our atomic arsenal, not the three you claim were available in September.
That is because after the war ended, A-bomb production was halted until they could design safer bombs.
Had the war continued, A-bomb production would have increased rapidly until we were making a minimum of seven a month.
Once again, you make things up, and i've seen you do it again and again--notoriously in the thread about bombing Germany in 1945, when you made things up about Dresden left, right and center.
Nope. You cannot show a single thing I've made up about Dresden, or about any other subject.
You'll always jump in to contradict established authority if it doesn't coincide with your screwy world view.
Well, I'm certainly not afraid to challenge established authority if they are wrong, but instances where I do that are somewhat rare.
In this particular case, established authority agrees with me 100%, so I don't anticipate that I'll be challenging them.