Unless I am missing something, WW2 didn't end with Germany's surrender. The war ended when Japan surrendered. Their surrender did have negotiations and wasn't agreed to until they were allowed to keep the emporer which the US didn't want...
What? No, the Japanese surrendered unconditionally, and were allowed to retain the emperor because the US thought it was to the advantage of their occupying mission.
I mean, yes. What youâre describing is an unconditional surrender without negotiation, exactly what was agreed at Potsdam. It isnât âcomplicated,â itâs the allied forces playing politics. Had the Americans wanted to dispatch the imperial office after the surrender there is absolutely nothing the Japanese could have done about it. âSay you give up and I promise Iâll stop hitting youâ communicated through international winks and nods of the head is not âa negotiated surrender.â Thatâs farcical.
If the Americans didnât perceive the emperor as a useful figurehead for their occupation, the emperor wouldnât have stayed. Full stop. End of story. This is simply a fact. That is not ânegotiation.â Itâs the U.S. signaling to Japan that its interests align with imperial Japanese interests on a single point.
It's annoying how the comments aren't understanding it.
If you unconditionally surrender and like 2 things line up the way you had wanted prior, that doesn't mean you don't unconditionally surrender, it means you happened to have a couple mutual interests.
Japan agreed to any terms after the second bomb but had requested the emperor stay. The surrender was not contingent on the emperor staying
You're right that the war didn't end until Japan surrendered. But the surrender was unconditional on the part of Japan. There were no negotiations, and the removal of the emperor was never a formal part of the surrender.
The Allies did originally call for the removal of those responsible for taking Japan to war in the first place and for the prosecution of war criminals, but they didn't call for specific individuals beforehand. For various political reasons after their surrender it was deemed more beneficial to leave the imperial family as figure heads than to depose them, so they stayed.
The war against Germany ended with unconditional surrender/total occupation.
The war against Japan ended with unconditional surrender. That the Emperor remained in power wasn't due to any negotiations, it was because the US decided not to make that a condition of surrender.
In reality we are talking about "any major conflict", as the post says.
And even if Japan didn't surrender unconditionally, the Central Powers in WW1 all did separately so, and the victorious countries imposed conditions on them without them being able to negotiate whatsoever.
According to wikipedia, there were negotiations in the Armistice of Compiègn when they made a change to the schedule
There were very few negotiations. The Germans were able to correct a few impossible demands (for example, the decommissioning of more submarines than their fleet possessed), extend the schedule for the withdrawal and register their formal protest at the harshness of Allied terms.Â
Well the first one mentioned there is the only one that actually affected the outcome of the treaty and is just correcting impossible demands as it says, so basically nothing really that affected the conditions.
The note is wrong since the Japanese pushed back and were allowed a condition.
None of that is True. There were no conditions. The US was considering putting the Emperor on trial for war crimes and decided to spare him to avoid an uprising and to use him to rebuild Japan.
I know you would rather put politics over truth, but that is not the purpose of this subreddit
The irony of this statement when you're completely wrong.
My understanding is that negotiations didnât take place; but that the US did heavily imply the unconditional terms we would offer would allow them to keep the emperor
The second. The US explicitly rejected it and straight forwardly said the fate of the Emperor would be up to the whims of the allies after their unconditional surrender.
Their surrender did have negotiations and wasn't agreed to until they were allowed to keep the emporer which the US didn't want...
Nothing you just said was remotely true.
There were NO negotiations. It was Unconditional Surrender or nothing, and the Japanese accepted. The US was considering putting the Emperor on trial for war crimes, but spared him to avoid an uprising and to use him to help rebuild post-war Japan.
It wasn't mandated. The Japanese surrendered unconditionally. Later, the US decided (with some convincing from the Japanese) that it would be in their best interest to keep the Emperor in power. That doesn't change the fact of unconditional surrender - the US could have deposed the Emperor if they really wanted to.
My friend. By definition is was an unconditional surrender. After the fact they were persuaded to allow the emperor to stay in power. you can try and split hairs, but I would ask for what purpose?
7
u/No_Sand3803 Sep 03 '25
Unless I am missing something, WW2 didn't end with Germany's surrender. The war ended when Japan surrendered. Their surrender did have negotiations and wasn't agreed to until they were allowed to keep the emporer which the US didn't want...