Dreadnought & Tuk tuk: Why an atoll?

What kind of lamplighter are U?

Why skimpy?

We had a Washington Cherry Tree and a treaty breaker there, so what was the point?

The year was 1946, so soon after the extermination, so why bother? What was the feared outlook? What were you testing?

Ignorance, that is why.

“In February of 1946 Commodore Ben H. Wyatt, the military governor of the Marshalls, travelled to Bikini. On a Sunday after church, he assembled the Bikinians to ask if they would be willing to leave their atoll temporarily so that the United States could begin testing atomic bombs for "the good of mankind and to end all world wars." King Juda, then the leader of the Bikinian people, stood up after much confused and sorrowful deliberation among his people, and announced, "We will go believing that everything is in the hands of God."

While the 167 Bikinians were getting ready for their exodus, preparations for the U.S. nuclear testing program advanced rapidly. Some 242 naval ships, 156 aircraft, 25,000 radiation recording devices and the Navy's 5,400 experimental rats, goats and pigs soon began to arrive for the tests. Over 42,000 U.S. military and civilian personnel were involved in the testing program at Bikini.” Source

242 ships notice.

Why would that be and why would Inchon?

“IN RECENT YEARS, historians looking into the reasons behindthe decision to drop the atomic bombs have been hampered by a lack ofunderstanding of how the casualty projections given to President Harry Trumanby the U.S. Army were formed, or even that specific methodologies existed fortheir creation. Complicating the situation even further for modern researchersis the fact that campaign, medical, and logistics planners used a form ofverbal shorthand in their communications with colleagues, who had a commonunderstanding of those methodologies and shared similar data on the relativestrengths and weaknesses of the opposing U.S. and Japanese forces. Consequently,World War II planning documents frequently have been misinterpreted and,together with a lack of research below the "top layer" of documents,this has led many historians to the conclusion that President Harry Truman'sassertion that he expected huge losses during an invasion^! 1 wasfraudulent, and his claim that "General Marshall told me that it mightcost half a million American lives to force the enemy's surrender on his homegrounds"^2 was a "postwar creation" to justifydropping the bombs on a "civilian target" and hide more sinister,calculating reasons for their use. For example, Kai Bird stated in the NewYork Times: "No scholar of the war has ever found archival evidence tosubstantiate claims that Truman expected anything close to a millioncasualties, or even that such large numbers were conceivable." ^3