200,000 deaths. 2 catastrophic bombs. Japan had no other option than to surrender. Though that meant giving up everything the country and its people had worked for, this unforgivable act was a complete and utter devastation in which Japan had to accept. There was no preparation, no heads-up, no courtesy involved when the United States dropped two atomic bombs on Japan. Japan was devastated and with very little days to recuperate, they were struggling to explain what had just happened. Before they knew it, a second bomb had been deployed and there was no time to think. Japan was flabbergasted. The only thing the emperor knew he could do to save his country from any further damage, was to surrender. So the question remains, was this just?
On
…show more content…
Some argued the bombings were retaliation against the bombing of Pearl Harbor, but the science of atomic bombs in the United States had began in 1938 and the second World War had only began in 1940. Due to the war occuring after the research of atomic bombs, conclusions can be made that America used Japan as an “excuse” to use their newly-found weaponry. In addition, Pearl Harbor was a naval base for the United States. So, there was no possible way Pearl Harbor was the reasoning for the atomic bombs because both, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, did not contain any military base. Therefore, Pearl Harbor was simply a placebo pacifier for the mouths of each American to make their malicious act seem …show more content…
Bombing a country itself was not illegal, however, bombing a civilian population was unlawful. The League warned, “Any attack on legitimate military objectives must be carried out in such a way that civilian populations in the neighborhood are not bombed through negligence.” Even though the United States was not a member of the League of Nations, the unrighteous acts were no way to introduce the first use of atomic weapons. The introduction could have caused a domino-effect and left little meaning to the laws concerning atomic weapons in the League of Nations. If Japan had not surrendered, their furiousness could have been refurbished into fury and used against the United
In discussion of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, one controversial issue has the dropping of the atomic bombs being justified. On the other hand others believe that there were other ways of getting Japan to surrender and it was not justified, the only way we could get Japan to surrender was to invade them. Our strategy was to island hop until we got to Japan. Many more lives were at steak when doing that. Not only would just Americans would die, but a lot of the Japanese would have died as well, and the death toll would have much greater. 199,000 deaths came after the dropping of the atomic bombs. However, many American lives were saved, what the Japanese did to Pearl Harbor, and the treatment of our American soldiers while
The United States was justified in dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki for many reasons. First of all, just to start out, the bombings had nothing to do with Japan, it was about the Cold War and the real reason America used these weapons was to show Russia that the US possessed them. Second, the war in the Pacific had been raging for almost four years. The two battles immediately preceding the bomb decision were Iwo Jima and Okinawa, two battles where the Japanese fought to the death and the cost in American casualties was horrific. It was predicted that the invasion of the Japanese mainland at the Island of Kyushu -- scheduled for November of 1945 -- would be even worse. The entire Japanese military and civilian population would fight to the death. American casualties -- just for that initial invasion to get a foothold on the island of Japan would have taken up to an estimated two months and would have resulted in up to 75,000 to 100,000 casualties. And that was just the beginning. Once the island of Kyushu was captured by U.S. troops, the remainder of Japan would follow. You can just imagine the cost in injuries and lives this would take. Also It is not beyond the possibility that a million or more Americans could have been killed had we landed. The Japanese had correctly guessed where we intended to land, and were ready and waiting for us. The casualties would have been high. Another reason the atomic bomb was justified is the bomb was dropped with a desire to save lives. It is a matter of math. How many Americans lost their lives fighting how many Japanese at Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa. The mathematical formula showed the closer we got to Japan the more we lost.
The United States of America’s use of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has spurred much debate concerning the necessity, effectiveness, and morality of the decision since August 1945. After assessing a range of arguments about the importance of the atomic bomb in the termination of the Second World War, it can be concluded that the use of the atomic bomb served as the predominant factor in the end of the Second World War, as its use lowered the morale, industrial resources, and military strength of Japan. The Allied decision to use the atomic bomb not only caused irreparable physical damage on two major Japanese cities, but its use also minimized the Japanese will to continue fighting. These two factors along
Some decisions, even in a democracy, may not be up to the people. We cannot blame either America or Japan for their actions. Another point to consider is Eric Foner's justification of the atomic bomb on page 878 in the section titled "The Nature of the War." Foner argues that the nature of the war was killing innocent civilians, and that Hitler killed millions in camps and bombings, and then Britain did the same. However, comparing the United States to Hitler's Germany and the Holocaust is not an excuse, but rather an embarrassment.
Atomic Bomb in World War 2 During World War II the United States government launched a $2 billion project. This project, known as the Manhattan Project, was an effort to produce an atomic bomb. This project was taken on by a group atomic scientists from all over the world.
Instead it would be more accurate to agree that the use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki a war crime, however, the use of it was necessary and justifiable. The atomic bomb has caused many lives in Japan of those who were not directly involved in the war and in had long lastly medical effects due to being exposed to nuclear material. In addition, it was justifiable and necessary that the United States acted due to the face that it was known for the Japanese to take drastic measures. It is important to consider how rash the Japanese were their “kamikaze pilots ' willingness to die for the motherland” (Beshears, 2005). Thus, the allies had legit reasoning to believe that the Japanese would not go down without a fight.
The attack on Pearl Harbor had changed the common view of the Japanese as nearly supernatural fighters, and this new view instilled fear in Americans. The view also instilled with the Americans the belief that Japanese differed from them in more than just militant aspects, but also in basic aspects of humanity. Fear of the Japanese would lead the Americans to want extra assurances that the Japanese threat would end, and Americans would be safe. The idea that the Japanese were different than Americans and Europeans on a basic level would also encourage the use of the atomic bomb because the prospective murder of women, children, and other Japanese civilians would hold less meaning. Evidence of racism from one of the American leaders who had direct influence on Truman and the decision to use the atomic bomb could help prove the role of racism in the decision. Also, propaganda supporting the atomic bomb featuring racist elements would prove the role of
Continuing on, the bombing of Japan was also unnecessary due to the unacceptable terms of the Potsdam Declaration. After Germany’s surrender on May 7, 1945, the U.S. created a treaty, called the Potsdam Declaration, with terms of surrender for Japan (Lawton). Among those terms was one which stated, “We call upon the government of Japan to ...
“My God, what have we done?” were the words that the co-pilot of Enola Gay wrote in his logbook after helping drop two bombs, one in Hiroshima and one in Nagasaki, that killed an estimated two-hundred thousand individuals. The bombings were completely unnecessary. Japan was already defeated because they lacked the necessary materials to continue a world war. The Japanese were prepared to surrender. There was no military necessity to drop the atomic bombs nor is there any factual information stating that the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dropped to “save the lives of one million American soldiers.” The United States bombed Japan in August of 1945. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were uncalled for and could have been avoided.
The first reason that the United States should not have dropped the bomb is because the U.S. violated the Geneva Protocol. The Geneva Protocol banned the use of chemical weapons in war. According to Siebert, “The use of atomic bombs violated these principles: excessive force was used to defeat the enemy; the direct targets were civilians and non-military installations; and the damage caused by radiation poisoning at the blast site and in the surrounding environment was neither limited nor contained”, which proves the United States was wrong in dropping the atomic bomb. That is the first reason why the United States should not have dropped the bomb on Japan.
August 6th, 1945, 70,0000 lives were ended in a matter of seconds. The United States had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Today many argue whether or not the U.S. should have taken such a drastic measure. Was it entirely necessary that we drop such a devastating weapon? To answer that first we must look at was going on in the world at the time of the conflict. The U.S. had been fighting a massive war since 1941. Moral was most likely low, and resources were at the same level as moral. Still both sides continued to fight and both were determined to win. Obviously the best thing that could have possibly happened would have been to bring the war to a quick end with a minimum of allied casualties. Harry Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb was entirely warranted and was in the best interest of Americans and the world. Three factors should be considered to fully realize this. First, what would have happened should we have not dropped the bomb? Would WWII have ended shortly afterwards without nuclear arms-not likely. Secondly we must consider the Japanese people’s extreme dedication to their country and emperor, willing to give up their own lives without thinking to stop the enemy. Lastly the morality of nuclear bombing must be explored. While many may argue against the use of such a seemingly cruel form of attack was unnecessary, it is obvious that the atomic bomb was the only means to an end of WWII.
Japan was the only nation that was still fighting against the allied countries when Germany surrendered, and its army was in very poor conditions: its troops were considerably weak, its amount of armament was running out, and the government was about to surrender in a matter of months . In addition, the final decision was not informed or warned to Japanese authorities which, in that case, could have probably prevented the catastrophe, the dropping place of the devastating bombs were of limited military value and, finally, the decision was made partly thinking of the value of its development, the political intimidation that it would create on the Soviet Union and the rest of the world, and man’s natural but vicious need of power and leadership.
Admittedly, dropping the atomic bomb was a major factor in Japan's decision to accept the terms laid out at the Potsdam agreement otherwise known as unconditional surrender. The fact must be pointed out, however, that Japan had already been virtually defeated. (McInnis, 1945) Though the public did not know this, the allies, in fact, did. Through spies, they had learned that both Japan's foreign minister, Shigenori Togo and Emperor Hirohito both supported an end to the war (Grant, 1998). Even if they believed such reports to be false or inaccurate, the leaders of the United States also knew Japan's situation to be hopeless. Their casualties in defending the doomed island of Okinawa were a staggering 110,000 and the naval blockade which the allies had enforced whittled trade down to almost nothing. Japan was quickly on the path to destruction. (Grant, 1998). Of course, the Allies ignored this for the reason that dropping the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would intimidate Russia. Had they truly been considering saving more lives and bringing a quick end to the war in Japan, they would have simply waited them out without the major loss of life seen at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
]. They had to weigh carefully the present and future costs and benefits for the American people. They decided to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The choice they made was justifiable.
Many were left clueless of why the United States went to the extent of using the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki because using a bomb was illegal. Also, the United States was meant to serve as a model for a place with abundant human rights, but the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which was an inhumane act. A multitude of people held the opinion that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not justified by the United States. As a result, after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the people of the United States were left in complete disarray. The United States’s choice to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki was illegal.