Truman Bombing Justified

1480 Words3 Pages

On August 6, 1945, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, however, three days later, August 9, another bomb released on Nagasaki. President Truman came down to a decision in bombing Japan in hope of swiftly ending the war, essentially saving numerous Americans and Japanese lives. But, because of Japan’s gruesome and barbaric actions in the past, the use of atomic bomb accounted justified. However, people have heavily criticized his decision as they have suggested other alternatives; such as implying Operation Downfall, another name for invading Japan would have been a better solution, given how defeated and incapable they were, compared to the United States. Other historians have challenged and argued these justifications by stating that Truman …show more content…

Take into consideration Japanese war crimes; such as the Rape of Nanking (Nanjing), during the year 1937. The Japanese invaded, raided, and “senselessly massacred over 350,000 Chinese civilians and soldiers”-- a bloodbath. In accordance with the book, Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust, the deaths “exceeded. . . the American raids on Tokyo (an estimated 80,000-120,000)” as well as the two atomic bombs combined which “estimated to 140,000-70,000” (Shen). Furthermore, Japanese soldiers took pleasure of Chinese women, which they mutilate and murder afterward. Hence, these barbarities exhibited by the Japanese soldiers bolstered the justification as to why release the atomic bomb on Japan …show more content…

On July 1945, there were messages gathered from Togo, Japan’s minister of Foreign Affairs, to Sato, Japan’s ambassador to Moscow, which displayed their desire in surrendering in the war. Theses messages included, “July 11 - ‘. . . we hope to terminate the war’ July 12 - ‘it is his [emperor Hirohito] majesty’s heart’s desire to see the swift termination of the war’” (Long). Truman, on the other hand, was well aware of these messages and did not feel the need to question the use of the atomic bomb, perhaps in retrospect, it all seemed fair. Although, there have been multiples debates whether Japan was going to maintain the same mindset, which is to surrender, without the use of the atomic bomb. When researching regarding the given topic, one would often find two sides of the argument, those who says, in this case: “The fact of the matter is that Japan was not preparing to surrender; it was preparing to fight to the death [emphasis added]. . .” (Nichols). Then, the other side which defends the Japanese. In which one would argue that “prior to the August bombings, most of [the] Japanese. . . had been wiped out by an extraordinary series of air attacks. . . millions were homeless. By July of 1945, both Japanese and American military knew the war was lost”7. Likewise, food also became a problem “most Japanese were subsisting on a sub-starvation diet” (Weber). They were physically incapable of

Open Document