World War II played host to some of the most gruesome and largest mass killings in history. From the start of the war in 1939 until the end of the war in 1945 there were three mass killings, by three big countries on those who they thought were lesser peoples. The rape of Nanking, which was carried out by the Japanese, resulted in the deaths of 150,000 to 200,000 Chinese civilians and POW. A more well-known event was of the Germans and the Holocaust. Hitler and the Nazi regime persecuted and killed over 500,000 Jews. This last country may come as a surprise, but there is no way that someone could leave them out of the conversation. With the dropping of the Atomic bombs the United States killed over 200,000, not including deaths by radiation, in the towns of Nagasaki and Hiroshima and ultimately placed the United States in the same group as the Japanese and the Germans. What are the alternatives other than dropping the two A-bombs and was it right? The United States and President Truman should have weighed their opting a little bit more before deciding to drop both atomic bombs on the Islands of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. In the case of dropping the atomic bombs the United States did not make the right decision. This essay will explain through logic reasoning and give detailed reasons as to why the United States did not make the right choice. One of the most argued topics today, the end of World War II and the dropping of the atomic bombs still rings in the American ear. Recent studies by historians have argued that point that the United States really did not make the right choice when they chose to drop the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Also with the release of once classified documents, we can see that the United States ... ... middle of paper ... ...that Japan was ready to surrender. Stimson, Churchill, Truman were all very aware of this. Declassified documents state that “the Japanese leaders had decided to surrender and were merely looking for sufficient pretext to convince the die-hard Army group that Japan had lost the war and must capitulates to the Allies.’’ (Alperoviz) According to this scenario there would have been some casualties but no more than 5000. As noted before this was Truman original plan but due to the number that he received he backed away from it. Rufus explains that there would have only been 31,000 American casualties, not deaths. The rhetoric is being missed under stood according to him. The number that Truman has been given are deaths and not casualties. Casualties include those who did and those who were wounded. The number of Japanese casualties would have consisted of about 66,000.
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 of injuries and lives this would take.
We agree that, whatever be one’s judgment of the war in principle, the surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. The “8 Primary Pros and Cons of Dropping the Atomic Bomb” People also say how Japan was already defeated, concluding why the bombs were unnecessary. Although, many others say that the dropping of the atomic bombs saved their lives, but the debate over the decision to drop the atomic bomb will never be resolved. The war against Japan bestowed the Allies with entirely new problems as they encountered an enemy with utterly unfamiliar tactics.
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
The Atomic Bomb Should Not Have Been DroppedAs President Obama signs new nuclear policy, we are reminded of the longand sordid history of nuclear policy in the United States. We have come a long waysince we decided to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II.It is amazing that we continue debating this initial deployment of nuclear weaponrytoday. The US should not have decided to drop these atomic bombs. This decisionwas morally incorrect and unnecessary. Thousands of people died who did not needto die, and many more became sick from radiation poisoning. The bombs wiped twoentire cities off the map. How can anyone even argue for this in the first place?One argument that was used to support dropping the bomb was that theJapanese forfeited their rights when they aggressively attacked Pearl Harbor andcommitted war crimes against prisoners and the Chinese. However, this argument does not work for a few reasons. First, there are two types of justice in war. There isthe justice for going to war (
On August 6th, 1945, the United States of America dropped the world’s first atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima in Japan. Two days later, a second bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. These two bombs were the most devastating weapons ever seen, and their effects on human beings and property were plainly horrifying. Approximately 110,000 people were killed; most of them were innocent civilians who just happened to have lived in the wrong place at the wrong time. Although using this weapon was an atrocity to both the Japanese, and humanity in general, the world was at war. No matter what ulterior motives may have existed, the fact remains that the bomb was a justifiably necessary measure to bring an early end to aggressive war that was instigated by Japan. Japan would never have surrendered unconditionally, as decreed in the Potsdam Ultimatum. Invasion of the Japanese home islands were out of the question because of the ferocious defense that would have been staged, and the huge number of casualties that it would entail. The bomb shocked the Japanese militarists into surrender and gave the “peace-party” the added credibility they required to bring about a quick end to the war. The use of the bomb also kept Russia out of the war, preventing problems that had occurred in post-war Germany, and later on in Korea. When all factors are taken into consideration, the use of the atomic bomb actually saved more lives, both Japanese and American than it took.
President Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the direct cause for the end of World War II in the Pacific. The United States felt it was necessary to drop the atomic bombs on these two cities or it would suffer more casualties. Not only could the lives of many soldiers have been taken, but possibly the lives of many innocent Americans. The United States will always try to avoid the loss of American civilians at all costs, even if that means taking lives of another countries innocent civilians.
The decision to inaugurate the nuclear age by dropping an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima was one of the most momentous acts of the twentieth century. To this day the wisdom of that decision is still a subject of controversy.1 The bomb was developed in great secrecy. This momentous decision that affected the entire planet was made by only a select few. In America, with its democratic government, the whole country finds itself responsible for the actions of its leaders, in particular the President. The leaders are elected with the select purpose of making decisions for the whole. They were responsible for looking at the war and the direction in which it was heading. The Americans would have to deal with the results of their leaders’ actions. Public opinion after the bomb was dropped showed whether the Americans actually approved of these decisions or not. This made the decision to drop the atom bomb on Hiroshima all the more important. Not only would those who ordered the bombing be responsible for the destruction, but the entire country would also be responsible for the actions of its leaders.
World War II brought up many new technologies for warfare. Advanced on existing developments such as weaponry, ships, vehicles air crafts, navigational devices and medicine are just a few broad examples of developments in warfare during this time in United States and World history. One development, however, changed the entire way of warfare. The Atomic bomb was developed during this time out of fears that the Germans had the same technologies, or at least were working to obtain it. Once the United States had this technological capability of producing atomic weapons, the way of fighting was changed. Two bombs were dropped on Japan in August of 1945, one on the city of Hiroshima and the other on the city of Nagasaki. Afterward, the ear of atomic diplomacy came up in American international relations, which as we have seen today, has led to the development of even stronger, more deadly weaponry and bombs. The bombing of Japan also brings up the still prevalent debate of whether the bombings were justifiable or not. Historians Gar Alperovitz, Robert P. Newman and Barton Bernstein all have written essays expressing their opinions in the matter.
This investigation assesses President Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It will determine whether or not his decision was justified. This investigation will scrutinize the reasons that made Harry Truman feel inclined to drop atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Preventing further casualties along with the desire to end the war are two argumentative points that will be analyzed to determine if they were strong enough to justify the dropping of the atomic bombs. Excerpts from Truman’s memoirs and a variety of different titles were consulted in order to undertake this investigation. Section C will evaluate two sources for their origins purposes values and limitations. The first is a book titled The Invasion of Japan written by John Stakes in 1955. And the second is a book titled Prompt & Utter Destruction written by J. Samuel Walker.
“Remember Pearl Harbor—Keep ‘em Dying,” were words spat from soldiers’ mouths in the United States military during World War II. Anger filled millions of citizens in the United States after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Were these unresolved feelings between Japan and the United States the cause of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Did the United States have a concealed passion to show their strength and scientific advancement? Was the United States terrified of another invasion taking place on their soil? Why were the atomic bombs created and used in the first place? The actions of the United States were derived from the initial attack by Japan, which was due to Japan’s unwillingness to surrender. The atomic bombs were initially created because Germany was believed to be in the process of creating their own nuclear weapons. Many people in the world today believe the bombings of Japan were not necessary; that the bombings were the United States’ way of depleting the Japanese culture. These theories are completely incorrect. The truth behind this unresolved conflict is the bombing of Hiroshima was necessary, where as the bombing of Nagasaki was unnecessary. These actions all occurred because of Japan’s refusal to surrender, the United States’ want to save American lives, and the Allies’ want for the war to finish.
Upon reading “Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs Against Japan” by J. Samuel Walker, a reader will have a clear understanding of both sides of the controversy surrounding Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. The controversy remains of whether or not atomic bombs should have been used during the war. After studying this text, it is clear that the first atomic bomb, which was dropped on the city of Hiroshima, was a necessary military tactic on ending the war. The second bomb, which was dropped on Nagasaki, however, was an unnecessary measure in ensuring a surrender from the Japanese, and was only used to seek revenge.
Although WW II ended over 50 years ago there is still much discussion as to the events which ended the War in the Pacific. The primary event which historians attribute to this end are the use of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although the bombing of these cities did force the Japanese to surrender, many people today ask “Was the use of the atomic bomb necessary to end the war?” and more importantly “Why was the decision to use the bomb made?” Ronald Takaki examines these questions in his book Hiroshima.
Maddox, Robert. “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb.” Taking Sides: Clashing View in United States History. Ed. Larry Madaras & James SoRelle. 15th ed. New York, NY. 2012. 280-288.
World War II, which took place from 1939 until 1945, is the most destructive war in terms of destruction and lives lost in all history. At the end of World War II, America made the decision to drop two atomic bombs on Japan to end the war quickly, and this has been a very controversial issue ever since. After the fact, many questioned the decision made by American military leaders, wondering if they had well enough considered the Nuclear Era they would bring about by dropping the atomic bombs. In discussions of dropping the atomic bombs to end World War II, one controversial issue has been whether the United States was morally justified, and there are two basic schools of thoughts in this debate. On the one hand, some argue that dropping the bombs on cities, therefore targeting civilians, makes the bombs morally wrong. On the other hand, some contend that dropping the bombs to end the war quickly saved hundreds of thousands of American lives and therefore was morally justified. My own view is that dropping the bombs was the best decision for America to make with the information that they had at that time and the enormous number of lives that were saved.
The thought that killing hundreds of thousands of people would be moral is incomprehensible, but according to Utilitarianism if an action provides the greatest happiness for the greatest number than it is deemed morally right. During World War II the United states was put in the most profound situation of the entire war. The United States had developed