Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
was the us justified in usuing the atomic bomb to end world war ii
the atomic bomb change history
air defense during ww2
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In contrast, Maier and Selden’s thesis claims the act of dropping the atomic bomb was completely justifiable and not a war crime is the counter argument. Since, both authors address the fact that the world was at war and that aerial bombing was not something new, however, the technology advances were. In addition, their logic is reasonable because at the time of World War II almost everyone was using strategic and tactical aerial bombing, not to mention the Allies wanted to end the war as soon as possible. Thus, the atomic bomb was justifiable, however, it was a war crime. The objective of the tactical bombing was to aim at military targets it achieves its objective, however, killing thousands of lives in the process. The statement by Maier …show more content…
While on the other hand, another thesis claims that the act of dropping the atomic bomb was complexly justifiable and not a war crime. Both sides had their weakness, however, they both had strong logical points. The first thesis strongest point was that without a doubt the use of the atomic bomb was a war crime because it killed so many and those whom it did not kill are left suffering. Thus, this argument contributes to present day fears of nuclear wars. In contrast, the second thesis is that even though the use of the atomic bomb may seem like a war crime. nevertheless, it was still justifiable because the allies did not know for sure if the Japanese were to surrender and the longer they would wait the more lives that would be …show more content…
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. Hence, making the use of the nuclear bomb necessary, since the entire world had already seen how cruel the Japanese were with brutal war crimes that happen throughout the war and spread terror. Also it is important to mention the attack on Pearl Harbor which at the time the United States was no involved in the war at the time. The United States needed to make Japan surrender so that nothing like that would happen again to them or the rest of the Allies. The use of the atomic bomb aided the Allies in getting one step closer to ending the war, however, the use of the bomb had a lot of after effects. Hence, “the four-ton uranium bomb wreaked unprecedented havoc
On August 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over Hiroshima. Three days later, a second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. On August 15th, the Japan announced unconditional surrender in World War II. To this day historians still discuss why the U.S. decided to use the atomic bombs. Orthodox historians argue that the decision to drop the bombs was a military one designed purely to defeat the Japanese. Revisionist historians argue that the bombs were not needed to defeat Japan; the bombs were meant to shape the peace by intimidating the Soviets. After analyzing the documents in The Manhattan Project it has become clear that the U.S. used the bombs during WWII not only to defeat the Japanese, but also to intimidate the Soviet Union
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.
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
The use of the atomic bomb against Japan was completely justified in both cause and impact. An intense weapon was necessary to force a quick Japanese surrender. The bomb saved thousands upon thousands of American and Japanese lives that would have been lost if the war continued or an invasion occurred. The bomb was the only way to end the suffering of the millions who were being held captive by the Japanese oppressor. The weapon of mass destruction also sent a powerful message to the shaky Soviet allies. The choice to use the atomic bomb was justified because it compelled a Japanese surrender, saved countless lives, served as retribution for the sufferings of many people, and acted as an anti-Soviet deterrent.
One of the most controversial decisions that have been made, in the history of the United States, was Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The ever so controversial topic of the dropping of the atomic bombs has successfully driven people insane. People feel strongly that this decision was atrocious and unnecessary, while others believe the polar opposite, that it was completely necessary. Some historians argue that the human cost to the Japanese population can never justify the use of such weapons. Other historians see it from an optimistic perspective, that it would not have been moral if atomic weapons had not been used to end the war as quickly as possible. President Harry S.
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 (
The statement “Killing 150,000 people in less than a second actually allowed fewer lives to be lost.” might sound horrendous. However, that statement is the reason why the United States was able to win the Second World War. In contrast to this statement, some people might argue that it is inhumane to massacre that many people in less than a second. The dropping of the atomic bombs on August sixth and ninth of 1945 was the correct decision for American in order to effectively and efficiently end World War Two. America should have dropped the bomb because it saved American lives, there was a lack of incentives not to use the bomb, and dropping the bombs was the quickest way to end the war.
“The atomic bomb certainly is the most powerful of all weapons, but it is conclusively powerful and effective only in the hands of the nation which controls the sky” (Johnson 1). Throughout World War II, the war was in pieces. The Germans were almost at world domination along with their allies, the Italians and Japanese. The Japanese and United states had remained at combat with each other since the bombarding of the Pearl Harbor ("U.S. Drops Atomic Bomb on Japan "1). There was abundant controversy as to whether the United States should have used the atomic bombs or not. There were many factors as to the argument relating to the atomic bombs leading to the United States final decision. Many people had arguments for the bombing and others had arguments against the bombings but it is still not determined if the United States made the right decision.
The year was 1945. World War II was nearly over. Germany had been defeated and the allied forces were sure to win the war. The only unsure thing was how many lives would be lost in defeating Japan. The United States decided to drop the atomic bomb on August 6, 1945. On that day the Enola Gay dropped "Little Boy" on Hiroshima. Three days later the United States dropped "Fat Boy" on Nagasaki. 240,000 civilians, mostly women and children, lost there lives on these two days. On August 14, 1945 Japan surrendered unconditionally. Was it necessary? I believe that the U.S. could have used other means to bring about the end of the war. This paper will note a few reasons for dropping the bomb, followed by a discussion of several alternatives to it's the use.
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.
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was directed towards peace, it was also used as a fear factor to fear the opponent side of what they can do. The action taken toward Japan was made to reduce or ended the war. In the article The Men Who Dropped the Bombs, they explained how their mission would impact and change the world. “ Were going to do something that I can’t tell you about right now, but if it works, it will end or significantly shorten the war.”2 (Theodore Van Kirk, 84). Kirk reminiscence about his colonel Paul description of how powerful their mission would be when they reach their target and successfully achieve their goal to stop or minimized the death tolls and safety of both Americans lives and its allies by stopping and putting an end to Japan role in the war. Every leader and president of a nation or country will do what are in the best interest of the country and it civilians especially during a national threat and president Truman and prime minster Churchill found that it was necessary for the use of the atomic bomb. In their memoirs Linethal (1996) notes that Truman and Churchill insisted that the use of the bomb prevented a huge causalities that would have resulted in ipso facto, from an invasion of Japan by more conventional forces. Although there are many resources and facts that support both sides, many historians, research and others lean more on the unjustified actions taken by The United
All in all, though thousands of people died after the U.S bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the best solution to Japanese aggression. The casualties of the bombings are far much less than the casualties of Japanese aggression. Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more than a million lives that would have been lost if the war had continued for the next one year. The bombing was a better option because invasion of Japan would have resulted in many civilian casualties. Therefore, the US bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified.
The first reason why the US’s choice of using Atomic Bombs was justified is that it saved many soldiers’ life. If the war had continued, many more lives on both the United States and Japan’s side would have been lost. If the United States had invaded Japanese land, the number of casualties would soar. Also, the Japanese said that they would fight to their death in this war, also making the United States more nervous. The Japanese thought that suicide
There are many people who oppose the use of the atomic bombs; though there are some that believe it was a necessity in ending the war. President Truman realized the tragic significance of the atomic bomb and made his decision to use it to shorten the agony of young Americans (“Was the Atomic Bombing”). The president knew of the way the Japanese fought. They fought to the death and they were brutal to prisoners of war. They used woman and children as soldiers to surprise bomb the enemy. They made lethal weapons and were taught to sacr...