The various decision making models on the decision to drop the bomb are, a rational actor model, organizational model, and a model of bureaucratic politics. President Truman used the rational actor model to make his decision to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “Rational actor theory treats the actions of governments and large organization as the acts of individuals”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Government leaders usually select the best option that will achieve the best result and at the lowest cost. Governments need to examine a set of goals, the evaluate the, then picks the goal with the highest payoff. “The appeal of this model lies in its predictive powers. Often enough, governments do not make clear why they act. On other occasions, they announce their goals but keep their strategies for achieving them secret”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Using standards of rational behavior help analysts put together leaps for the government’s unclear goals or actions. The model explains the progression of events that brought about the bomb’s development. First, several physicists saw that there was a possibility of nuclear fusion, Second, Roosevelt ordered speedup for the recovery period, Then, there were scientific breakthroughs that led to a higher certainty of success and lastly, the race with Germany and Japanese resistance in far east encouraged several scientists to push for success. “Although this outline of key decisions proceeds logically enough, there are troubling features to it, suggesting limits to the rational actor model”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Roosevelt is a rational actor model but there have been several committees and subgroups that were involved in the process. “Historians have offered contradictory answers ...
... middle of paper ...
... the president, would be the secretaries of states, defense (war and navy), and treasury”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Sometimes political actors would turn a less influential office into an important command post just like Henry Kissinger did when was Richard Nixon’s security advisor. Kissinger and Nixon had rehsaped teh style and substance of froeign affairs. Kissinger had saw Russia as a rival and had sought out to achieve global balance of power by pursuing areas of cooperation with Moscow. “With Nixon’s approval, Kissinger concentrated foreign policy-making power within foreign affairs bureaucracy and effectively curtailing the authority of Secretary of States William Rodgers”(1996-2009 WGBH Educational Foundation).
Bibliography
Davidson and Lytle, 2010. After the Fact The Art of Historical Detection. New York: McGraw-Hill.
The President of the United States is instrumental in the running of the country. He serves as the chief executive, chief diplomat, commander in chief, chief legislator, chief of state, judicial powers, and head of party. Article II of the Constitution states that the President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the laws created by Congress. He also is tasked with the authority to appoint fifteen leaders of the executive departments which will be a part of the President’s cabinet. He or she is also responsible for speaking with the leaders the CIA and other agencies that are not part of his cabinet because these agencies play a key role in the protection of the US. The President also appoints the heads of more than 50 independent
Decisions are the hardest thing to do, especially considering how Harry Truman decided to drop the US Atomic bombs onto Okinawa and Iwo Jima. The role to end the war with Japan was in his hands, but it would require releasing the most horrendous weapon ever known. Although, there was some controversy over Truman’s decision. Some people say that it was unnecessary to use the Atomic bombs, such as the Federal Council of Churches and the Christian Faith. They stated that: “As American Christians, we are deeply penitent for the irresponsible use already made of the atomic bomb. We are agreed that, whatever be one’s judgment of the war in principle, the surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. ("8 Primary Pros and Cons of Dropping the Atomic Bomb")” People also
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
This position requires the management of the Country by implementing the laws, nominations of officials, grant pardons, serve as Commander-in-Chief of the military, veto lows passed by Congress, and negotiate treaties. The President is also responsible proposing yearly budgets and helping boost economic development. The many divided tasks between Congress and the Presidency has made it
Imagine a society where everyone has a different opinion about dropping an atomic bomb to country that they are fighting with. What is an atomic bomb? An atomic bomb is a bomb which derives its destructive power from the rapid release of nuclear energy by fission of heavy atomic nuclei, causing damage through heat, blast, and radioactivity. The atomic bomb is a tremendously questionable topic. Nonetheless, these literary selections give comprehension on the decision about dropping the atomic bomb for military purposes. For example, the “Speech to the Association of Los Alamos Scientists” by Robert Oppenheimer, argues that we should have drop the atomic bomb, “A Petition to the President of the United States” by 70 scientists, asks President
In fear that Nazi Germany was developing an atomic bomb, on December 6 1941, scientists, engineers and the army raced to build the first man-made atomic bomb. These combined efforts provide the United States with wartime military advantage was dubbed ‘The Manhattan Project’. However, when by late 1944, concrete intelligence confirmed that Germany’s work on atomic weaponry had basically stalled in 1942, many scientists were given cause to pause and reassess their commitment to the project. Joseph Rotblat, for instance, quit the project maintaining that, ‘the fact that the German effort was stillborn undermined the rationale for continuing’. Indeed, he was the exception. Nevertheless, the scientists’ apprehensions reached a high plateau when Germany surrendered in May 1945. These events, among others, suggested that the bomb would be used, if at all, against Japan (a reversal, in a way, of the racism and genocide issues within Germany). Many scientists, thus, began to debate among themselves the moral and ethical implications of using an atomic bomb in the war and the fate of humanity in the imminent atomic age. In doing so, the scientists with a stronger sense of responsibility, resolved that, as they had created the bomb, they possessed both the legitimacy and intellect to formulate proposals regarding its use. On their political mission, the scientists fastened...
In 1945, Germany had surrendered, but the war in the Pacific raged on. The allies were becoming desperate to end the war before it was necessary to carry out a full scale invasion. New developments in science had made it possible for the United States to weaponize the atom, and the consequent bomb created was dropped on Hiroshima and later Nagasaki at the approval of President Harry S. Truman and his advisors. In years to come, Truman would have to face questions over the merit of his actions. Although some may believe the atomic bomb was needed because it ended WWII, it was unnecessary to drop the nuclear bomb because of the alternatives that existed, the effect it had on the Japanese people, and because of the unethical reasons for dropping it.
In the end, dropping the bomb was the best option for the United States. Unfortunately, there wasn’t an abundance of options and dropping the bomb was the most appealing in all aspects. The United States’ decision to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima required extensive research leading to its production. The main goal of the American side was to damage the enemy’s confidence, while choosing a target with the highest military output in order to conclude the war (Robinson).The group in charge of developing the technology was known as the Manhattan Project, and was kept top-secret. Selection began in the spring of 1945, with assistance from the Commanding General, Army Air Forces, his Headquarters (Robinson).There was a variety of experts working on the project, including mathematicians, theoretical physicists, and specialists trained in weather and blast effects
The Assembled States' legitimate choice to drop the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a military measure ascertained to speed the finish of the war. The bombings were atomic assaults amid World War II against the Realm of Japan by the Assembled States. A definitive choice made by President Harry Truman was a standout amongst the most troublesome and disputable issues of the twentieth century, since he needed to ask himself whether it was on the whole correct to utilize a weapon of unspeakable dangerous power. Albeit many may contend that the bombarding was exploitative and unethical, from a traditionalists' perspective, many firmly trust that it was more helpful since it abbreviated the Pacific War. President Truman was searching for
While Truman had his reasons for using the bomb, there were people who agreed with him were the orthodox historians while the people who disagreed called revisionists. Truman had thought through the possibilities and had decided that using the bomb would be the most effective and quickest tactic. As a president, Truman had a responsibility to protect his country, citizens, and foreign affairs, so deciding on the best method to establish everybody’s needs was difficult. There were many things to worry about: fighting in Iwo Jima and Okinawa, bombing Japan, and building the bomb. His decision was mainly based on how the US citizens felt and the actions of Japan.
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.
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 official reason given for dropping the bomb was to bring a quick end to tht war and save American lives. However, Takaki presents many different explanations as to why the decision to use the bomb was made. He disagrees with the popular belief that the decision to use the bomb was made solely to quickly end the war in the Pacific and to save American lives. Takaki presents theories such as international concerns, American sentiment, and racism in an attempt to more fully explain why this decision was made.
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.
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.