More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of nuclear weapons Essay
Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb leffler ihj bulletin
Harry Truman deciding to use the atomic bomb
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
President Harry S. Truman’s decision to procedure atomic weapons against the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was simply one of the most debatable decisions in history. President Truman gave the forward motion to drop the atomic bomb on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Noted Truman titled the bombings “The greatest achievement of organized science in history” (http://www.pbs.org). Truman targeted those specific cities because he thought that they were a key location for the armed forces of japan. Truman wanted to destroy Japan's power to create war. Noted “Truman was targeting things such as shipping docks, factories, and communication.” (http://spartacus-educational.com) He believed that it would spare the lives of the Japanese people, saving them from broad devastation. There have been debates on whether or not President Truman’s Decision to drop the bombs was the accurate thing to do. Father Wilson Miscamble, a Professor of History at Notre Dame defends …show more content…
It caused the need for physical and medical treatment to those who survived. From what Doug Long’s article said “the dropping of the bombs did more than just end thousands of lives. It caused the Soviet Union to enhance its atomic bomb program right before an atomic precedent had been set.” (http://www.spectacle.org) He asks if it is worth it while reading this topic for whatever understanding it may give for upcoming decision-making and future of saving lives on all sides. A few alternatives could have been, waiting on Soviets to enter into Japan and a further conservative bombing. Doug Long thinks that these alternatives could have prevented the war from lasting as long as it did. I think Doug Long touched on a good point about the alternatives since the bombs, in reality, should have been dropped if the war actually got out of control. In the end I think Truman just ended up being a little impatient with Japan and just decided to show his
According to document A, President Truman believed that it was his duty to protect and save American lives And that's exactly what he did. If we did not go through with the atomic bomb, then we would have had to get Japan to surrender another way, yeah we could have put up an economic blockade and continuously bombed them like Admiral William Leahy wanted to do in in document A. Or we could have invaded and lost many more lives in the process, the war would have dragged on costing more American lives and more money for the United States.
In Prompt and Utter Destruction, J. Samuel Walker provides the reader with an elaborate analysis of President Truman’s decision behind using the atomic bomb in Japan. He provokes the reader to answer the question for himself about whether the use of the bomb was necessary to end the war quickly and without the loss of many American lives. Walker offers historical and political evidence for and against the use of the weapon, making the reader think critically about the issue. He puts the average American into the shoes of the Commander and Chief of the United States of America and forces us to think about the difficulty of Truman’s decision.
Throughout history, there have been countless wars between different groups of people because of race, religion, economic basis, and endless other reasons. More often than not the party that initiated the war was not justified in doing so based on Douglas Lackey’s “just war theory”. One action initiated by the United States that has been furiously debated since the decision was made is the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and later Nagasaki. While some argue that President Harry S. Truman was wrong in making the decision that he did, I will be arguing that he was correct in deciding to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima because there is clear evidence that shows his actions were justified with both statistical proof as well as that the choice coincides with the criteria for “just war theory”.
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.
Both sides of the war had suffered tremendous losses and the numbers would have continued to grow over the course of the war. By choosing to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, I believe the lives saved in the long run outweigh the initial number of lives lost. There is no way to put a price of one human life against another, but the total number of deaths prevented could have been multitudes compared to the hundred thousand killed in the atomic blasts. From the numbers alone, I support President Truman’s utilitarian
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.
bomb. The introduction of this weapon began a nuclear arms race. Some say that the
The dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan were ethical decisions made by President Harry Truman and the United States government. By the time of the atom bomb was ready, the U.S. had been engaged in military conflict for over four years and lost over 400,000 soldiers. Truman claimed, "We would have the opportunity to bring the world into a pattern in which the peace of the world and our civilization can be saved" (Winkler 18). The bomb was aimed at ending the war immediately and avoiding prolonged battle in the Pacific Theater and the inevitable invasion of Japan. President Truman hoped that by showing the Japanese the devastating weapon the U.S. possessed, that the war could be brought ...
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.
The war was coming to a victorious conclusion for the Allies. Germany had fallen, and it was only a matter of time until Japan would fall as well. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson was at the forefront of the American war effort, and saw atomic weaponry as a way out of the most monumental war ever. As discussed in Cabell Phillips’ book, The Truman Presidency: The History of a Triumphant Succession, Stimson was once quoted as saying that the atomic bomb has “more effect on human affairs than the theory of Copernicus and the Law of Gravity” (55). Stimson, a defendant of dropping the bomb on Japan, felt that the world would never be the same. If the world would change after using atomic weapons, could it possibly have changed for the better? One would think not. However, that person might be weary of the biased opinion of White House personnel. He or she should care more for the in depth analytical studies done by experts who know best as to why America should or should not have dropped the atomic bomb. As more and more evidence has been presented to researchers, expert opinion on whether or not the United States should have dropped the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has also changed. More and more researchers seem to feel that the atomic bomb should never have been used (Alperovitz 16). Despite several officials’ claims to enormous death estimations, an invasion of Japan would have cost fewer total lives. In addition, post atomic bomb repercussions that occurred, such as the Arms Race, were far too great a price to pay for the two atomic drops. However, possibly the most compelling argument is that Japan would have surrendered with or without the United States using the atomic bomb. In defiance of top...
The Revisionists and the orthodox views are different opinions on President Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb. The revisionists believed that Truman’s decision was wrong and there could have been alternatives. They say that the Bomb was unnecessary and it was only used as a “diplomatic tool” and to show the power of th...
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.
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.
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...