At about eight A.M on August sixth, 1945 the Japanese city Hiroshima was destroyed by the deployment of the first nuclear weapon, nicknamed “Little Boy.” Soon after, at about eleven A.M the following day, a second bomb was dropped, called “Fat Man” on Nagasaki. Together, these bombings caused massive destruction. The death total was well near 220, 000. Only portions of these deaths were from the days of the bombings, with an equal number occurring later in the year from exposure to radiation. More have died since from leukemia. It is unclear as to why such devastation necessary. These targets were cities, not exclusive military positions. The deaths were mostly civilians, not soldiers. Countless innocent lives were ruined by this choice by American military leaders. It is questioned why the bombs were dropped at all, much less why they were dropped where they were. Many think that if the bombs had to be dropped, the US should have chosen less civilian populated areas. Leahy was named as Chief of Staff of the army and navy to President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942 and was useful in this position in all the Second World War, and continued under President Harry S. Truman. In relation to the bombings he said, “It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were defeated and ready to surrender…” (Alperovitz, 3). Many high officials, not just Leahy were aware that it was not the last resort that the American government was selling to the general public. There were other options that were either left unexplored thoroughly or outright ignored. Even the President Dwight D. Eisenhower thought “it wasn’t necessary to hit them with ... ... middle of paper ... ...or America's defense against future trans-Pacific aggression.” (Alperovitz, 324.) Alperovitz says of General Arnold “there is also substantial, but less direct evidence (including some which seems to have come from President Truman himself) that General Arnold argued explicitly that the atomic bomb was not needed.” (Alperovitz, 322-4; 335-7) Evidence can be found for the fourth member, Evan King, thinking the bombings were unnecessary. At the very least, we know he “didn’t like the bomb, or any part of it.” (Alperovitz, 342). Alperovitz provides detailed information on the views of staff assistants, deputies and others working closely with the Joint Chiefs which makes it extremely difficult to believe that the advice given to the President by his top military leaders at the time was that there were no alternatives to the use of the atomic bomb. (Alperovitz, 319-70)
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.
In August of 1944 the war in Europe was over and the face off between the United States and Japan had finally arrived. The United States had to choose between sending hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, to invade Japan killing and being killed by the hundreds of thousands, OR dropping a newly developed weapon called the atomic bomb on two cities in Japan which would result in tens of thousands of civilian lives with little cost to US servicemen. The only hope of ending the war quickly and honorably was to drop the bombs. Calls for surrender were ignored and the Japanese hierarchy, Okinawa and Iwo Jima had shown clearly what an invasion of Japan would be like. The decision was made, the bombs were dropped, the war was ended and both military and civilian lives were saved by both countries.
...ar the use of weapons of this magnitude, the American idea of the Japanese people has changed, and we now have set up preventions in the hope of avoiding the use of nuclear weaponry. John Hersey provides a satisfactory description of the atomic bombing. Most writers take sides either for or against the atom bomb. Instead of taking a side, he challenges his readers to make their own opinions according to their personal meditations. On of the key questions we must ask ourselves is “Are actions intended to benefit the large majority, justified if it negatively impacts a minority?” The greatest atrocity our society could make is to make a mistake and not learn from it. It is important, as we progress as a society, to learn from our mistakes or suffer to watch as history repeats itself.
In August of 1945, both of the only two nuclear bombs ever used in warfare were dropped on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. These two bombs shaped much of the world today.
Under President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration the atomic bomb was being developed. After Roosevelt died, his vice president Harry Truman was appointed President of the United States. Truman was never informed about the bombs development until an emergency cabinet meeting (Kuznick 9). Truman had to make the fatal decision on whether the bomb was to be dropped on Japan. With the idea of going to war, Truman had to think about the lives of the thousand American soldiers. The American soldiers had begun using the method of island hopping, because the bomb was not available. The idea of dropping a bomb was that the war itself could possibly end in its earliest points. The dropping of the atomic bomb could also justify the money spent on the Manhattan Project (Donohue 1). With a quote by Franklin D. Roosevelt “This will be a day that will live in infamy”, Pearl Harbor was a tragic day for Americans. The United States had lost many soldiers, which they had claimed that they will eventually get revenge. The alternates of dropping the bomb was also discussed at the Interim Committee. The American government was trying to get an invitation response from the Japanese government. If the United States did not drop the bomb and ‘Operation Downfall’ ha...
One of the main opponents to the atomic bomb was William Leahy. Chief of Staffs to the president, Leahy saw the bombings as barbaric and unnecessary as he believed the war against the Japanese was already won. He believed war should not be won by killing women and children.
The bomb that landed in Hiroshima was called the “Little Boy” (World War 2 Atomic Bomb 2). The bomb ended up killing about 170,000 people. 70,000 people died the first day and 100,000 people died in the next few months due to the radioactivity of the bomb and burns from the bombing (Ford 1).... ... middle of paper ...
During World War II on August 6, 1945, an American B-29 bomber dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over the city of Hiroshima in Japan. Only three days later did another B-29 bomber drop an atomic bomb over the city of Nagasaki also in Japan. The United States joined with the Allies, which were Britain, France, and the USSR to battle the Axis Powers, which were Germany, Italy, and Japan after Pearl Harbor in 1941 when the Japanese attacked the US forces. Japan had surrendered in 1945 due to the dropping of the bombs. These two atomic bombs were called by their nicknames; the one dropped on Hiroshima was named “Little Boy”, and the one dropped on Nagasaki was named “Fat Man.” Some may argue that the United States of America was unjust in the bombing on Japan, while others believe that the bombing was the only way to have Japan surrender and bring an end to World War II. President at this time, Harry Truman made this final decision hoping for it to bring the outcomes he wanted. The bomb killed men, women, and children while also causing major destruction to both cities. The US was just in taking this action because Japan most likely would not have surrendered without the dropping of the atomic bombs.
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...
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.
In 1945, the United States was facing severe causalities in the war in the Pacific. Over 12,000 soldiers had already lost their lives, including 7,000 Army and Marine soldiers and 5,000 sailors (32). The United States was eager to end the war against Japan, and to prevent more American causalities (92). An invasion of Japan could result in hundreds of thousands killed, wounded and missing soldiers, and there was still no clear path to an unconditional surrender. President Truman sought advice from his cabinet members over how to approach the war in the Pacific. Although there were alternatives to the use of atomic weapons, the evidence, or lack thereof, shows that the bombs were created for the purpose of use in the war against Japan. Both the political members, such as Henry L. Stimson and James F. Byrnes, and military advisors George C. Marshall and George F. Kennan showed little objection to completely wiping out these Japanese cities with atomic weapons (92-97). The alternatives to this tactic included invading Japanese c...
To fully examine the factors that led to the United States dropping an atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki, one can look at the event as a result of two major decisions. The first decision concerned the use of newly developed nuclear weapons in lieu of other military techniques to secure a timely Japanese surrender. The second decision was to use several of these weapons instead of only one. Although the Truman administration displayed little hesitation or ambivalence over the decision to use atomic weapons (Walker, 51), it is important to examine what factors contributed to these swift actions. It was believed that dropping an atomic bomb on Nagasaki would resolve a number of problems in a simpler fashion than prolonging the conventional warfare until Japan finally ceded defeat.
Historian Robert James Maddox starts the debate by siding with Truman and states that he made the right decision in dropping the bomb. Maddox uses several influential meetings, speculations and the presidents’ personal opinions on the situation to defend his statement. Some examples he uses include, Japanese military power and mentality, saving American lives, and unconditional surrender. In short, because the use of the atomic bomb occurred, the Japanese military lost their lust to fight to the end, countless lives were saved, and Japan surrendered. Therefore, although many Japanese lives were lost in the conflict the right decision was made by Harry Truman to authorize the usage of the bombs.
Overall, I believe that Truman's decision for dropping the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan was unjustified and uncalled for. The bomb killed about 80,000 innocent Japanese civilians. The Japanese were defeated and they were ready to surrender. Dwight D. Eisenhower even felt regretful from dropping the bomb, because he didn’t want the United States to be the first country to use weapons of mass destruction on a heavily populated city.
During the First World War, America dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, which killed around 90,000 to 166,000 in Hiroshima and another 60,000 to 80,000 in Nagasaki. These include who died as a result of the force and excruciating heat from the blast and also death cause by acute radiation poisoning. This exposure to radiation also caused cancer and other radiation related diseases such as leukemia. Children born to the survivors are often reported to have small head size and mental disability, as well as their physical growth is