As the war in Europe wraps into a close, and the country leaders are choosing what to do with defeated Germany, war still waged on in the pacific. As America continues to drive the Japanese empire back further and further into a corner, the war seems relentless. Defeat is inevitable for people of Japan. With a strong military code, the Japanese fight to the last breathe, and never allowed themselves to be prisoners. Truman, the next man up to fill in the role of recently deceased president Roosevelt is faced with an arduous decision, advance more American soldiers into the final assault of Japan, or use the recently developed atomic bomb as a chance to end the war swift and quick as possible. Truman choose to use the atomic bomb to have a minimum amount of American casualties. “Until July 1945, the atomic bomb remained untested and the leading plan of the U.S. was to invade …show more content…
I have told the Sec. of War, Mr. Stimson, to use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new (Truman).” This was a blatant lie. Women and Children were mostly hit by the blast. One of the creators of the atomic bomb Albert Einstein himself said, "I have always condemned the use of the atomic bomb against Japan. I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made (Einstein).” Obviously more wrong came from the atomic bomb. America was the first to use it on another country, and the last. I hope it stays as is with all the nuclear power contained around the world in today’s
For decades, Harry Truman, the 33rd President of the United States of America, will always be remembered as the man who took the decision to launch the atomic bomb in two cities of Japan, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The president takes measure, which was a very important decision and any President would ever have to make. Harry Truman, the 33rd President of the United States, is known for the decision to drop the bomb in Japan in August 1945.
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.
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 Age represents the most epic era and composed of diverse controversial issues in the human history. In the late 1945, President Harry Truman informed to drop two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These two bombs quickly yielded the surrender of Japan and the end the World War 2. However, the impact of it led us to debate whether this decision was actually right or so. First off, it would be hard to imagine how Japan would have been surrendered without the atomic bomb. Therefore to save many American lives, President Truman believed that it was his duty to end the war as soon as possible. But the bombs took away innocent lives and killed civilians indiscriminately. “Atomic Age America” written by Martin
Kuznick, Peter J. "The Decision to Risk the Future: Harry Truman, the Atomic Bomb and the Apocalyptic Narrative.” JapanFocus. The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, 9 Dec. 2013. Web. 09 Jan. 2014.
“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 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.
To choose whether or not it was morally sound to use the atomic bomb, we must first examine the background as to what circumstances it was dropped under. In 1945, American soldiers and civilians were weary from four years of war, yet the Japanese military was refusing to give up their fight. American forces occupied Okinawa and Iwo Jima and intensely fire bombed Japanese cities. But Japan had an army of 2 million strong stationed in the home islands guarding against Allied invasion. After the completion of the Manhattan Project, For Truman, the choice whether or not to use the atomic bomb was the most difficult decision of his life. First, an Allied demand for an immediate unconditional surrender was made to the leadership in Japan. Although the demand stated that refusal would result in total destruction, no mention of any new weapons of mass destruction was made. The Japanese military commander Hideki Tojo rejected the request for unconditional s...
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...
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.
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
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...