More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of the atomic bomb on the world
American Involvement In Ww2
United States involvement in World War 2
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of the atomic bomb on the world
Chapter 3: The Protection of American Soldiers William (Bill) Griswold, a World War II veteran, estimated that the war would have been extended 1-2 years if the bomb had not been dropped. He stated that if Japan had been invaded, he would have been sent to the front, and that the final decision to use the bomb saved his life. Veterans who reflect upon the use of the bomb generally have similar thoughts regarding the weapon and their own life. Don Wright, another war veteran, spoke about Japan’s ruthless attitude toward war, saying that Japan never would have surrendered, seeing what they were willing to put their country through, and that anyone who believes that they were close to a surrender clearly hasn’t paid much attention to facts and details. He states “I was very grateful to have been spared what might have been one of the …show more content…
In short, if the bomb had not been dropped, there would be no choice but to invade Japan, and hundreds of thousands of American soldiers would have died on enemy land. However, dying in combat was almost preferred when considering what had happened to the prisoners that were captured by the Japanese military. In 1907, Japan signed standards for the “human treatment” of prisoners (of war) at the Geneva Convention. However, after signing the agreements, Japan flagrantly violated international agreements, by torturing and murdering prisoners of war and forcing both prisoners and civilians into performing slave labor and acts of prostitution. In 1942, Japan indicated that they would follow the Geneva Convention rules, but continued to mistreat prisoners. They were infamous for their war crimes since the beginning. Japan even ran experiments similar to the ones in the Nazi death camps. Prisoners of war were often vivisected, as they were used to practice medical
During World War II American soldiers who were caught by the Japanese were sent to camps where they were kept under harsh conditions. These men were called the prisoners of war, also known as the POWs. The Japanese who were captured by the American lived a simple life. They were the Japanese internees of World War II. The POWs had more of a harsh time during World War II than the internees. While the internees did physically stay in the camps longer, the POWs had it worse mentally.
In 1942, groups of people were taken from all of the camps and sent to work on the Burma-Thailand Railway. In 1864 the Geneva Convention was formed internationally. The Convention laid down rules concerning the treatment and protection of prisoners during wartime. The Japanese did not follow this Convention as they continuously mistreated many prisoners, including Australian troops/soldiers and civilian prisoners. The Japanese saw the prisoners in camps as people who surrendered, therefore they were considered weak and cowardly because of a belief that the Japanese held that soldiers should die out respect for their emperor and country, known as the Bushido Code.
1.The dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima was necessary to end the war with the least number of total casualties and in the fastest possible way. The figures regarding the exact number of American lives that would’ve been lost has been highly debated, but considering the great resolve that the Japanese army had, they would almost surely have been more than those killed in Nagasaki, and that is just on the American side. I do not value American lives more than the lives of the innocent, many of whom were victims to the attack, but it is important to remember that regardless of whether we had dropped the bomb or not, we were fighting total war. In the many battles that would’ve occurred if the war had continued, women and children may have still been victims as we advanced our troops. These battles could’ve taken as long as another year, and who can say when the Japanese would’ve finally surrendered? They were filled with pride and resilience, and many soldiers would’ve prefered to die with honor, defending their homeland, than to surrender.
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 that the bomb was dropped with a desire to save lives. It is a matter of math.
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 imminent invasion of mainland Japan and the allied casualties that came with it were also a factor in the decision to drop the bomb. If the allied forces had invaded mainland Japan, many lives on both sides would have been lost, probably more than they lost in the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The tactics that the allies had used up to this point cost hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides. This was when the Japanese only had maybe two or three thousand men on an island; whereas on the mainland millions of people would fight until their death to protect their country. Can you imagine if the Americans invaded mainland Japan, where they had not only soldiers to fight against, but also the citizens of Japan?
During the initial blast the A-bomb released about 85% of its energy as intense heat followed by a supersonic shock wave that is felt as a highly destructive high pressure air blast, which can easily demolish tall buildings, not to mention people. After the initial blast radiation covers the area, causing people, animals, and structures to practically disintegrate. Even years afterwards people were still dying and having health problems related to the radiation they were exposed to long before. There were many people that were strongly opposed to the using of nuclear weapons on Japan. But invading the is land instead of bombing would have taken perhaps 1 million us soldiers lives.
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...
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...
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.
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.
It was actually unnecessary for the United States to do this because the Japanese government was going to surrender anyway. Many critics that analyzed the military decisions insisted that Japan was forced to bend to the will of the Allies, even if it brought shame to their nation forgiving up (“Hiroshima”, 2016). For this reason, the U.S did not need to drop the bombs on Japan because Japan would have to surrender, since their military was defeated in other attacks. According to Barnes (2016), the estimate of the amount of lives of troops and civilians were way too high to be realistic. If the United States had waited for Japan to surrender, then the estimated lives of many people being lost would not have been accounted for because Japan would not have continued fighting in WWII. Therefore, the United States was not justified in dropping the atomic bombs because Japan was bound to surrender and the United States caused a lot of unnecessary casualties that would not have occurred if they had let Japan surrender on their
In February and April 1945, the U.S attacked 2 islands of Japan. The first island was Iwo Jima, the Americans were able to capture the island but the Japanese soldiers never surrendered causing the American to kill every single soldier on the island. With tragic losses for both sides, 6,800 American soldiers dead and 21,000 Japanese soldiers dead. On the second island Okinawa the U.S attacked and suffered many loses again with the Japanese since they never surrender again. 7,300 U.S soldiers dead and 107,000 Japanese soldiers dead. Traumatic losses from just capturing 2 small islands. In total there was 14,100 dead American soldiers and 128,000 Japanese soldiers dead. When dropping the bombs on Japan we saved lives on both sides. Imaging what would happen if the U.S invaded Japan would end in deaths never seen before. 100,000 more dead American soldiers and 6x the amount of deaths of Japanese. This would of been the most inhumane thing to have happened.
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.
Without the use of the bombs, the war may never had come to a close. In Robert Oppenheimer’s “Speech to the Association of Los Alamos Scientists,” paragraph five states “... without atomic weapons it might be very difficult, it might be an impossible, it might be an incredibly long thing to win the war.” (“Speech to the Association of Los Alamos Scientists,” 23). This quote shows that the atomic bomb used to end the war was an excellent choice because without the atomic bomb the war would continue and could have escalated to a level of world destruction, but because of the use of the bomb the war was ended. Most obviously, the atomic bombs made it extremely easy to quickly end the war. Also, as stated in 70 scientists’ “Petition to the President of the United States,” “The war has to be brought speedily to a successful conclusion and attacks by atomic bombs may very well be an effective method of warfare.” (“Petition to the President of the United States,” 29). Not only was the bomb the easiest way to end the war, but it was also one of the most effective weapons. Certainly, the bombs were able to stop the country from going deeper into war and helped to save many lives by bringing a rapid end to the entire war. In www.ushistory.org’s “The Decision to Drop the Bomb,” it says, “Normandy-type amphibious landing would have cost an estimated million casualties. Truman believed that the bombs saved Japanese lives as well. Prolonging the war was not an