The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bomb On Japan

1456 Words6 Pages
Perhaps one of the most controversial topics that have ever existed is whether the U.S should have dropped the atomic bomb on Japan. To some people this is a matter of morals, while to others it is a matter of what was better politically, while some others say that it was better because it reduced the number of people that died. There is two views on the atomic bomb dropping, one side says it was the right thing to do while the other side says it was the wrong thing to do and it seems as if the American people are the only ones that are saying that it was the right thing to do. In countries like Russia, China, Japan etc. they teach in schools that it was the wrong thing to do, while here kids are taught that the use of the atomic bomb was justified.…show more content…
The problem with this is that we have to keep in mind that it’s not a democracy in Japan and they could not just take a vote on whether they will keep fighting or not, it was a strict dictatorship, and whatever the leader said they had no choice in it and had to do what they were told. So an example of this would be the atomic bomb dropping, some people say well the Americans had a choice to not drop it, therefore they are all immoral people because it was their decision to do it, but, in reality no one took a vote and it was the decision of the president and his advisors. The president decided that it was the best decision and that is the decision that was taken, despite what people would say about morals and that we shouldn’t do it. Same thing with Japan the Emperor decided it was the thing to do and that is exactly what they did. Also when the talks about surrender were going on; “The Japanese military command rejected the request for unconditional surrender, but there were indications that a conditional surrender was possible.”(U.S History.org) So there was clearly a way around the atomic bomb but the choice to drop it was taken anyways. There are some decisions that even in a democracy, the people would not have a choice, and this was one of the decisions for both America and Japan, so we cannot blame them for not surrendering and then killing a…show more content…
Another thing that can be brought up is that Eric Foner on page 878 in the section titled “The Nature of the War” tries to justify the atomic bomb by saying that the nature of the war was killing innocent civilians, and that Hitler killed millions in camps and bombings and then Britain did the same therefore we are not that bad. This is probably the lowest thing ever heard in the history of America. Justifying what this country did by comparing it to Hitler’s Germany and the Holocaust, is not exactly an excuse it’s just an embarrassment. The atomic bomb was a terrible decision and mistake that could have been avoided by the United States, however, what is done is done, and saying that Hitler killed more innocent people than us makes what we did okay is also not an option, Joe Paterno said,” We shall act with good intentions, but at times we will be wrong. When we are, let us admit it and try to right the situation” this is something that with all the pointless justification, we
Open Document