More handpicked essays just for you.
The history of the atomic bomb essay
Explain critically when the atomic bomb was used in 2 world war
The history of the atomic bomb essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
For years, people have debated whether President Truman should have allowed the atom bomb to be used on Japan. The dropping of the atom bomb was indeed the right choice. There is a lot of evidence that support it. It was not only morally acceptable, but it was the best strategic choice that America could have chosen. It got rid of the Japanese’s main sources for supplies. In the long run, it also helped prevent the war from lasting any longer. Otherwise, the Japanese people would have continued to fight. The biggest thing about the bomb that people debate about is whether dropping the bomb was moral or not. This action was indeed moral. The first reason is that it fulfills the requirements of the Principle of Dual Effect. It act was indifferent. …show more content…
All the other strategies would have been more devastating. One plan was to invade Japan. This plan would have been worse due to the number of casualties, estimated to be over five million. The ones that would have suffered were the Americans, the Allies, the prisoners at Japanese prison camps, and most of all the Japanese. The reason why so many would have died is because of the fact that all of Japan, especially the military leaders, were determined to win the war at all costs. This included turning the population into soldiers. By invading Japan, so many lives would have been …show more content…
This plan would not be as bad as a plan as invading Japan, but it is still a terrible plan. Many cities have been destroyed, and 3 million people have already died. If the plan continued, more people would have died from conventional bombing then from when the atom bomb was dropped. It would have taken longer for Japan to surrender. Many other people, such as American soldiers and Japanese militarized civilians, would have been at risk of dying as well. Strategies are important, but the effects are important as well. It is always important to add the long-term effects of an action when judging the righteousness of an action. Looking at what happened when the bomb dropped, it was the best way to stop the war. After the bomb dropped, the emperor realized that Japan needed to surrender. A few days later, Japan surrendered. Many lives on both sides were saved because Japan surrendered. However, this is not the only way to look at this
On August 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over Hiroshima. Three days later, a second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. On August 15th, the Japan announced unconditional surrender in World War II. To this day historians still discuss why the U.S. decided to use the atomic bombs. Orthodox historians argue that the decision to drop the bombs was a military one designed purely to defeat the Japanese. Revisionist historians argue that the bombs were not needed to defeat Japan; the bombs were meant to shape the peace by intimidating the Soviets. After analyzing the documents in The Manhattan Project it has become clear that the U.S. used the bombs during WWII not only to defeat the Japanese, but also to intimidate the Soviet Union
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.
We agree that, whatever be one’s judgment of the war in principle, the surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. The “8 Primary Pros and Cons of Dropping the Atomic Bomb” People also say how Japan was already defeated, concluding why the bombs were unnecessary. Although, many others say that the dropping of the atomic bombs saved their lives, but the debate over the decision to drop the atomic bomb will never be resolved. The war against Japan bestowed the Allies with entirely new problems as they encountered an enemy with utterly unfamiliar tactics.
There are many opinions surrounding the question: Was the decision by Truman to drop the atomic bomb ultimately the right or wrong decision? Not only can this question be answered in many different ways, it can be interpreted in many different ways as well. Overall, Truman ultimately made the right decision to drop the atomic bomb. This can be supported by the fact that the atomic bomb helped prevent the deaths of American troops, saved the lives of foreign citizens, and in comparison the atomic bomb was not as destructive as the firebombing in Tokyo.
... Stimson, Churchill, Truman were all very aware of this. Declassified documents state that “the Japanese leaders had decided to surrender and were merely looking for sufficient pretext to convince the die-hard Army group that Japan had lost the war and must capitulate to the Allies.’’ (Alperoviz) According to this scenario there would have been some casualties but no more than 5000.
The use of the atomic bomb against Japan was completely justified in both cause and impact. An intense weapon was necessary to force a quick Japanese surrender. The bomb saved thousands upon thousands of American and Japanese lives that would have been lost if the war continued or an invasion occurred. The bomb was the only way to end the suffering of the millions who were being held captive by the Japanese oppressor. The weapon of mass destruction also sent a powerful message to the shaky Soviet allies. The choice to use the atomic bomb was justified because it compelled a Japanese surrender, saved countless lives, served as retribution for the sufferings of many people, and acted as an anti-Soviet deterrent.
The Atomic Bomb Should Not Have Been DroppedAs President Obama signs new nuclear policy, we are reminded of the longand sordid history of nuclear policy in the United States. We have come a long waysince we decided to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II.It is amazing that we continue debating this initial deployment of nuclear weaponrytoday. The US should not have decided to drop these atomic bombs. This decisionwas morally incorrect and unnecessary. Thousands of people died who did not needto die, and many more became sick from radiation poisoning. The bombs wiped twoentire cities off the map. How can anyone even argue for this in the first place?One argument that was used to support dropping the bomb was that theJapanese forfeited their rights when they aggressively attacked Pearl Harbor andcommitted war crimes against prisoners and the Chinese. However, this argument does not work for a few reasons. First, there are two types of justice in war. There isthe justice for going to war (
On August 6th, 1945, the United States of America dropped the world’s first atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima in Japan. Two days later, a second bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. These two bombs were the most devastating weapons ever seen, and their effects on human beings and property were plainly horrifying. Approximately 110,000 people were killed; most of them were innocent civilians who just happened to have lived in the wrong place at the wrong time. Although using this weapon was an atrocity to both the Japanese, and humanity in general, the world was at war. No matter what ulterior motives may have existed, the fact remains that the bomb was a justifiably necessary measure to bring an early end to aggressive war that was instigated by Japan. Japan would never have surrendered unconditionally, as decreed in the Potsdam Ultimatum. Invasion of the Japanese home islands were out of the question because of the ferocious defense that would have been staged, and the huge number of casualties that it would entail. The bomb shocked the Japanese militarists into surrender and gave the “peace-party” the added credibility they required to bring about a quick end to the war. The use of the bomb also kept Russia out of the war, preventing problems that had occurred in post-war Germany, and later on in Korea. When all factors are taken into consideration, the use of the atomic bomb actually saved more lives, both Japanese and American than it took.
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
There were many arguments and factors as to if Truman decided correctly and if the United States should have dropped the bombs. There were many disputes supporting the bombing. Some being the Japanese were warned early enough, it shortened the war, and it saved many Americans lives. There are also voluminous quarrels against the United States bombing the Japanese. Some of these are the bombing killed innocent Japanese civilians who did not deserve it, the Japanese was about to surrender before we bombed them, and the United States only blasted the Japanese because of racism toward them. Though there are many valid reasons for and against the bombing, there is still much controversy today whether president Truman made the right decision.
In my personal opinion, after gather as much information as possible, I think that the use of the atomic bomb is impracticable and a waste of time, money, and lives. If I were President of the United States I could have made the decision to not use the Atomic bomb on Japan. Using this weapon would only open the door to more destruction. After dropping this bomb, I don’t think it would have ended the war. It probably would have ended World War II, but I think that it would have created more wars to come. People, most likely Japan, would have wanted revenge and find a way to counterattack. They would try to create a more dangerous destruction weapon that would allow them to retaliate and destroy. I, as President, would have wanted to prevent that. And in the best interest of my country I would have made the decision to keep this nuclear weapon out of war.
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...
On August 6, 1945 the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. This was an extremely controversial military strategy in the United States. Was the United States justified in the dropping of the atomic bomb? The U.S. feared the rise of communism and gave aid to any country against it. The U.S. also fought countries threatening the spread communism. One of these countries was Japan. We began a harsh and brutal war against Japan and against communism. This war was killing many soldiers and Japan was not backing down. President Truman decided to use the atomic bomb when things were getting worse. The decision to use the atomic bomb was a difficult one and many people wonder if it was the right choice.