The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a necessary action taken by the United States government in order to ensure that their allies does not receive any more casualties from the conflict with the Japanese Empire during World War II. If United States did not use the atomic bomb on the island there would have been a higher number of casualties from the U.S troops. The first reason why the U.S would have lost more troops was because the Japanese soldiers had an extremely strong conviction that their country was the righteous side of the war and they were doing the right thing for the greater good of the empire. They would have fought until the last man while attempting to take the U.S soldiers with them. Another reason is that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were legitimate targets; Hiroshima was the main military base that act as a guardian for southern Japan while Nagasaki was a naval base that distributed supplies to the armies of Japan. The last reason why the use of the atomic bomb was justified was because there were no laws regulating the use of the atomic bomb during World War II but it also discouraged future use of other atomic bombs because after the success of the Manhattan project other nations developed their own bomb but were afraid to use it because they were concerned about the aftermath of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was morally justified because the United States had a legitimate reason at the time to use the atomic bomb, which was to save American lives. Before United States decided to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they were using a tactic called Island Hopping. Island Hopping involved American forces occupying islands that leads toward Japan. Du... ... middle of paper ... ...g the islands. It could also encourage the Japanese to surrender quickly so that American lives will be saved from certain doom. The stance of this argument could be rebut with the statement that the suffering of the inhabitants, which consisted mostly of people who aren’t able to participate in the war was immoral because they posed no threat at all towards the invading troops of the United States. The statement would be considered bias towards the invading American troops because it focused solely on the suffering of Japanese population without considering how much the American troops suffered throughout the war because they had a very high casualties from island hopping and also most the army was comprised of civilians that were forced to be drafted into the army meaning they also had no intention of harming anyone without the orders from the commander in chief.
Both atomic bombs were necessary to stop any further possibility of hostilities. These hostilities came in the form of landings on the Japanese islands, a possible Anglo-Soviet War over Far East interests. Its main purpose was to prevent Japan from fighting back by implementing their plan to defend the home islands. The fear caused from the sheer power of these bombs defused any further usage of these weapons after the war.
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.
Throughout history, there have been countless wars between different groups of people because of race, religion, economic basis, and endless other reasons. More often than not the party that initiated the war was not justified in doing so based on Douglas Lackey’s “just war theory”. One action initiated by the United States that has been furiously debated since the decision was made is the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and later Nagasaki. While some argue that President Harry S. Truman was wrong in making the decision that he did, I will be arguing that he was correct in deciding to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima because there is clear evidence that shows his actions were justified with both statistical proof as well as that the choice coincides with the criteria for “just war theory”.
Instead it would be more accurate to agree that the use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki a war crime, however, the use of it was necessary and justifiable. The atomic bomb has caused many lives in Japan of those who were not directly involved in the war and in had long lastly medical effects due to being exposed to nuclear material. In addition, it was justifiable and necessary that the United States acted due to the face that it was known for the Japanese to take drastic measures. It is important to consider how rash the Japanese were their “kamikaze pilots ' willingness to die for the motherland” (Beshears, 2005). Thus, the allies had legit reasoning to believe that the Japanese would not go down without a fight. Hence, making the use of the nuclear bomb necessary, since the entire world had already seen how cruel the Japanese were with brutal war crimes that happen throughout the war and spread terror. Also it is important to mention the attack on Pearl Harbor which at the time the United States was no involved in the war at the time. The United States needed to make Japan surrender so that nothing like that would happen again to them or the rest of the Allies. The use of the atomic bomb aided the Allies in getting one step closer to ending the war, however, the use of the bomb had a lot of after effects. Hence, “the four-ton uranium bomb wreaked unprecedented havoc
With multiple chances from the United States to surrender in the war and rejecting each one, the Japanese set themselves up for disaster. On August 6, 1945 the course of history was changed. Two atomic bombs were dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima, and three days later, August 9, 1945, on Nagasaki that ended World War II. Japan had already been a defeated nation from conventional bombs and World War II. Many innocent lives were lost, psychological scars were left on the lives of the bomb survivors, and thus many lives were changed forever. The atomic bombings caused many people to have genetic effects due to the radiation from the bombs. Revisionists have said the US used the bombs to blackmail the Soviet Union. The deployment of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was morally justified because it ended the war quickly, ultimately saved many lives, and was a beginning for many.
In my opinion, the decision to use the atomic bomb was harsh and rash, but necessary to end the war and protect American lives and interests. Sometimes harsh decisions need to be made in order to serve the greater good. It was somewhat unjust to the Japanese civilians but in the end saved many military lives that would have been wasted if the war dragged on for who knows how many more years. This is why, in the end, I feel it was the best way to put the storm of World War 2 to rest.
Drawing a dichotomy, the United States Government tried to put a human face on the forced evacuations by claiming America was protecting the Japanese by moving them out of a war zone. The government would claim it was helping the Japanese by relocating the Japanese to a zone of safety outside the military zone. Statements from the government would contradict each other throughout this period of time. For instance, Japanese-Americans were termed “enemy aliens,” while at the same time, they were encouraged to be good citizens and loyal Americans by enlisting in the war effort, relocating voluntarily, offering no resistance and no questioning of the relocation efforts and activities.
The development of the atomic bomb and chemical warfare forever changed the way people saw the world. It was a landmark in time for which there was no turning back. The constant balancing of the nuclear super powers kept the whole of humankind on the brink of atomic Armageddon. Fear of nuclear winter and the uncertainty of radiation created its own form of a cultural epidemic in the United States. During these tense times in human history officials made controversial decisions such as the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Dangerous biological experiments and bombs tests were carried out in the name of the greater good and national defense. Some historians and scientists argue that the decisions and acts carried out by the U.S. during World War II and the Cold War were unethical because of the direct damage they did. The United States' decisions were moral because it can be proven their actions were aimed at achieving a greater good and those that were put in potential danger volunteered and were informed of the risk.
... then turned to incidenary bombing at low altitudes with devastating results. In a few months 180 square miles of 67 different cities were destroyed; 2, 510,00 Japanese homes were destroyed leaving about 30% of the population homeless. With between 268,157 to 900,000 Japanese civilians killed there were more Japanese civilians killed by American weapons than were Japanese soldier and the majority of these deaths were direct results of firebombing. The United States then dropped two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing 200,000 people and within days the Japanese surrendered. While the morality of the bombing of Japan is highly questionable the effectiveness is not. The bombing led directly to the surrender of the Japanese and saved the lives of the many American troops that would have been lost had the United States engaged in the invasion of the mainland.
Firstly, the bombings were unjustified because of the locations where the bombs were dropped. Neither cities were military or naval bases. Hiroshima was “… on a river delta and had been a fishing settlement for centuries” (Lawton) while Nagasaki was a shipbuilding city. Furthermore, Nagasaki had been bombed five times in the twelve months previous to the assault by the U.S. (“The Bombing of Nagasaki”). Both cities were also highly populated leading to high casualty levels. Before the attacks, Hiroshima had a population of 255,000 people and Nagasaki was home to 195,000 people. When these cities were attacked, 70,000 out of those 255,000 died in Hiroshima and 42,000 out of 195,000 perished in Nagasaki. This means that the bombings whipped out 27% of Hiroshima and 22% of the Nagasaki population (Total Casualties).
...ings by saying that it saved millions of Americans, but I came to find out that, that wasn’t so true. While looking through many articles, books, and databases, I realized that before getting this assignment I only knew the things that were shared with me about this subject. I knew what everyone wanted me to know and I never questioned it. I believed that if our country were to bomb someone, they’d have justifiable reasons as to why they did it. This event taught me that just because there are a few myths as to why something happened, you don’t have to agree with them. America is my home, but never will I ever agree that the dropping of Little Boy and Fat Man on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary. They could have been avoided and lives could have
The decision to drop the atomic bomb was contemplated by officials in the American government for a prolonged period of time. Ultimately the conclusion was that dropping the bombs would be beneficial to America. The American government rationalized dropping the bombs by stating that it would terminate the war with Japan and save a plethora of American lives. America did issue an ultimatum declaring that Japan should cease to resist and in return conditions would be provided for Japan to finish the war with honor. This ultimatum was ignored and the alternative was absolute destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (Dollinger) Most officials believed that taking this last step would force Japan’s surrender and shorten the war which would result in a decrease of American casualties. (Barnes) Winston Churchill approximated that one million American lives were preserved by utilizing the atomic bomb.
All in all, though thousands of people died after the U.S bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the best solution to Japanese aggression. The casualties of the bombings are far much less than the casualties of Japanese aggression. Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more than a million lives that would have been lost if the war had continued for the next one year. The bombing was a better option because invasion of Japan would have resulted in many civilian casualties. Therefore, the US bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified.
The first reason why the US’s choice of using Atomic Bombs was justified is that it saved many soldiers’ life. If the war had continued, many more lives on both the United States and Japan’s side would have been lost. If the United States had invaded Japanese land, the number of casualties would soar. Also, the Japanese said that they would fight to their death in this war, also making the United States more nervous. The Japanese thought that suicide
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.