American Responsibility for the Bombing of Hiroshima
The decision to inaugurate the nuclear age by dropping an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima was one of the most momentous acts of the twentieth century. To this day the wisdom of that decision is still a subject of controversy.1 The bomb was developed in great secrecy. This momentous decision that affected the entire planet was made by only a select few. In America, with its democratic government, the whole country finds itself responsible for the actions of its leaders, in particular the President. The leaders are elected with the select purpose of making decisions for the whole. They were responsible for looking at the war and the direction in which it was heading. The Americans would have to deal with the results of their leaders’ actions. Public opinion after the bomb was dropped showed whether the Americans actually approved of these decisions or not. This made the decision to drop the atom bomb on Hiroshima all the more important. Not only would those who ordered the bombing be responsible for the destruction, but the entire country would also be responsible for the actions of its leaders.
The road that led to the bombing of Hiroshima was a long and covert one. In fact, the research and development of the atomic bomb was so secretive that when Vice President Harry S. Truman entered the Presidency following the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt, he had no knowledge of it. Yet he would be the central figure in making the decision to use the bomb. In April 1945, Secretary of War Henry Stimson(pictured - left) and General Groves briefed Truman(pictured - right) about the "Manhattan Project", the top-secret program that researched and developed the atomic bomb.2
The ...
... middle of paper ...
...
9. "Why Did They Drop the Atomic Bomb," The Atom Bomb.
The various decision making models on the decision to drop the bomb are, a rational actor model, organizational model, and a model of bureaucratic politics. President Truman used the rational actor model to make his decision to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “Rational actor theory treats the actions of governments and large organization as the acts of individuals”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Government leaders usually select the best option that will achieve the best result and at the lowest cost. Governments need to examine a set of goals, the evaluate the, then picks the goal with the highest payoff. “The appeal of this model lies in its predictive powers. Often enough, governments do not make clear why they act. On other occasions, they announce their goals but keep their strategies for achieving them secret”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Using standards of rational behavior help analysts put together leaps for the government’s unclear goals or actions. The model explains the progression of events that brought about the bomb’s development. First, several physicists saw that there was a possibility of nuclear fusion, Second, Roosevelt ordered speedup for the recovery period, Then, there were scientific breakthroughs that led to a higher certainty of success and lastly, the race with Germany and Japanese resistance in far east encouraged several scientists to push for success. “Although this outline of key decisions proceeds logically enough, there are troubling features to it, suggesting limits to the rational actor model”(Davidson and Lytle, 2010). Roosevelt is a rational actor model but there have been several committees and subgroups that were involved in the process. “Historians have offered contradictory answers ...
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.
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
President Harry Truman’s use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan during the Second World War is the most controversial decision in history. While it was an undoubtedly difficult decision, it was indeed necessary in order to end this six-year war that had ravaged the world. While many critics argue that the bomb was used primarily as an act of vengeance toward Japan, simplifying such a crucial moment in human history downplays the very real risk invading Japan posed to the United States. While avoiding strained relations with the other Allied countries, Truman had to assess the possible danger of the Soviet Union in a post-war world. Furthermore, the possibility of an arms race, the moral implications of using this weapon, and the number of American lives that would possibly be lost invading Japan were among the numerous pros and cons Truman had to consider when contemplating the use of this powerful weapon never before unleashed on humanity.
Maddox, Robert. “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb.” Taking Sides: Clashing View in United States History. Ed. Larry Madaras & James SoRelle. 15th ed. New York, NY. 2012. 280-288.
One of the most argued topics today, the end of World War II and the dropping of the atomic bombs still rings in the American ear. Recent studies by historians have argued that point that the United States really did not make the right choice when they chose to drop the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Also with the release of once classified documents, we can see that the United States ...
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”.
One of the most controversial decisions that have been made, in the history of the United States, was Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The ever so controversial topic of the dropping of the atomic bombs has successfully driven people insane. People feel strongly that this decision was atrocious and unnecessary, while others believe the polar opposite, that it was completely necessary. Some historians argue that the human cost to the Japanese population can never justify the use of such weapons. Other historians see it from an optimistic perspective, that it would not have been moral if atomic weapons had not been used to end the war as quickly as possible. President Harry S.
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
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 fact that the United States resolved to drop an atomic bomb over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan shocked many people, including U.S. citizens. The U.S. chose a brutal weapon when choosing the atomic bomb, as proven by the thousands of deaths it caused. Today, some people still question the motives for such a ruthless choice of weaponry. The atomic bomb, however destructive and questionable, seemed to be the only way to ensure “unconditional surrender” of the Japanese. The atomic bomb was, in fact, “a clear step designated to force Japan’s unconditional surrender;” however, this statement fails to give attention to the larger picture that influenced the U.S.’s decision to use the atomic bomb. By using the atomic bomb before any other nation
During the final stages of World War II the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the country of Japan. On August 6, 1945 America dropped the first nuclear weapon ever used in war, an atomic bomb by the name of “little boy.” It killed approximately eighty thousand people, not including the amount of people that died due to the radiation exposure. Then on August 9, 1945 America dropped its second atomic bomb by the name of “fatman” that killed roughly forty thousand people. The dropping of the atomic bombs lead to Emperor Hirohito announcing Japan’s surrender in the war on August 15, 1945. “Why We Dropped the Bomb” written by Gar Alperovitz discusses the use of the atomic bombs, why they were used, and how it helped America gain political power. “Thank God for the Atom Bomb” written by Paul Fussel discusses how the atomic bombs were used to save lives against the Japanese. Gar Alperovitz’s article is a more persuasive piece compared to Paul Fussel’s article, because it provides facts and examples that help us understand why America used the atom bomb and how it helped America’s political status.
During the time period when Franklin D. Roosevelt was in office, it was during WWII. Japan attacked the U.S. on Dec. 7, 1941 and was known as Pearl Harbor. When that happened, Roosevelt did not hesitate to ask Congress to officially declare war on Japan. During the war, there was a proposal of an atomic bomb landing over Hiroshima and Nagasaki to finalize the war. To this day there is still controversy that if that atomic bomb was actually necessary to end the war, because of the number of innocent casualties suffered from the Japanese. The aim of this investigation is to answer the question: To what extent was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki necessary to end the war with Japan? To answer this question, the investigation will need to determine if there was justification for this type of action led by the U.S. government as well as the cons. The tactics of F.D.R., Truman, citizens and historians will be evaluated. Books and speeches about Pearl Harbor and speeches of the Presidents will be provided to answer the investigation.
The United States’ decision to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima required extensive research leading to its production. The main goal of the American side was to damage the enemy’s confidence, while choosing a target with the highest military output in order to conclude the war (Robinson).The group in charge of developing the technology was known as the Manhattan Project, and was kept top-secret. Selection began in the spring of 1945, with assistance from the Commanding General, Army Air Forces, his Headquarters (Robinson).There was a variety of experts working on the project, including mathematicians, theoretical physicists, and specialists trained in weather and blast effects Headquarters (Robinson). In order to monitor all of the results, the city had to be untouched, meaning the target had to have no signs of previous bombings. Based on these requirements, the designation of Hiroshima for the bombing was not a simple determination. After a target was selected and the weapon was developed, testing was set to begin. On July 16, 1945, the first test in Alamogordo, New Mexico, proved that the bomb was prepared for release onto...
The moral and military necessity of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings has been a subject of debate for almost half a century. Most revisionists emphasize the victimization of Japan during the attacks. They often forget the military realities and the historical context while judging whether it was necessary for America to use nuclear weapons against the two Japanese cities. It is important to note that Japan was the aggressor. Japan triggered the war that led to the bombing of its two cities with its sneak attack on America’s Pearl harbour in 1941. Subsequent systematic and flagrant violation of several international agreements and norms through employment of chemical and biological warfare and mistreatment of prisoners of war and civilians aggravated the situation[ Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth. (NY: Knopf, 1995), 89]. A response was needed to deal with increased aggression from Japan. Allied military planners had to choose between invading Japan and using the US atomic bombs in 1945[ Ronald Tabaki, Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb. (Little, Brown, 1995), 101