Essay on Analysis of Film "Einstein's Letter"

On July 16, 1939, at the insistence of Leo Szilard and Eugene Wigner, physicist Albert Einstein sent a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, warning the President of Nazi Germany's scientific research of the atomic bomb. His letter would acknowledge Roosevelt of the importance and the danger of this type of weapon in the hands of Adolf Hitler. Roosevelt immediately created the Advisory Committee on Uranium. After some time had passed, Einstein was forced to send another letter to Roosevelt because the government was not fully funding the committee because Leó Szilárd and Eugene Wigner were both born outside of the U.S. and were considered possible security risks. Roosevelt immediately ordered the government to give them the needed funds, and this brought about the Manhattan Project. After realizing the bomb would likely be used, Einstein regretted sending the letters to Roosevelt. Although a pacifist,

Lastly I will discuss the elements of Symbolic Interaction. This theory was brought to sociology by Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929), William I. Thomas (1863-1947) and George Herbert Mead (1863-1931). They believed that symbols, things with meaning and face to face interactions are how society views the world and communicate with each other , without symbols our social life would have no meaning. Symbolic interactionists analyzed how our social life depends on the way we define ourselves and others, for example with out symbols we would have no mom, dad, teachers, brothers and sisters. We would not know who we should respect and whom we are obligated too.

Symbolic Interactionism (1)- The theory of symbolic interactionism conveys how society is made up of symbols that create meaning, develop communication, and produce world views. At the North Hanover Mall all interactions and even moods were established because of simple symbols. The overall mood of the mall was almost the same form person to person, a look of boredom was on the faces of many whether young or old. The attitude seemed to appear in people shortly after they entered the mall, once they had observed other individual’s body language and expressions, they shifted theirs as if they were trying to fit in with the crowd. Contrastingly when an employee

The necessity of the atomic bombs have long been debated in America. Although they did contribute to stopping the war, Americans still wonder if murdering Japanese civilians was a necessary means to an end, or if it could have been avoided. Some people believe that the war would have ended without using the bombs. Others believe they were the sole purpose that the war finally ended. Many people were involved with bringing the bombs to fruition, such as the scientists, the government and military leaders, and the very teams that flew them to their targets. Then the President addressed the situation and American citizens spoke their minds. All of these people had their own thoughts on whether the bombs were needed. In this essay, the opinions on the atomic bomb’s necessity will be reviewed by presenting both the pros and cons from a variety of sources.

The dropping of the atomic bombs was so devastating because no one saw it coming. Although, the bombs shortened the war the lives of thousands were taken including men, women, and innocent children. The United States did send the Japanese a warning stating what they were going to do, but the citizens refused to pay attention to the warnings.When the bombings took place there were a lot of different arguments that will be discussed in this paper. These events took place on August 6, 1945, and August 9, 1945, and about 225,000 people were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many individuals have shared their opinions stating why they are for or against the bomb.

Thank God for the Atomic Bomb by Paul Fussel is a provocative essay about the opposing views on the two atomic bombs that America dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan ending World War 2, the most defecating event to happen in history. Over a few million-innocent people died that day, and thousands of the survivors and their offspring have suffered or died since of the result of the chemicals used in the bomb. Fussel was a purple hearted second lieutenant military man frontline in the war. He writes about the difference of opinion of using the atomic bomb from two views: those with firsthand combat with the Japanese and those without firsthand combat experience with the Japanese. Paul Fussel’s essay has the primary aim of persuading the reader that the Atomic bomb was the best choice as a means to end the war and he uses the primary mode of evaluation to persuade. His secondary aim is referential, to inform and explain to those who had no firsthand experience in that war and he uses the secondary mode of description to do this, citing from those against the bomb and those with their hands in the daily blood.

On August 2, 1938, in the heat of World War II, Albert Einstein, a physicist born in Germany, sent a letter to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd president of the United States. The letter suggested America to build an atomic bomb before the Nazi Germany does. However, it took more than two months for the letter to reach Roosevelt. On October 19, 1938, Roosevelt agreed, replying, “I found this data of such import that I have convened a Board … to thoroughly investigate the possibilities of your suggestion regarding the element of uranium” (“President Roosevelt's response to Dr. Einstein”). As a result, America held a secret program, code named Manhattan Project, and started to build new, destructive weapons in a laboratory in Los Alamos,

July 16, 1939 began as a rather ordinary day for Einstein. Two former students, now colleagues came to visit. Through this visit Einstein learned that nuclear fission was not simply theoretically possible, but a reality. He immediately recognized the repercussions; both good and evil. He realized that if he did nothing, Germany (Hitler) would be able not only to build an atomic bomb, but also to monopolize all known all sources of the precursor materials. Thus, to do nothing, would be to aid the Nazis. To write a letter, use his influence, to make sure the United States would have access to uranium (from Belgium), he was encouraging the development of a device whose sole purpose would be a weapon more devastating than any other ever imagined.

He further explained that the bombings would encourage enemy countries to challenge the United States through their own nuclear innovations, ultimately putting not only American cities at risk, but also the world. In addition to Szilard, another influential critic of Truman’s decision to drop the bomb was Albert Einstein, although he had previously urged President Roosevelt to start production of nuclear weapons. The reason behind Einstein’s change of heart was mainly due to the fear that the initial dropping of the atomic bomb by the U.S. would result in the inevitability of further destruction by other countries. Einstein explains this in his biography by saying, "when the war is over, then there will be in all countries a pursuit of secret war preparations with technological means which will lead inevitably to preventative wars and to destruction even more terrible than the present destruction of life." (Clark,

This investigation assesses to what extent the atomic bomb was necessary to end the Second World War. This investigation will be limited to the years 1939 to 1945, the duration of World War II, to assess the justifications for the bombing. However, this investigation will also examine sources as recent as the 2010s to evaluate the objective necessity of the bombing because it has remained a consistently controversial topic despite the time difference. Additionally, the necessity of the bomb is a matter that is independent from the initial bombing because its effect went beyond just ending the war, and, contextually, it is essential to examine its causes and effects with respect to events both before and after the war. Throughout this investigation, novels, memoirs, and web articles will be analyzed with evaluations of their origins, purpose, values, and limitations.

In this essay the scientists, Szilard and his 59 consigners, drafted a petition to the President of the United States, in hopes that he would not allow the use of atomic bombs during the war. The scientists who worked in the field of atomic power for many years, want the President to know that using atomic bombs could increase ruthlessness, which the country has already started on a journey to do so. They go on to state that the Air

Though people questioned why acts of war were committed, they found justification in rationalizing that it served the greater good. As time evolved, the world began to evolve in its thinking and view of the atomic bomb and war. In Hiroshima, John Hersey has a conversation with a survivor of the atomic bomb about the general nature of war. “She had firsthand knowledge of the cruelty of the atomic bomb, but she felt that more notice should be given to the causes than to the instruments of total war.” (Hersey, 122). In John Hersey’s book, many concepts are discussed. The most important concept for the reader to identify was how society viewed the use of the bomb. Many people, including survivors, have chosen to look past the bomb itself, into the deeper issues the bomb represents. The same should apply to us. Since WWII, we have set up many restrictions, protocols and preventions in the hope that we could spare our society from total nuclear war. The world has benefited in our perspective of the bomb because we learned, understand, and fear the use of atomic weapons.

When President Harry S. Truman ordered the nuclear attack on Hiroshima on the 6th of August, 1945, most people were supportive of it because it ended the war before an invasion became necessary. Seventy two years since the first and last nuclear attacks, many 'traditionalist' historians still believe that Truman made the best possible decision in the given circumstances. However, in the 1960's, Truman's critics, who reinterpreted history began to believe that the bomb played no significant role in ending the war and was thus unnecessarily used. These revisionist historians have gone so far as to characterize the use of nuclear weapons as “the single greatest acts of terrorism in human history” (Awan, 16). On the other hand, traditionalists argue that the bomb was an important

Some regard the atomic bomb as “the thank God for the atom bomb”. This places God on the U.S. side and regards the bombs as our saving grace. This bomb forced the Japanese to surrender which in turn proved the U.S. to be the heroes who saved the American’s lives.1 The Americans intended on ending the war but did not expect to end it with such a large number of casualties. The results of the atomic bomb and how it effected the Japanese people both emotionally and physically will be addressed. “The bombs marked both an end and a beginning—the end of an appalling global conflagration in which more than 50 million people were killed and the beginning of the nuclear arms race and a new world in which

In the summer of 1939, Einstein, along with another scientist, Leo Szilard, was persuaded to write a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt to alert him of the possibility of a Nazi bomb. President Roosevelt could not risk the possibility that Germany might develop an atomic bomb first. The letter is believed to be the key factor that motivated the United States to investigate the development of nuclear weapons. Roosevelt invited Einstein to meet with him and soon after the United States initiated the Manhattan Project (M. Talmey).