Why did the Truman Administration decide to drop the atomic bombs on Japan in 1945? There has been much debate as to why Truman elected to drop the atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the summer of 1945. Historians have long debated the true purpose to which the atomic bombs were designed to fulfil upon there deployment. The Alperovitz thesis of the 1960 was accepted for many years. The thesis revolved around the idea that the atomic weapons were deployed as diplomatic tools to intimidate the Soviet Union. Like many revisionist historians this essay will oppose the thesis of Alperovitz, and in doing so, attempt to understand why it was that the Truman administration decided to drop the atomic weapons on Japan in the summer of …show more content…
Japanese officers high and low had been ready to fight till the death because surrender was considered dishonourable.'[6] To ensure that the fighting in the Pacific was completely nullified Truman had to destroy the Japanese will to fight. As Bonnet illustrates ‘winning the conflict was not only contingent on removing the opponent’s material capacity to resist, but also, its psychological capacity to resist.'[7]Truman's diary entries suggests that he understood that the Japanese defeat by invasion, would not necessarily guarantee the defeat of the Japanese throughout the entirety of the Pacific theatre, as his entry from August 6th suggests: ‘That its power may be an overwhelming influence towards peace.[8] Clearly, Truman understood that Japan had to be defeated psychologically as well as militarily if their defeat was to be ensured throughout the Pacific theatre of war. It was therefore paramount that Truman used the Atomic weapons to ensure the sustainability of peace in the Pacific and thus ensure that no more American lives would be lost. It was this aspect of the Atomic weapons deployment which was perhaps most attractive to Truman when he was considering how to bring about the defeat of the Japanese in June 1945. Truman did have other alternatives to the Atomic weapons by 1945; one such alternative to the Atomic weapons was to adjust the surrender terms to the Japanese. Another argument brought forward by Alperovitz in his thesis is the decision of the
On July 26, U.S. President Harry S. Truman and Allies issued a final ultimatum to Japan, known as the Potsdam Declaration. The Potsdam Declaration is a statement that called for the surrender of all Japanese armed forces. The Proclamation Defining Terms of Japanese Surrender consisted of thirteen conditions that the Japanese had to abide by. Japan was warned numerous times from the United States about the potential threat of an invasion or the use of a new weapon. “Japan would be warned that the new weapon would be used against Japan unless surrender was forthcoming.” Premier Kantaro Suzuki had rejected Truman’s final warning by stating that it was unworthy of public notice. January of 1945, a reporter for Newsweek wrote, “This intense hatred was first aroused by the sneak attack on Pearl Harbour. I remember men who, when they came to the Pacific, had no particular hatred of or desire to kill Japanese. When treachery affects you, or somebody you know, you grow to hate violently.” President Truman was disturbed over the unwarranted attack of Pearl Harbour and the murder of their prisoners of war. Japan had, not only attacked Pearl Harbour, involvement of the Bataan Death March, and the bloody battles in the Pacific. Leaflets were also dropped over Japan to let the people acknowledge that if Japan would not surrender, the U.S. is willing
1. Long after World War II and the use of the atomic bombs against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a great debate remains. It seems that there are two main potential arguments as to why the bombs were detonated and whether or not they were even necessary to begin with. The first theory surrounds the notion of the national security interests of the United States. In this theory essentially, Truman’s actions had been defended and justified as necessary in order to quickly end the war with U.S. causalities kept to a minimum.
Was it necessary for Truman to drop the Atomic Bombs on Japan in World War II? On August 6, 1945, the first atomic bomb was dropped by a US aircraft on Hiroshima. This atomic bomb was dropped to force Japan into surrender, this bomb alone destroyed Hiroshima and over 90,000 people were instantly killed in the explosion and an additional 100,000 people perished from burns and radiation sickness. On August 9, 1945 only three days later, the second atomic bomb was dropped over Nagasaki resulting in an additional 80,000 casualties of the Japanese population. The people of Japan surrendered on August 14, 1945 soon after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many people opposed to the use of the atomic bombs because people argued that Truman 's decision to use atomic bombs was a barbaric act of cruelty. People also argued that the US government had other ulterior motives to drop the atomic bomb that were necessary for America 's ideals. Necessary motives like presenting The Soviet Union a strong message for the Soviets to watch their step around America. A conventional way of warfare for Japan 's surrender would have costed many more American lives. Truman and others believed that the atomic bomb was necessary to save American lives but also Japanese lives. These actions from President Truman marked the end of the most destructive war in history. The two sources that will used and evaluated in this paper are is The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb by Dennis D. Wainstock (1996)
On August 5th, 1945 the Enola Gay, a B-29 bomber flew over the Japanese city of Hiroshima and released the most destructive weapon known to mankind. Mere moments later the city was engulfed in a fireball that rose up into the sky. Thousands perished instantly and many more would die from severe exposure to radiation. Two days later a second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki increasing the death toll to 120,000. The decision to drop nuclear weapons on Japan was made by the United States president Harry S. Truman. The decision to use these weapons has sparked controversy over whether or not a justification exists for extinguishing the lives of innocent civilians. For President Truman the decision
On May 1945, a long-awaited V-E Day finally came and brought an end to the war in Europe. But, the war in the Pacific was still continuing against Japan since they are being reluctant to surrender despite the continuous indiscriminate bombardments The United States began to consider about using the atomic bombs as the only way to end the war immediately. On the other hand, many argued that Japan’s staggering losses were enough to force Japan’s surrender. In the end, President Harry S. Truman didn’t hesitate to use this nuclear weapon and bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki with only three days interval between the two bombing. As a result, Japan has surrendered, but if I were to make a decision, I haven’t used atomic bombs because it was unnecessary since Japan has virtually lost already.
Many debates have been provoked based on President Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The debate is not solely based on the bomb being dropped, but more on the actual necessity and intention of the bomb being dropped.
Why President Truman Decided to Drop Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki At 02:45 August 6th 1945, the B-29 Superfortress the Enola Gay took off from the specially lengthened North Field on the Island of Tinian in the Marianas. The plane piloted by Colonel Paul Tibbets was 7 tons. At 0815 hours the bomb doors of the B-29 opened and flying at approximately 32,000 ft the uranium based atom bomb code-named “Little Boy” was unleashed upon the city of Hiroshima. Over 70,000 men women and children were killed by blast alone.
While Truman himself stated in an August 1945 radio address and further emphasized in his 1955 memoirs that the atomic bombs were dropped in order to “shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans” (Doc H), historians and government officials are split on the issue of the true motivations behind dropping the a-bombs. However, given his sour relationship with Stalin, it is clear that Truman intended the bomb to be used more than merely as an atomic weapon. When the Truman Administration made the decision to drop the atomic bombs, it was neither completely military or diplomatic. The decision was militaristic in that it tried to end the war with Japan in the most efficient manner possible, and was diplomatic in that it tried to prevent the Soviets from gaining too much
Perhaps the most controversial and heavily scrutinized issue of the twentieth century was President Harry Truman’s decision to unleash atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the summer of 1945. While the sequence of events preceding that fateful summer morning of August 6,1945 are fully understood, the motives behind Truman’s actions are shrouded in controversy. Top military officials publicly denounced the use of such a horrendous weapon, while the obvious advantages to the bomb, traditionalists argue, was a shortened Pacific War. Parallactic views between traditional beliefs and revisionist theories suggest that the issue is still very much unresolved. Why is the issue so hotly debated? Partially because of the overwhelming
“Truman stated that his decision to drop the bomb was purely military. Truman believed that the bombs saved Japanese lives as well. Prolonging the war was not an option for the President,” (ushistory.org 1). President Truman and the United States government made a fair decision by dropping the atomic bomb on the Japanese citizens in Hiroshima and Nagasaki during 1945. The bomb allowed the United States to appear more powerful and led to them influencing the rest of the world. The dropping of the atomic bomb was also a just response to the previous atrocities committed by Japan to other countries including the United States. In the long run, the bomb saved more lives that would have been lost in the war, since the bombs caused the
The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 1945 was a definite turning point in the Pacific War of World War II. Earlier that year, Germany had been defeated and the world then turned its attention to the Pacific war. Most history books state the argument that the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan was necessary to stop the war in order to save thousands of lives of American troops that were planning to invade Japan. "Had the bombs not been employed (so the "wisdom" goes), an enormous number of American troops would have perished in an inevitable amphibious operation against the Japanese mainland."(McManus 1) This paper will demonstrate that Japan was willing to
To what extent was Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified?
President Harry Truman determined to release nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the optimum decision of circumstances that supported the surrender of Japan in World War 2. Many arguments will doubt the atomic bombs had made results any better. While, the other handful of individuals, supporting Truman’s authorization, have considerable justification. Toss away the reasons for disagreement and contemplate the motives that lead descending atomic bombs as the right choice of a weapon.
Historians like Gar Alperovitz and Martin Sherwin have known for many years, based on declassified U.S. government documents that Japan was going to surrender in 1945 even if the atomic bombs were no dropped and that no invasion would ever have been necessary. Their only condition was that the United States "guaranteed the safety of the Emperor Hirohito", and in the end the Truman administration agreed to this rather than prosecuting him as a war criminal (Sherwin xviii). At the time in the summer of 1945, all the top military and civilian officials of the administration except Secretary of State James Byrnes had already advised Truman to accept the Japanese surrender on this condition. Yet when the Potsdam Declaration was issued in July 1945, Truman and Byrnes removed the condition that would have allowed the emperor to remain in power. As Herwin put it, "for forty years, the American public had been misled about the decision-making process", as indeed most of it still is even today (Sherwin xv). From secret documents declassified over the last thirty years, Alperovitz and Sherwin also proved conclusively that Truman, Byrnes and Winston Churchill regarded the atomic bomb as an instrument of diplomatic coercion to win concessions from the Soviets in Eastern Europe and Asia, and that they dropped it on Japan as a demonstration of resolve that they had the will to use it on Russia. Americans like to see themselves as the "good guys" in history and still regard
This investigation will explore the question: To what extent was the nuclear bombing of Japan necessary to end World War II? The years 1940 to 1950 will be the focus of this investigation, to allow for an analysis of the circumstances during the war and commentary of the decision to drop the bomb after the war ended.