During World War II Americans dropped atomic bombs over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing nearly 200,000 people. This resulted in Japans surrender in World War II. J. Samuel Walker analyzes this historical event in his book Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs. Over the past 70 years’ extensive research has been conducted and there is an understanding that Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bombs is inconclusive. It is impossible to determine that the use of the bomb was the quickest way to end the war. An analysis of President Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb reveals one challenge: was the decision to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki a show of good judgment. The most important question surrounding this issue is: should the United States have dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II? In his book Walker does not conclusively say if the use of atomic bombs was or was not necessary. On one hand it was necessary to save American troops lives and to end the war as quickly as possible. But, on the other hand if the United States did not drop the bomb they would have invaded Japan instead and that was all unnecessary because Japan was on the verge of surrender. While making this decision Truman had many advisors. One of them was Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson. Stimson created the “Interim Committee” this group was comprised of military, business, and political leaders. The members of this
Was the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the American Government unavoidably necessary? This is what Samuel J. Walker intends to uncover in his publication. His argument is that the justifications made by the American Government after the dropping of the Atomic bombs were gross exaggerations and that the reasoning behind their ultimate decision is complicated. He contends that because of their lack of knowledge of the actual damage that the force of the
One of the most controversial and heavily scrutinized issue of the twentieth century was President Harry S. Truman’s decision to unleash atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The motives behind Truman’s actions are shrouded in controversy as top military officials publicly denounced the use of such a disastrous weapon. There is overwhelming evidence supporting both sides of the decision, as historians are split in opinion. The United States had been using conventional bombing to try to push Japan over the edge to surrender, but with countless Japanese civilians loyal to their country, invading Japan proved to be more problematic than first thought. Harry S. Truman made the ultimate decision of dropping the atomic bomb in hopes that it would end the war, but the amount of casualties caused by it has historians questioning if it was morally right, “The bomb was unfortunate, but it was the only means to bring Japan to a surrender,” historian Sadao Asada states (Bomb 9). Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justifiable because they would ultimately lead to the end of the war and would demonstrate U.S. supremacy.
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)
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.
Intense moral justification was needed in order to make the decision to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki however, President Truman was ultimately the man who made the final decision to launch ‘Little Boy’ and destroy Hiroshima, Nagasaki and their civilians, thus forcing an end to the war. Although there were many alternatives presented to President Truman, it is unknown as to whether they would have actually succeeded in ending the war or producing less casualties. Truman made the decision to drop these bombs in the heat of war but his justification of having a military target appeared extremely unrealistic, as both cities were full of innocent civilians. The morality of the bombs have been debated over the years, however the publication of the actual damage to civilian life caused a strong voice opposed to the usage in the 60 years following the action.
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.
This essay we will be discussing the pros and the cons of President Truman’s ethical decision to drop the bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. There were many people against dropping the bomb on Japan as well as people in favor of bombing. I believe that President Truman made the correct decision when bombing the country of Japan. President Truman had to make decisions based on what would be right for the people of the United States and what is also helpful to the United States military. There were many decisions that were deemed either ethical or unethical made by President Truman going into the dropping of the atomic bomb.
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.
Did we make the right decision in dropping the atomic bombs on Japan during WWII? Till this day ordinary citizens and commanders question if the bombing was ethical. The utilitarian approach supports the argument considering without the bombs millions of lives would’ve been at risk. However, dropping the atomic bombs kept the deaths significantly lower on both sides. I believe the right decision was to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. I’m briefly going to talk about why Truman decided to drop the bomb, why there wasn’t another alternative, and what some felt after the bombing.
America's decision to drop two nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had a profound effect on millions of lives of both Americans and the Japanese. Not only did it carry a significant amount of casualties but many American lives were spared. By entering into WWII, there were so many innocent lives that were lost including millions of civilians so when this monstrous war was coming to an end in 1945, I believe that President Harry S. Truman acted on a prompt decision in order to spare many more American lives. As stated in U.S. History in Context, Historians writing closer to 1945 tended to accept President Harry S Truman’s interpretation of events, that an invasion of Japan, which had been badly wounded but was hardly defeated in August 1945, would have cost over one million American lives and many more Japanese (History in dispute, 2000). The same article advises that the atomic bomb, a new weapon developed in such secrecy that Truman, who succeeded to the office on President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s death in April, knew
Thesis: The dropping of the atomic bomb during World War II by the United States on Japan was a justified act. Not only was the dropping of the atomic bomb used to save American lives, but it prevented the war from lingering on, taking the lives of more civilians. The bomb did not just make sense, but it saved lives, despite taking some, therefore making the atomic bomb a reasonable action. It is not war mentality to think of preserving the lives of innocent people when the safety of the world is at stake. World War II, taking place in Japan, was likely to continue to linger on which would produce more deaths in the long run. In a book entitled, Thank God for the Atomic Bomb, by WWII soldier, Paul Fussell, he noted that "The people who preferred an invasion to a bombing seemed to have no intention of proceeding to the Japanese front themselves. I have already noted what a few more days would mean to the luckless troops and sailors on the spot....on Okinawa, only a few weeks before Hiroshima, 123,000 Japanese and Americans killed each other. War is immoral. War is cruel". By saying this it proves that although dropping the atomic bomb had some consequences, not dropping it, and letting the war carry on had far worse outcomes, and those who did want an invasion were not willing to go fight for it, again proving the high demand for the wars end. Then, in a speech made by President Truman he explains, "My chief
Few events in world history have made a global impact on humanity as the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The decision to drop the bombs made by Harry S. Truman, the newly sworn in commander-in-chief after the death of Franklin Roosevelt, has been one scrutinized not only for the destruction of the act, but also in itself for the actual motive of the decision. Was the decision to use the Atomic Bombs one to quickly end the war to save American lives, or did Truman do his best to prevent Soviet influence in East Asia, to try and scare the Soviet Union from making any kind of territorial claims in Japan? Because there is ample evidence for both points of view, it's impossible to declare one to be the case. While both sides have good evidence, it's likely Truman made his decisions not only to end the war quickly, but to also avoid massive casualties on both sides, and to intimidate the Soviets. This was the genius of Truman's actions, it was able to end the war that was destroying the globe's nations for nearly six years, while also preventing another war from occurring in the future, and to keep peace in the process. As far as today, there has been no atomic warfare
This investigation assesses President Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It will determine whether or not his decision was justified. This investigation will scrutinize the reasons that made Harry Truman feel inclined to drop atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Preventing further casualties along with the desire to end the war are two argumentative points that will be analyzed to determine if they were strong enough to justify the dropping
The disagreement whether it was necessary for the United States to drop the bomb on either Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been going on for about half a century. Many have argued that Harry S. Truman did the right thing while others disagree that it was a horrible decision. There is technically not a right or wrong answer because no one knew what could have happened if the United States did not drop the bombs on either cities. There can only be disagreements over the decisions a leader could make in order to protect its people from being killed.
Would you kill a thousand to save millions? Well the drastic actions taken by the United States did save millions. There were two actions that had to occur to save the millions and end the war, the dropping of the two atomic bombs being the first of their kind were to be the most powerful bomb ever invented using atomic and nuclear forces so create it and packed over 20,000 tons of TNT and was about ten feet long. The bomber that transported and dropped them was called the 'Enola Gay’. The two Japanese cities’ that were struck by such creations were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In this essay I will be discussing on how the actions taken by the United States of America were completely justified in dropping the two bombs as is established a future power image, saved millions, ended the war and ended the axis of evil.