Atomic Weapons Are The Absolute Most Dangerous Weapons Essay

“In 1957, with the arms race in full swing, the Department of Defense had decided it was just a matter of time before an airplane transporting an atomic bomb would crash on American soil, unleashing a radioactive disaster the likes of which the world had never seem.” On August 6, 1945, the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, killing 20,000 soldiers and 70,000 – 126,000 civilians. On August 9, 1945, the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, killing 39,000 – 80,000. A total of 129,000 – 226,000 people were killed in combining both bomb droppings. Dropping both atomic bombs on Japan was necessary to end the war because the military needed to end the war, the Japanese were given fair warnings

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

As World War II was coming to an end during 1945, the creation of one of the most destructive weapons known to humanity occurred within the United States. This weapon, known as “the atomic bomb,” was used on the two Japanese cities: Hiroshima and Nagasaki, resulting in a death toll unprecedented by any military weapon used before and an immediate, unconditional surrender. Some historians believe President Truman decided to drop the atomic bomb in order to intimidate the Soviet Union whereas others believe it was a strictly military measure designed to force Japan’s unconditional surrender. In the Report of a Scientific Panel of nuclear physicists, some scientific colleagues believed the atomic bomb was a “purely technical

The first atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Hiroshima, one of the larger cities of the country of Japan. The announcement that an atomic bomb had been dropped on Japan came from Truman as a “scientific landmark and the age of atomic energy” . This power came as not only for the advancement of civilization, but also the ability for civilization to be

“We have to protect our Earth, so our children and grandchildren will never suffer like that,’ she said. And she looked ahead. ‘Maybe nuclear weapons won’t be abolished while I’m alive,’ she said. ‘But I will never give up.” (Hanley, NBC News). August 6, 1945 at 8:16 in the morning, the United States dropped the world's first atomic bomb on thousands of unsuspecting people in Hiroshima, Japan. Not only did this catastrophic event kill thousands of civilians, but it also resulted in other nations obtaining and learning how to create these deadly weapons, weapons that we still have today. In the book Hiroshima by John Hersey he gives readers a new look at that day, through the eyes of six victims who survived the horrific attack on Hiroshima, he shows how the entire city of Hiroshima suffered, and were left alone to fend for themselves.The book Hiroshima by John Hersey, sheds light on the immense dangers of nuclear warfare, and the government's responsibility for its people, affected by a war they aren’t fighting in.

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.

Few inventions have shaped war as much as the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb enabled massive indiscriminate destruction on a scale the world had never seen. The offensive capabilities of the atomic bomb were terrifying and many believed a nuclear war could destroy the world. Bernard Brodie, Albert Wohlstetter, Thomas Schelling, and André Beaufre describe the state of war the atomic bomb introduced in the Nuclear Age. Their writings show that atomic bombs changed warfare by changing the focus of arms development to avoid conflict and threats against civilians were now used to force surrender.

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.

Inventions have been accomplished due to the vast technology that is in place. Technology has led to the advancement of warfare in most parts of the world. The same technology has resulted in inventions that range from gunpowder to the atom that is splitting the environments across the borders. These inventions have led to some countries being able to leap over other weaker countries when it comes to war. Among all these inventions, the atomic bomb stands out as the most lethal weapon. The splitting atom has launched the whole world through its conventional warfare that led the world to change their perspectives to ushering in a new era of the nuclear age. The world atomic bomb is so vivid to the cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima (Madaras 99). When one mentions these two places and the splitting atom, a person is able to picture a city that was torn apart and the masses of people that were killed by the United States ' actions of using the bomb in these two cities. Thus, this paper tries to examine if it was necessary for the United States to drop the atomic bomb on the cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in order to bring an end to World War II.

On the clear morning of August 6, 1945 in Hiroshima, Japan, the world was hit with a total shock, that went down in history as a day for the history books. This day, the city of Hiroshima was blasted by the world’s first atomic bomb, which sent the grounds quaking, and leaving thousands dead. The debates for years since the bombing were having us all wonder if the attack was a military necessity or not. Considering both sides of the argument, it is clear to me that the bombing was the best plan for ending the world war. The use of the bomb saved more lives than it took.

America’s use of the atomic bombs on the Japanese cities also opened the door to other countries challenging them through their own use of nuclear bombs. Many have criticized that the atomic bomb was an act of “muscle flexing” due to the sheer power and destruction caused by the decision to drop the two bombs. (Nicholls, 67). Not only were these bombs a demonstration of the power that these nuclear weapons had, but they were a testament of power that the United States now held. Never before had a country surrendered in war without first being invaded, so the decision to drop the bomb and Japan's subsequent surrender were extremely significant (Baldwin, 39). These bombings didn’t just impact the Japanese, but the whole world and gave way to

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.

Hiroshima is an outstanding recreation of the complete annihilation and devastation of during the aftermath and the year following the United States’ dropping of the atomic bomb. As the war in the east carried on, many thought this desolated war might last a lifetime, all the while hoping for an end and praying it not mean their own end. To end the war, Americans had to pick a target that would leave the Japanese government with nowhere to retreat, allowing for a crippling effect that would essentially cause their collapse and surrender. In his writings, John Hersey proclaims that Hiroshima was a “… inviting target - mainly because it had been one of the most important military command and communications centres in Japan …” (HERSEY, P. 107). In the minds of American strategists, this must have seemed a flawless method to force the Japanese military into a corner, not allowing withdrawal without laying down of arms. There was surely no doubt that dropping this bomb of god-like destructive power would, at a minimum, tear into the souls of Japanese, causing catastrophic devastation.

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

The previously accepted nature of war stemmed from the Clausewitzian trinity: war is emotional, an experience wrought with passion, violence, and enmity; uncertainty, chance, and friction pervade the medium of war; however, because war is not an end in itself, and because, as a means, it is subordinate to its political aims, war must be subject to reason (Clausewitz, 89). With the first employment of nuclear weapons, however, strategists and military theorists began to question Clausewitz’s foundational ideas (Winkler, 58). Similarly, Allan Winkler, in agreeing with Bernard Brodie’s thesis, opines that the advent of nuclear weapons fundamentally changed the nature of war. Winkler’s assertion stems from his argument that such a nuclear duel would yield a post-war environment incapable of recovery for any parties involved (62). He further describes Brodie’s realization that “[t]he atomic bomb is not just another and more destructive weapon to be added to an already long list. It is something which threatens to make the rest of the list relatively unimportant.” (62) Ultimately, Winkler abridges Brodie’s assessment in stating that “the United States was caught in the paradox of having to prepare for a war it did not plan to fight.” (63)