The Atomic Bombs On Hiroshima And Nagasaki

1764 Words8 Pages
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. There have been many suggestions of alternative measures of ending the war which were made available to President Truman without the mass casualties of dropping the atomic bombs. The most popular alternative to the atomic bombs was an invasion of Japan. Thomas Sowell, American economist, social theorist, political philosopher, author and currently Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University states; “Japan’s plans of defence against invasion involved mobilising the civilian population including women and children. That invasion could have been the greatest bloodbath in history.” (Capitalism Magazine
Get Access