The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bomb

What if the world we lived in was no longer safe? The decision for the hydrogen brings in the possibility for safety to cease to exist at every corner of the world. Although there are many reasons why someone would say the hydrogen bomb should be created, it should not be. If created it would be able to cause even more mass destruction to civilization than the atomic bomb is, have unpredictable effects, and would change the nature of foreign policy.

World War II lasted for six years from September,1 1939 to September 2, 1945 and resulted with Japan's surrender but believe it or not many events occurred both good and bad before anyone could make that choice. Before the declaration of this war japan had made an agreement with the U.S in which they gave them a friendship medal signifying peace. Turns out that wasn't the case japan actually backstabbed the U.S and on the morning of December 7th, 1941 the japanese attacked Pearl Harbor destroying nearly 20 American ships and more than 300 airplanes. About 2,403 sailors, soldiers and civilians were killed and about 1,000 people were wounded. After that the U.S could no longer trust Japan for many reasons they decided to fight back with two atomic bombs on Japan. The dropping of these two bombs on that country in my personal opinion is not justified. My reasons are that this was the first time the U.S was going to try these bombs out so in other words this was an experiment in which they had no clue the amount of damage that

the United States dropped the atomic bombs on Japan during World War II, yet the controversy about the validity of this decision continues in scientific, political and general public circles. Most likely, due to the complexity of the issue and never knowing the outcome if the bombs were not dropped, it will remain unresolved. A lesson that is continually learned in the U.S.-once again in present times-is the importance of acting from facts and not from emotion. It is hoped that all pros and cons are very seriously weighed before any action is taken if and when such a serious decision must be made in the future.

Whether the use of the atomic bomb on Japan during World War II was justified, we will never know. However, the amount of time spent on discussing the use and effect of the bomb seems to be nonexistent. If they talked about the bomb there was no major argument against using the bomb; with that came mystery because they did not understand the bomb. There were factors that they used as an excuse to use the bomb, but these were in the background and later added to make the argument seem more one-sided, in their favor. Whether the use of the atomic bomb proved helpful or not is up to debate. The atomic bomb changed the world, and given the evidence, the use of the bomb was not talked about in detail except for when and where to use it.

During World War II, President Harry S. Truman ordered for an atomic bomb to be dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima on August 6th ,1945. The second and last atomic bomb to ever be dropped was in the city of Nagasaki on August 9th, 1945. Many Americans believed dropping the atomic bomb was necessary to end the war in a more timely manner, however, many others believed dropping the atomic bomb was too extreme of a measure to take against Japan. With the creation of the atomic bomb, the United States had a weapon of mass destruction that no one else yet had. Therefore, with the power the atomic bomb possessed, some people believed its use should only be used as a last resort. If Japan would not surrender during this war, then the United States would have a valid and necessary reason in using the power of an atomic bomb. For the other Americans that believed in the immediate drop of the atomic bomb, dropping it would end the war sooner, which would then decrease the amount American soldiers who would be killed during the war. Whether dropping the atomic bomb on Japan was the most ethical decision that President Truman could have ordered is still debated.

Ray Bradbury once said, “After Hiroshima was bombed, I saw a photograph of the side of a house with shadows of the people who had lived there burned into the wall from the intensity of the bomb. The people were gone, but their shadows remained.” Keep in mind that quote only described the intensity of “Little Boy”, the nickname for the bomb that devastated Hiroshima. The bombs that dilapidated both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were harrowing, gruesome, and in all sincerity, needless. The reasoning people have given to justify the bombings was because it was a military necessity; they thought the atom bombs were needed to save lives and to end the war quickly. However, the Merriam-Webster dictionary explicitly defines a ‘military necessity’ as “the necessity attending belligerent military operations that is held to justify all measures necessary to bring an enemy to complete submission excluding those (as cruelty, torture, poison, perfidy, wanton destruction) that are forbidden by modern laws and customs of war.” According to this interpretation of a ‘military necessity’, both of the bombings do not match this definition. Various people wonder why the U.S. would condone the use of the explosives and inflict such destruction on others, considering that they had first hand experiences on devastating attacks that seemed gratuitous. Many have argued that there were multiple alternatives to such a catastrophe, and the bombs did not have to be utilized. Others state that the bombings were

In August of 1945, two nuclear bombs were dropped on Japan, consequently, killing tens of thousands of civilians due to radiation, burns, or turning them immediately into ash. The monstrous bomb sneaks up on innocent civilians and rips their life from them in one foul swoop. The Atomic bomb kills masses of people at one time, but can also save masses of people’s lives from the ongoing war. Herein lies the conflict, since the nuclear bomb is extremely lethal, but effective, should it be used in war? Do you believe that this act was ethical? The atomic bomb should have never been used in past wars and should never be used today because its deadly side effects.

“The city was hidden by that awful cloud . . . boiling up, mushrooming, terrible and incredibly tall," said Colonel Paul Tibbets, pilot of the modified B-29 bomber that dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over Hiroshima. The bombings resulted in the death of thousands, including not only Japanese citizens, forces, and military but also American captive soldiers. In the midst of World War II the United States forced Japan to surrender by dropping bombs in the major cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They released the second atomic bomb shortly after, in Nagasaki, Japan.

On August 6, 1945 the United States deployed the first atomic bomb over Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Once the United States dropped the atomic bomb there has been a lot of comments whether or not it was the right move to do. I believe that it was justified for the United States to drop the atomic bomb on Japan however, it did have some cons to it. The reason behind dropping the first atomic bomb was to stop the war. Although it roughly killed around 60,00 people in Hiroshima and 35,000 in Nagasaki. If they didn’t drop that bomb the war could have claimed more lives than the atomic bomb dropping.

The United States absolutely did the right thing when they dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If they had decided to do a land invasion the death toll would be much higher than the victims of the two bombs, with much more catastrophe. There is a lot of evidence that conveys the many pros of dropping the bomb instead of a land invasion.

What other options (if any) did the United States have (other than dropping the Atomic Bomb) to ensure that Japan would surrender without having to mount a full invasion?

In 1945, August 6th and 9th, a US bomber drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, causing instant deaths and massive destruction.Yet, Despite it ending the war, despite Japan surrender and thousands of lives saved. Was it okay for the US to use such massive amount of deadly power against other humans?

On August 6, 1945, Enola Gay, an American pilot dropped a five-ton atomic bomb on Hiroshima killing thousands of people instantly and leaving thousands of people cursed to die in pain. The Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki wiped out 90% of each city, the survivors who were not killed would have died from the remanding radiation scaring their cities. The mushroom cloud filled in the sky would be the last thing the survivors would have ever seen, physically and mentally as the light from the bomb melted away their retinas and death scared their mind. The question we are faced with, why did America do it?

“What were the alternatives to the August 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima & Nagasaki and whywere they not pursued?” Matthew Picki

“The human body can absorb just so much radiation until it falls apart because the very cells that you need to heal are dying from the radiation poisoning.” says Shiya Ribowsky, a forensic medical investigator in the “Coroner’s Report: Atomic Bomb”. This is what the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had to go through after the United States dropped two atomic bombs over the cities. Everything in that area was ultimately destroyed. Lives were lost, and those who were still living were left severely injured. Despite many warnings, the American government decided that it was prudent to use nuclear force during WWII. It is indisputable that the atomic bombing left irreversible damage. Indeed, the cities could be rebuilt, but the lives that were lost were gone forever. Yet, the American