The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bomb On Japan

The process of this investigation has revealed to me, the significance of different methods and limitations that historians experience when carrying out studies. When researching past history, authors are able to use hindsight to either enhance or hinder their writing. This was evident through the use of my secondary sources, particularly the analysis of the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima by Taketo Suzuki. I was introduced to the difficulty of gaining accurate and reliable information on an event that is certainly open to question. Since Suzuki is a part of Japan’s Research Center, there are a plethora of sources that are available to him. Although this may seem as great benefit, the challenge comes from careful fact selection.

In the brutal and deadly Pacific Theater of World War ll, President Truman had to make a crucial decision on whether or not to drop the atomic bomb on Japan. Some believe that Truman’s actions to drop the atomic bomb were unethical and inhumane; however, Truman was justified in his decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan due to the fact that they are our enemy, saving American lives is the first priority, and the atomic bomb will ultimately prevent Russia from gaining control of Asia.

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.

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.

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.

Some say the decision was moral and some say it was immoral. The people who think the bombing was immoral was because they think that the atomic bomb is the last thing for destruction on God’s scale. It is immoral to God’s creation of mankind. As the author of Nippon Times (Tokyo) said, a nuclear bomb “strikes at the very basis of moral existence” (Document 4). The author said that it is ethically wrong to bomb innocent humans and destroy mankind. But although the Japanese had to face poor conditions, the American lives were saved by President Truman. The decision was indeed justified on the United States standpoint but unfortunately the decision was immoral on the Japanese

On August 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan. To this day there is controversy on whether the U.S. should have risked the lives of hundreds of thousands of people to win the second world war. The U.S. Should have considered other options before dropping the bomb on Hiroshima. There were many alternative actions that could have taken place instead of dropping the bomb, but President Truman decided that using it was the best way to get the Japanese to surrender. If he would have chosen differently, the world would be a different place today.

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

On August 6th, 1945, the first atomic bomb to ever be used in the history of the world was dropped on Hiroshima. The result of this bomb killed roughly 80,000 people from the blast itself, and tens of thousands more due to radiation poisoning. After a few days passed, the United States dropped another nuclear bomb on Nagasaki, and threatened to drop another if the Japanese did not surrender. The bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki lead to the Japanese surrender to the United States, removing them from the war. While the use of this bomb was likely necessary at the time, was it an ethical decision? The lives that were affected from this blast were not just of those who experienced it, generations later, people who weren’t even alive at the time were faced with trauma as well. With that being said, the dropping of the bomb might have been necessary, but it was an unethical decision, even though the Japanese made it perfectly clear that they will fight until the last civilian.

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.

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

During WW2 Truman, the United States President at the time, was asked to make one the toughest decision in History. Choosing between dropping an atomic bomb or invading are both choices that will result in a lot of deaths. The huge diffrence between the two was who died wether it be the Japanese with the bomb, or the American soldiers with the invasion. Trumans decision was supposed to end the war sooner, hence reducing the amount of agony,deaths, stress or any other negative effects that could result in the continous war. Truman's decision on dropping the Atomic Bomb's was an efficient course of action for the Americans, but was deffinantly not the most educated decision. If I had been placed in Truman's shoes and had to make this

The decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the hardest decision for President Truman to make. He had the power right there in his hands to end the war but he would have to unleash the most powerful weapon known to man, at this time. Everyone was very tired of fighting but the Japanese would not give up so Truman decided to drop it. Even though we told Japan that if they did not surrender we would completely demolish some of their cities, they did not listen and they did not surrender. Maybe they did not think about what kind of weapons we would use because

Humans are a prodigious species, who are intellectual and social. We have found ways to make work easier, allow conversations that can happen long distance without the need of mail, and have made multiple advancements in sciences. These advancements have been used to help people who are injured or sick, and to build machines that are increasingly helpful. However, our technological improvements have also been used to harm the world and others. Atomic bombs that can be, and have been, used to destroy large cities and cause a nuclear fallout, pollution of environments due to oil rigs and barges breaking and releasing the deadly substance, and mass murders or homicides. With all of this in mind, how do we know if we are honorable or evil?