Truman Decision

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.

In the 1930’s and the 1940’s there was a change in American leadership. Having this change not only changed the outcome of the war that we were currently in, but how the rest of the world would view our country after the war. The decision that Harry Truman was forced to make on the choice to drop the atomic bomb or to attempt more land invasions was a choice that shaped the outcome of the war. There were major influences and side effects from the dropping of the atomic bomb and what it did to the country of Japan. Having the option and the weight of the moral decision weighing on Truman’s shoulders about what decision should be made, he was the only one who was capable of making the decision that shaped the outcome of the war. Having dropped the bomb on Japan, as a statement of power and a means to an end in a form was the only way that American lives could have been spared as comparing that to the lives that would have been lost in a land invasion. Knowing what the issues with the bomb was; one has to look at the moral issues, the results of the incident, and also how it played in the rest of the development of the world.

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.

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.

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.

Americans have been wondering whether President Truman should’ve ordered the usage of weapons which was against Japan back in August 1945. The World War II which involved almost every part of the world. This decision had the citizens thinking every year that passes by as if the President had made wrong decision. This horrible event had the citizens in doubt. The results were not good for the Japanese civilians. Because the of the atomic bomb they had lost not only their families, but also their houses and businesses. It impacted the tens of thousands of people in every way possible. To what Americans observes from this is not only the pros it had brought for the citizens, but it

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

It has been just over seven decades since the destructive atomic bombs were dropped on Japan. These bombs were the first of its kind-weapons of mass destruction. There are many points-of-view or opinions about whether or not the bombs should have been used. As always there are two sides to each story; those who are for a cause and those who are against. In this paper, I will discuss the two opposing points-of-view, as well as my own opinion on which argument I find most compelling.

Before him no president had made the effort to enforce equality with the general interest of the people instead of another motive. Although his attempts were largely ineffective that is due to the unwillingness of people occupying other political positions. The same can be said about the Marshall Plan. The only reason some parts of it failed were due to the inability of other people to want to implement it. Additionally, some might say that Japan was on its knees and the bomb was unnecessary and a ridiculous waste of lives. The Japanese philosophy regarding war is simple- fight until you cannot anymore. Truman knew this, and realized that without a way to intimidate there war would continue and there would be no end in sight. The alternative to the bomb was an amphibious attack on the Japanese coast which would have cost a million lives on both sides. The bomb, although devastating cost only 230,000. The ethical debate over the atomic bomb will never be over, but it was effective in its purpose- ending the

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

To fully examine the factors that led to the United States to drop an atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki, one can look at the event as a result of two major decisions. The first decision concerned the use of newly developed nuclear weapons in lieu of other military techniques to secure a timely Japanese surrender. The second decision was to use several of these weapons instead of only one. Although the Truman administration displayed little hesitation or ambivalence over the decision to use atomic weapons (Walker, 51), it is important to examine what factors contributed to these swift actions.

The final chapter analyzed in the course discusses the decision to use the bomb to initiate Japanese surrender and whether or not it was a necessary action. Problems in The History of World War II: Chapter 11 presents various documents ranging from a letter penned by Albert Einstein that indicates the power that can come from Uranium which initiated the Manhattan Project, all the way to discussion on how to handle the secrecy of America’s new found weapon. The chapter includes three essays from historians Gar Alperovitz, Robert P. Newman, and Barton J. Bernstein. The three men offer their takes on the necessity to deploy the atomic bomb to cause Japanese surrender.

Upon reviewing Ronald Takai’s Hiroshima, it only makes me wonder what was going through the mind of President Harry Truman when he gave the “green light” to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It has been more than 70 years since that happened and the conclusion of World War II, and yet the legacy remains in our modern day history books and class lectures. But was deploying the atomic bombs on Japan really necessary? What was Truman thinking? And did the end really justify the means? Truly, upon reading Takaki’s Hiroshima, it led me to believe that Truman was probably more militant than his predecessor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and yet also showed a more personal side after the two bombs were used against the Japanese Empire. In this essay, I will describe how I would personally evaluate Truman’s decision and what possible scenarios could have led to the outcome as well as determining what other alternative routes he might have chosen if he decided not to use atomic bombs.