WWII : The Effects Of The Atomic Bomb On Japan

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.

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.

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

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)

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.

The pressing question still lingers: Was the United States justified in using the Atomic Bomb against Japan during WWII? World War II stands as the bloodiest and deadliest war of all time. It involved more than thirty countries and resulted in over fifty million civilian and military deaths. It lasted six years, beginning with Adolf Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939. As the Allied Powers (mainly the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union) and the Axis Powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) were in direct conflict with each other, many wonder if the cost of victory was too extreme. In late 1941, the process of creating the world’s first, most deadly weapon began. The production of the first atomic bomb was code named “the Manhattan Project.” After months of production, August 6, 1945, America dropped the “Little Boy” bomb on Hiroshima, wiping out ninety percent of the city. August 9, 1945, just three days after the devastation of the first bomb, America dropped the “Fat Man” bomb on Nagasaki. Dropping the atomic bomb on Japan was not necessary, nor justified in ending World War II. Due to the fact that America targeted heavily civilian populated cities (with limited military value), that Japan was in a position of surrender before the bomb was dropped, and the fact that the U.S. did not give enough time for Japan to process the devastation of the first bomb before the second in Nagasaki shows that America’s decision to drop the atomic bomb was entirely unjustified.

When the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki all living things in a five square mile radius of where the atomic bombs impacted died instantly, it ended the war and saved thousands lives. The following documents tell you about the importance of dropping the atomic bomb and the thinking behind there strategies. The US wanted Japan to surrender and wanted no more bloodshed and wanted the Soviet Union to be surprised. As stated in document 13 the Americans concern for Japan's unwillingness to resign, “imminent threat of a landing, on Japan proper by us, to convince them of the hopelessness of their situation”1. and again in document 16 shares thoughts for Russia involvement, “atomic attack against Japan would shock the Russians”2 finally document 17 shows the stubbornness of “Japan to agree Japanese leadership would probably not have surrendered if the Truman administration had clarified the status of the emperor when it demanded unconditional surrender prolongation of the war and cost a large number of human lives”3. Although some people think dropping the atomic bombs on Japan wasn’t justified, I think that dropping the atomic bombs on Japan was justified.

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.

This essay we will be discussing the pros and the cons of President Truman’s ethical decision to drop the bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. There were many people against dropping the bomb on Japan as well as people in favor of bombing. I believe that President Truman made the correct decision when bombing the country of Japan. President Truman had to make decisions based on what would be right for the people of the United States and what is also helpful to the United States military. There were many decisions that were deemed either ethical or unethical made by President Truman going into the dropping of the atomic bomb.

People always wonder if the United States decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan were the right choice. Even though the bombs killed and injured many people, Japanese civilians and Japanese soldiers. The decision to drop the bombs on Japan was the right thing to do at that time.

Did we make the right decision in dropping the atomic bombs on Japan during WWII? Till this day ordinary citizens and commanders question if the bombing was ethical. The utilitarian approach supports the argument considering without the bombs millions of lives would’ve been at risk. However, dropping the atomic bombs kept the deaths significantly lower on both sides. I believe the right decision was to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. I’m briefly going to talk about why Truman decided to drop the bomb, why there wasn’t another alternative, and what some felt after the bombing.

On August 6, 1945 the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. This was an extremely controversial military strategy in the United States. Was the United States justified in the dropping of the atomic bomb? The U.S. feared the rise of communism and gave aid to any country against it. The U.S. also fought countries threatening the spread communism. One of these countries was Japan. We began a harsh and brutal war against Japan and against communism. This war was killing many soldiers and Japan was not backing down. President Truman decided to use the atomic bomb when things were getting worse. The decision to use the atomic bomb was a difficult one and many people wonder if it was the right

As the war continued and violence escalated, bombings caused enormous destruction and high death tolls, leading inevitably to the use of the atomic bombs. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki represented a culmination in the destructiveness of bombings, not a significant deviation from previous bombing practices. The alternatives to the use of the atomic bomb were likely to have caused equal suffering for the Japanese people. The use of the atomic bomb was no less moral than these horrific wartime practices. Harry Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan was justified by Japan’s refusal to immediately surrender. Harry Truman gave the Japanese time to surrender in order to preserve the existence of their people. They did not comply and as a result endured the consequences. (Walker) Yet an alternate perspective states that it was quite unnecessary to drop the Atomic Bombs in that Japan was practically an already defeated opponent. If a conditional surrender were to be issued by the United States to Japan in

On August 6, 1945 uranium gun-type atomic bomb (Little Boy) was dropped on Hiroshima, within the first day of the bombings the effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima. The effects of the atomic bomb left many dead, homeless, and sacred. Even four months later people would die from radiation poisoning and discovering they had cancer now. Skin would be peeling off like bark on trees, this was a true horrifying sight. The United States were at war with japan but, does that justify what they did? Some would say what they did was inhuman and just plan wrong. They say there were other alternatives that the United Sates could have done. I believe there could have been a better way of ending the war with japan but I understand why the United States did what they did. The Japanese came out of nowhere and attacked the United States did they think that the US would just roll over and die? The should of known not to surprise attack one of the strongest nations. The needed to be put back in place and show the rest of the world that the US was one not to be reckon with.

August 6th, 1945, 70,0000 lives were ended in a matter of seconds. The United States had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Today many argue whether or not the U.S. should have taken such a drastic measure. Was it entirely necessary that we drop such a devastating weapon? To answer that first we must look at was going on in the world at the time of the conflict. The U.S. had been fighting a massive war since 1941. Moral was most likely low, and resources were at the same level as moral. Still both sides continued to fight and both were determined to win. Obviously the best thing that could have possibly happened would have been to bring the war to a quick end with a minimum of allied casualties. Harry Truman’s decision to