Both articles concern the highly contentious subject of the British strategic bombing campaign in Germany during the Second World War. This subject focuses around the historical debate that the British government knowingly targeted civilian cities in Germany, killing hundreds of thousands of non combatants while also gravely misinforming the British public as to the purpose and results of their strategic bombing campaigns. In the years after the war the debate had come to light due to the renewed interest in the strategic bombing campaign. The articles by Mark Connelly and Alex Bellamy are products of this renewed interest. This essay seeks to compare and contrast the articles on three grounds: the different methods hat each historian uses …show more content…
This substantiates his claims more than Bellamy as one of Bellamy's primary arguments is that the public in a liberal society would be against the use of “terror bombing”. However, as Connelly elaborates more on the use of surveys to highlight public opinion,it is clear that the British public were in favour of “revenge bombing” against Germany. This certainly highlights the discrepancy between the two articles, because while Bellamy references Connelly's (accentuating Connelly's reliability as a contemporary historian) research into public opinion on area bombing, he leaves out vital information in the survey such as the location of those being bombed, which played an extremely important part in public attitudes to retaliation against Germany. This is something Bellamy fails to point and and therefore this damages the integrity of his argument and allows us to come to the conclusion that for the most part of his argument, Connelly is the most …show more content…
Bellamy argues differently, and less convincingly than Connelly, that the government assumed the public would not support the strategic bombing campaign of Germany if they knew of the aim of “undermining of the moral of the German people”. Therefore claiming that in liberal societies such as Britain, the population generally do not support the killing of non-combatants in war time. These different views stem from the use of the New Statesmen's mass observation survey in 1944 which found that people wanted the bombing of Germany to continue, however both historians interpret it
Two people could be living two very different lifestyles, yet they could be very similar in the way they act and react in the same situation. Charlotte from “The Metaphor” by Budge Wilson and the Mother character from “Borders” by Thomas King live very different lives but the way they deal with the problems they are faced with is very similar. Both protagonists have to deal with trying to be forced to be something they are not by society and their families, but Charlotte from “The Metaphor” has been challenged by her strenuous home, she must face her organized mother and orderly home; the Mother from “Borders” must stand up for what she believes in and fight for what she wants.
Most writers take sides, either for or against the atom bomb. Instead of taking sides, he challenges his readers to make their own opinions based on their personal meditations. One of the key questions we must ask ourselves is “Are actions intended to benefit the large majority, justified if it negatively impacts a minority?” The greatest atrocity our society could make is to make a mistake and not learn from it. It is important, as we progress as a society, to learn from our mistakes or suffer to watch as history repeats itself.
One of the most argued topics today, the end of World War II and the dropping of the atomic bombs still rings in the American ear. Recent studies by historians have argued that point that the United States really did not make the right choice when they chose to drop the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Also with the release of once classified documents, we can see that the United States ...
Fuller, J.F.C. "Propaganda and War. The New Technique of Mendacity as a Psychological Weapon." Ordnance, Dec
In contrast, Maier and Selden’s thesis claims the act of dropping the atomic bomb was completely justifiable and not a war crime is the counter argument. Since, both authors address the fact that the world was at war and that aerial bombing was not something new, however, the technology advances were. In addition, their logic is reasonable because at the time of World War II almost everyone was using strategic and tactical aerial bombing, not to mention the Allies wanted to end the war as soon as possible. Thus, the atomic bomb was justifiable, however, it was a war crime. The objective of the tactical bombing was to aim at military targets it achieves its objective, however, killing thousands of lives in the process.
Throughout the intense bombing of the Blitz you could argue that the idea of Britain being invaded and conquered brought out the ‘grit’ and resolve in the British people that helped to destroy social boundaries, bring people together in a united front and inevitably win World War II. Or you could also argue that, the fear, panic and unrest created by the Blitz managed only to divide a country already separated by class, gender and social barriers, therefore increasing existing tensions and creating new problems; that the government could only control by forcing censorship and propaganda to manipulate the frightened and overwhelmed people of Britain. One thing is clear, that most evidence (including the Sources given) shows proof of an understandably terrified Britain during times of devastation and destruction.
In the 70 years since the bombing of Dresden, the event has remained the center of controversy and debate, and as a result, the bombing has become the flag-bearer of ethically questionable tactics used by the Allies. As the event receded into history, different groups have argued their perspective on whether the bombing was justified or was it a war
The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima which triggered incredible human suffering and brought about insightful allegations of the entire human race embodies one of the crucial events of the twentieth century. By scrutinizing the historical background and the incentives of the past leaders at the time, various individuals have established different viewpoints to evaluate whether the circumstances justified the decision to drop the atomic bomb. In this paper, I shall compare General Paul Tibbett's and Yoshikawa's Kawamoto's perspectives and how they differ from each other.
Christopher McCandless and Adam Shepard both did some similar targets in their lives, at the end it lead them to unexpected situations. Christopher McCandless was a young man who didn't believe in society and he chose to get away from that and left everything he had, including his family. He developed important relationships with key people that helped him on his journey into the wild. Similarly Adam Shepard was a young man who left with only $25 and a sleeping bag to go prove his point that the american dream does exist and to see if he can achieve it in a couple of months. Overall comparing McCandless and Shepard, Christopher McCandless had a greater impact in people, motivated many, and was selfish in plenty of good ways.
The nation held its breath, as citizens of every city kept their ears alarmed for the drone of a German bomber, to rain bombs on Britain’s urban areas. Shelters were dug, buildings were made light-proof and millions awaited the first air raid. The wait lasted longer than anyone expected. Britain’s towns and cities remained untouched by German bombs for months. In fact, during this first stage of the war, the period which came to be known as the Phoney War - not very much happened at all. Fighting was very limited and bombing absent, leading many of the parents of children to go against the advice of the government and bring them
To this day, the strategic bombings within the context of World War II are polarizing contested events, with historians arguing for and against the morality and the effectiveness of the campaign. From the time of the publication of the theory of strategic bombing to the present, no wider consensus has been reached around the moral or strategic legitimacy and viability of the tactic - historians, politicians, and strategists remain in disagreement. There are many different perspectives on the various strategic bombings in World War II, with some historians arguing that strategic bombing is morally indefensible and militarily ineffective, some arguing that strategic bombing is morally indefensible yet militarily effective, some
Newman, Robert P. “Hiroshima and the Trashing of Henry Stimson.” New England Quarterly (1998): 5-32.
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 of the atomic bombs. Excerpts from Truman’s memoirs and a variety of different titles were consulted in order to undertake this investigation. Section C will evaluate two sources for their origins purposes values and limitations. The first is a book titled The Invasion of Japan written by John Stakes in 1955. And the second is a book titled Prompt & Utter Destruction written by J. Samuel Walker.
Have you ever read a novel then watched the film version and were disappointed that they left something out of the film? This is common when they make films from novels; a case of this is the novel “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee. The classic 1930s American novel is mainly about a six-year-old girl, Jean Louise Finch also known as Scout and her life growing in the small town of Maycomb Alabama. At this time in Maycomb, racism is common. So when scouts father Atticus is chosen to defend an African American named Tom Robinson it stirs up some tension in town. Analyzing the characters and moods of the sections in the novel and film, they were slightly different from the film has since it has less dialogue
Fogleman, Edwin. Hiroshima; The Decision to Use The A-Bomb. Ed. Martin Steinmann,Jr. New York: Scribner Research Anthologies. 1964. Pg.1-75.