More handpicked essays just for you.
World War 2 and nuclear weapons technology
The role of the United States in World War II
The role of the USA in WW 2
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Atomic Question The United States heralded in the Atomic Era with the use of the atomic bomb on Japan, which would forever change the world. Was the United States correct to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the Second World War? The answer is not as clear as one might think. There were many sides that led to the decision to drop the bombs on Japan. President Truman on the day he took office was approached by the Secretary of War Stimson and was informed of a new type of weapon the countries top scientists were working on. Truman had not known of such developments when he was Vice President, it was not until the day he was sworn into office. In his memoirs, Truman stated, “My knowledge of these developments had come …show more content…
about only after I became President, when Secretary Stimson had given me the full story.” The weapon unlike any in history would have the potential to end the war and have the potential of saving hundreds of thousands of American troops lives. A committee was formed by President Truman to advise him about the potential effects of using the bomb against Japan to end the war.
The discussions were primarily about how many casualties would be lost and how to use the Atomic bombs to win the war. The alternative was to keep island hoping with troops and eventually penetrate and seize the main island of Japan. The committee also discussed giving japan early warning about a possible attack using a new kind of weapon, or possibly demonstrate the weapon in an isolated part of Japan to show its destruction. After several days of discussion the committee informed the secretary of war that it was “Recommended that the bomb should be used as soon as possible in the war with Japan, without warning, and against a target that would reveal its devastating strength.” The secretary then informed President Truman of the advice from the …show more content…
committee. The invasion of Japan would cost the United States not only vast sums of money and supplies but also tens if not hundreds of thousands of American lives. Truman’s staff and senior military leaders each had estimated that to invade mainland Japan would cost between 40 and 220 thousand lives. By using the rate from Okinawa of 35 percent and the estimated total force of 681,000 troops the casualties would number in the 230 thousand range. When looking at the opposition to the use of atomic weapons there are several groups and ideas against using the bomb. Several scientists sent a letter that favored an international coalition for atomic bombs instead of relying on the U.S. Their reasons were that if the U.S. was to use the atomic bomb they would threaten to cause an arms race the Soviet Union, and were unsure how the American public would react to such a powerful bomb. The scientists who drafted the letter were some of the top nuclear scientists and included Leo Szilard who had convinced Roosevelt into researching atomic weapons. President Truman wanted the Soviets to declare war against Japan and The Soviets primary objective was to destroy the Japanese Army in Manchuria, followed by withdrawing after the defeat of the Japanese.
This tag team approach would help to spare American lives by utilizing the Soviet Unions man power to help fight the Japanese. The death toll that Japan would face if the atomic bombs were to be used was staggering. Hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese civilians would die from either the initial blast or radiation poisoning shortly after. The bomb would wipe out anything in its path including women and children who were not fighting the United States. Traditionally U.S. air strikes had been aimed at supply depots and factories where civilian casualties would be at a minimum, however with the atomic bomb everything and everyone within its blast radius would be
destroyed. President Truman after the Japanese decided to not sign a treaty between the U.S. and the Soviet Union made the decision to drop the atomic bomb on strategic cities in Japan on July 24, 1945. Shortly before Truman had informed Stalin of the new type of weapon and Stalin approved of its use against the Japanese. On August 6, 1945, the Enola Gay released the first atomic bomb. The explosion destroyed 60 percent of the city, with casualties reaching 200,000 people, Truman received news of the bombing of Hiroshima and was exhilarated as he knew that Japan would have to soon surrender. On August 9, the U.S. dropped the second atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki. Approximately 36,000 people died as a result of the second bomb. The Japanese council met with the emperor and accepted the Potsdam Declaration on August 10, less then 24 hours after the second atomic bomb was dropped. So was the United States correct to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the Second World War? The answer is yes. Approximately 250,000 people were to die either from the atomic bombs or soldiers from invading mainland Japan. The bombs allowed the U.S. a swift victory over what had been a very long and gruesome war. Without the bomb many more American lives would have been taken and the toll a longer war in the American public would be tremendous. Without a doubt the use of the atomic weapon to end the Second World War was the correct choice.
The war was coming to a victorious conclusion for the Allies. Germany had fallen, and it was only a matter of time until Japan would fall as well. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson was at the forefront of the American war effort, and saw atomic weaponry as a way out of the most monumental war ever. As discussed in Cabell Phillips’ book, The Truman Presidency: The History of a Triumphant Succession, Stimson was once quoted as saying that the atomic bomb has “more effect on human affairs than the theory of Copernicus and the Law of Gravity” (55). Stimson, a defendant of dropping the bomb on Japan, felt that the world would never be the same. If the world would change after using atomic weapons, could it possibly have changed for the better? One would think not. However, that person might be weary of the biased opinion of White House personnel. He or she should care more for the in depth analytical studies done by experts who know best as to why America should or should not have dropped the atomic bomb. As more and more evidence has been presented to researchers, expert opinion on whether or not the United States should have dropped the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has also changed. More and more researchers seem to feel that the atomic bomb should never have been used (Alperovitz 16). Despite several officials’ claims to enormous death estimations, an invasion of Japan would have cost fewer total lives. In addition, post atomic bomb repercussions that occurred, such as the Arms Race, were far too great a price to pay for the two atomic drops. However, possibly the most compelling argument is that Japan would have surrendered with or without the United States using the atomic bomb. In defiance of top...
The potential use of atomic weapons against the Japanese was appealing to the United States because it was seen as a dramatic and decisive way to end the war (Walker, ). Prior to the decision to use nuclear weapons, Japan and the United States were at odds over the terms by which the Japanese would surrender to the Americans, which did nothing but prolong the military conflict (Walker, ). Japanese leadership had expressed its desire to end the war to third parties, but could no...
Upon reading “Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs Against Japan” by J. Samuel Walker, a reader will have a clear understanding of both sides of the controversy surrounding Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. The controversy remains of whether or not atomic bombs should have been used during the war. After studying this text, it is clear that the first atomic bomb, which was dropped on the city of Hiroshima, was a necessary military tactic on ending the war. The second bomb, which was dropped on Nagasaki, however, was an unnecessary measure in ensuring a surrender from the Japanese, and was only used to seek revenge.
This sharp decrease in morale amongst the Japanese people after the dropping of the atomic bomb coincided with an increase in Japanese fear of American and Allied power in future battles. For example, according to survivors of the bombing, whenever a lone American plane was seen over a Japanese city, people would “rush into their shelters,” and “They went in and out so much that they did not have time to eat. They were so nervous they could not work.” Prior to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki most Japanese were only scared of American aircraft if there was a large group, but after the dropping of the atomic bomb any individual plane could wreak havoc on Japanese cities, as Elona Gay did to Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945. The use of the atomic bomb was able to spread fear amongst the Japanese people so much that after the droppings of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki many people fled the cities to the countryside fearing more attacks of the same magnitude from the Allied powers.
President Harry Truman’s use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan during the Second World War is the most controversial decision in history. While it was an undoubtedly difficult decision, it was indeed necessary in order to end this six-year war that had ravaged the world. While many critics argue that the bomb was used primarily as an act of vengeance toward Japan, simplifying such a crucial moment in human history downplays the very real risk invading Japan posed to the United States. While avoiding strained relations with the other Allied countries, Truman had to assess the possible danger of the Soviet Union in a post-war world. Furthermore, the possibility of an arms race, the moral implications of using this weapon, and the number of American lives that would possibly be lost invading Japan were among the numerous pros and cons Truman had to consider when contemplating the use of this powerful weapon never before unleashed on humanity.
First, a defense of the Japanese islands would have been extremely costly for both the Americans and the Japanese because the number of civilians that would be caught in between the two colliding forces on the main island were massive, noting that the cities of Tokyo and Kyoto were prime targets for the allies. Also, what would have made the Japanese Defense Plan more costly was the Japanese soldiers, roughly two million in strength were desperate and fanatic to defend their home at all costs. All of these factors made the atomic bomb the legitimate solution to bringing the Japanese to the table to sign to the terms set forth by the Western allies' Unconditional Surrender.
But the Japanese military was cruel and had a mindset almost suicidal and the only viable way to win the war and prevent the least amount of American lives lost was to speed up the process with the use of atomic weaponry. Dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not an easy decision by the U.S. military and government and as the president stated it was not something that was taken lightly or was likely to be used again unless necessary. The Atomic bomb had quite an impact on American military strategy and it is important with the amount of impact two bombs can have on not only the United States but the world that we understand the reasons this kind of weaponry is used in the first place as a well calculated last
Dropping the atomic bombs was not a new calamity at the climax of World War Two. The United States had already “fire bombed” the cities of Tokyo and Dresden. During the Tokyo firebombing, an estimated 200,000 civilians were killed instantaneously. The Dresden fire bombing also produced a total of 25,000 civilian deaths. Fire bombing was also a more vicious tactic by the United States than the atomic bombs were. Fire bombing consisted of a two wave attack where the first wave would come through and detonate bombs about 100 feet above the ground in order to blow out the building’s windows. This technique was used to expose the internal contents of buildings so that they could burn faster. Immediately after the first wave, the second wave would come through and drop bombs that were created with the sole purpose of starting fires. The whole city would erupt in a big fire that would absorb the air from the atmosphere. The civilians in those cities would die either by being charred to death, or by suffocating to death due to the lack of oxygen. Therefore, the atomic bombs were not a new thing, but rather they were another domino that fell on the gameboard of bombing raids. Another incentive to use the bomb involved the time and money spent by the Manhattan Project on the creation of the bomb. The Manhattan Project spent five years and two billion dollars on the atomic bombs. That money could not go to waste
To choose whether or not it was morally sound to use the atomic bomb, we must first examine the background as to what circumstances it was dropped under. In 1945, American soldiers and civilians were weary from four years of war, yet the Japanese military was refusing to give up their fight. American forces occupied Okinawa and Iwo Jima and intensely fire bombed Japanese cities. But Japan had an army of 2 million strong stationed in the home islands guarding against Allied invasion. After the completion of the Manhattan Project, For Truman, the choice whether or not to use the atomic bomb was the most difficult decision of his life. First, an Allied demand for an immediate unconditional surrender was made to the leadership in Japan. Although the demand stated that refusal would result in total destruction, no mention of any new weapons of mass destruction was made. The Japanese military commander Hideki Tojo rejected the request for unconditional s...
There were many factors as to the argument relating to the atomic bombs leading to the United States final decision. Many people had arguments for the bombing and others had arguments against the bombings, but it is still not determined if the United States made the right decision. After Truman decided to bomb Japan, they had to plan it out. They first had to decide where to release the bomb. They ended up choosing Hiroshima, Japan and Nagasaki, Japan as their two locations.
The dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan were ethical decisions made by President Harry Truman and the United States government. By the time of the atom bomb was ready, the U.S. had been engaged in military conflict for over four years and lost over 400,000 soldiers. Truman claimed, "We would have the opportunity to bring the world into a pattern in which the peace of the world and our civilization can be saved" (Winkler 18). The bomb was aimed at ending the war immediately and avoiding prolonged battle in the Pacific Theater and the inevitable invasion of Japan. President Truman hoped that by showing the Japanese the devastating weapon the U.S. possessed, that the war could be brought ...
In 1945, Germany had surrendered, but the war in the Pacific raged on. The allies were becoming desperate to end the war before it was necessary to carry out a full scale invasion. New developments in science had made it possible for the United States to weaponize the atom, and the consequent bomb created was dropped on Hiroshima and later Nagasaki at the approval of President Harry S. Truman and his advisors. In years to come, Truman would have to face questions over the merit of his actions. Although some may believe the atomic bomb was needed because it ended WWII, it was unnecessary to drop the nuclear bomb because of the alternatives that existed, the effect it had on the Japanese people, and because of the unethical reasons for dropping it.
“My God, what have we done?” were the words that the co-pilot of Enola Gay wrote in his logbook after helping drop two bombs, one in Hiroshima and one in Nagasaki, that killed an estimated two-hundred thousand individuals. The bombings were completely unnecessary. Japan was already defeated because they lacked the necessary materials to continue a world war. The Japanese were prepared to surrender. There was no military necessity to drop the atomic bombs nor is there any factual information stating that the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dropped to “save the lives of one million American soldiers.” The United States bombed Japan in August of 1945. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were uncalled for and could have been avoided.
The decision to drop the atomic bomb was contemplated by officials in the American government for a prolonged period of time. Ultimately the conclusion was that dropping the bombs would be beneficial to America. The American government rationalized dropping the bombs by stating that it would terminate the war with Japan and save a plethora of American lives. America did issue an ultimatum declaring that Japan should cease to resist and in return conditions would be provided for Japan to finish the war with honor. This ultimatum was ignored and the alternative was absolute destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (Dollinger) Most officials believed that taking this last step would force Japan’s surrender and shorten the war which would result in a decrease of American casualties. (Barnes) Winston Churchill approximated that one million American lives were preserved by utilizing the atomic bomb.
There are many people who oppose the use of the atomic bombs; though there are some that believe it was a necessity in ending the war. President Truman realized the tragic significance of the atomic bomb and made his decision to use it to shorten the agony of young Americans (“Was the Atomic Bombing”). The president knew of the way the Japanese fought. They fought to the death and they were brutal to prisoners of war. They used woman and children as soldiers to surprise bomb the enemy. They made lethal weapons and were taught to sacr...