The three essays, "Thank God For The Atom Bomb" by Paul Fussel, "Democracy" by Carl Becker, and "Chief Seattle: Letter to President Pierce, 1855" are three different rhetorical modes of writing that exposits theoretical, personal reasoning on the realities of certain controversial historical topics. The main focus of the essays are in proving a steadfast view of an ambiguous subject through sarcastic criticism of opposing ideas and by applying clever use of irony; the authors’ sentiments vary from imperialistic to anti-imperialistic, and from attesting to detesting a past event."Thank God For The Atom Bomb" is a straightforward imperialistic literature which analyzes cause and effect to justify the use of the Atomic bomb during World War 2. The author continuously criticizes the evil of the Japanese in an attempt to convince the reader why the "Japs" deserved what they got. He sites a Japanese pilot saying, "All Japanese must become soldiers and die for the Emperor" to prove his point that the general mentality of the enemy was just that –"implacable, treacherous, barbaric"(p460), and savage. He consistently acknowledges his up-close experience with the war to inform the reader that he has sufficient basis for his analysis. But to reinforce his authenticity that his view is not just possessed by himself, he borrows many statements and examples used by others who share his ideas.
The U.S. war committee already drew out plans for a full-scale coastal assault and that was about to take action anytime; if the bomb was not to be dropped, an armed invasion on the mainland would call for a hellish massacre of unpredictable proportions on both the American and Japanese side. He noted a British observer saying "But for the atomic bombs, ... they would have annihilated the lot of us"(p457). Just preventing an anticipated one million American casualties was sufficient cause for the Nagasaki bomb that "led to peace"(p459).The effect of the bomb should be obvious that "the killing was all going to be over, and peace was actually going to be the state of things"(p462).
Though not a very compassionate statement, it is true to the fact that the war was over and the killing has come to an end; the reason being that the Japanese has already been killed. "We were going...
... middle of paper ...
...an’s dreams are hidden from us"(p409) concludes the sarcasm in referring to the white man’s destructive motives as his endeavorous dream, something obscured from his inferior red counterpart.These three pieces of literature are exclusively fanatical essays preaching the oblivious existence of ethical errors in people and in the general society through different expository styles. All three rationalizes on ego superiority, the foundation of imperialism. Yet their philosophies are not exactly conforming with one another. It can be derived from "Democracy" that the author dislikes people for labeling any fascist government as democratic - thus a superior state - to justify for unrelated wars or revolutions (i.e. the Nazi imperialism); while "Thank God For The Atom Bomb" attests American righteous-superiority during the Pacific Wars and criticizes people who thinks his ideas imperialistic. Chief Seattle who detested against imperialism, can no doubt be seen as also possessing self superiority for it can be judged that he believes the red man to be superior, at least from a moral point of view. Therefore concludes the similarities and differences of the essays.
It was believed that dropping an atomic bomb on Nagasaki would resolve a number of problems in a simpler fashion than prolonging the conventional warfare until Japan finally ceded defeat. The primary goal of this extreme force was to bring a swift end to the war in the Pacific,(Walker) but a secondary goal was to display the military and technological might of the United States to allies and rivals around the world (Walker,). The use of multiple nuclear weapons made it clear to Japan and the world that Truman's threat of “utter destruction” was intended to be carried out unless Japan delivered what the United States wanted―unconditional surrender (Cite).
In Prompt and Utter Destruction, J. Samuel Walker provides the reader with an elaborate analysis of President Truman’s decision behind using the atomic bomb in Japan. He provokes the reader to answer the question for himself about whether the use of the bomb was necessary to end the war quickly and without the loss of many American lives. Walker offers historical and political evidence for and against the use of the weapon, making the reader think critically about the issue. He puts the average American into the shoes of the Commander and Chief of the United States of America and forces us to think about the difficulty of Truman’s decision.
1.The dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima was necessary to end the war with the least number of total casualties and in the fastest possible way. The figures regarding the exact number of American lives that would’ve been lost has been highly debated, but considering the great resolve that the Japanese army had, they would almost surely have been more than those killed in Nagasaki, and that is just on the American side. I do not value American lives more than the lives of the innocent, many of whom were victims to the attack, but it is important to remember that regardless of whether we had dropped the bomb or not, we were fighting total war. In the many battles that would’ve occurred if the war had continued, women and children may have still been victims as we advanced our troops. These battles could’ve taken as long as another year, and who can say when the Japanese would’ve finally surrendered? They were filled with pride and resilience, and many soldiers would’ve prefered to die with honor, defending their homeland, than to surrender.
Thank God for the Atom Bomb by Paul Fussell is one of many essay written in favor of the Atom bomb that aided the ending of World War 2 in 1945. Fussells claim was that not only was the bomb necessary to end the war, but the bomb actually saved thousands of lives.
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.
Although WW II ended over 50 years ago there is still much discussion as to the events which ended the War in the Pacific. The primary event which historians attribute to this end are the use of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although the bombing of these cities did force the Japanese to surrender, many people today ask “Was the use of the atomic bomb necessary to end the war?” and more importantly “Why was the decision to use the bomb made?” Ronald Takaki examines these questions in his book Hiroshima.
The United States of America’s use of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has spurred much debate concerning the necessity, effectiveness, and morality of the decision since August 1945. After assessing a range of arguments about the importance of the atomic bomb in the termination of the Second World War, it can be concluded that the use of the atomic bomb served as the predominant factor in the end of the Second World War, as its use lowered the morale, industrial resources, and military strength of Japan. The Allied decision to use the atomic bomb not only caused irreparable physical damage on two major Japanese cities, but its use also minimized the Japanese will to continue fighting. These two factors along
Prince Henry of Portugal, more commonly known as Henry the Navigator, and Zheng He, a successful Chinese admiral, were both extremely accomplished men throughout the 14th and 15th centuries. During this era, many accomplished explorers ventured out into the ocean and discovered new lands, two of the most important men being Henry the Navigator and Zheng He. Although both men came from different backgrounds, their contrasting societies and structures affected the way in which they regarded economic and political expansion and also their contact with other cultures. Societies like the Chinese and Portuguese had many cultural differences such as their different religions. The Chinese practiced neo-Confucianism whereas the Portuguese were Christians which was one of the many purposes of their exploration, to spread Christianity. There were also many cultural similarities between the two societies such as their long lasting histories and their explorer’s curiosity to seek out to new lands, which resulted the two societies in having different views on economic and political expansion and contact with other cultures. Both Confucian and Christian ideologies favored those who worked over the wealthy. Thus, to a larger extent, the structures and values of a society have an extensive impact on the way people view economic and political expansion and contact with other cultures.
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.
The imminent invasion of mainland Japan and the allied casualties that came with it were also a factor in the decision to drop the bomb. If the allied forces had invaded mainland Japan, many lives on both sides would have been lost, probably more than they lost in the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The tactics that the allies had used up to this point cost hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides. This was when the Japanese only had maybe two or three thousand men on an island; whereas on the mainland millions of people would fight until their death to protect their country. Can you imagine if the Americans invaded mainland Japan, where they had not only soldiers to fight against, but also the citizens of Japan?
Some people think that if they could only change one aspect of their lives, it would be perfect. They do not realize that anything that is changed could come with unintended consequences. “The Monkey’s Paw” by W.W. Jacobs and “The Third Wish” by Joan Aiken both illustrate this theme. They demonstrate this by granting the main character three wishes, but with each wish that is granted, brings undesirable consequences. The main idea of this essay is to compare and contrast “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Third Wish.” Although the “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Third Wish” are both fantasies and have similar themes, they have different main characters, wishes, and resolutions.
Hence, making the use of the nuclear bomb necessary, since the entire world had already seen how cruel the Japanese were with brutal war crimes that happen throughout the war and spread terror. Also it is important to mention the attack on Pearl Harbor which at the time the United States was no involved in the war at the time. The United States needed to make Japan surrender so that nothing like that would happen again to them or the rest of the Allies. The use of the atomic bomb aided the Allies in getting one step closer to ending the war, however, the use of the bomb had a lot of after effects. Hence, “the four-ton uranium bomb wreaked unprecedented havoc
A huge proponent to the use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and August 9 of 1945 was President Harry Truman. Although they value the ideas and contributions out in by the committee they choose, the president ultimately has the last say on war time decisions. It just so happens that President Truman wanted to drop the bomb. President Truman believed that Japan's leaders would not surrender to the terms outlined in Potsdam meeting. He saw it fit to drop the bombs and end all doubt.
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.