On December 7, 1941, Pearl Harbor was bombed by the Japanese. The brutal battles of Okinawa, Iwo Jima, and Midway proved that the Japanese were powerful soldiers and fearsome. The Kamikaze pilots were part of the Japanese army and lived with the Bushido code. The Bushido code was that a warrior must be loyal courageous, and etc. for the emperor. Emperor Hirohito was the emperor of Japan at the time and all soldier must be loyal and fight for the emperor to follow the Bushido code. Since the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, President Truman ordered the atomic bomb Fatman and Little Boy to be dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan. President Truman’s order of bombing Japan was unjustified because there were alternative ways of solving the
relationship between Japan and the U.S. and using the atomic bomb was illegal. First of all, the use of the atomic bomb was illegal globally. Bombing an area filled with civilians was illegal because of the danger that the civilians would be put in. In the end, the bomb is still used and was used in an unprofessional way. This illustrates the U.S. bombing Japan was illegal because the use of atomic bomb was illegal in a civilian area. Next, Truman’s order in bombing Japan was unjustified was because the bomb was supposedly used for defensive purposes. The bomb was originally supposed to be used as a bluff to scare other countries. This demonstrates that using the bomb was unjustified because if the bomb was used for defense only, then why was it launched and used to bomb Japan. Others may argue that bombing Japan was the only solution to stopping the Japanese from committing crimes. For instance, instead of dropping the atomic bomb, the U.S. could've wait for Russian help or continued conventional bombing. The Soviet and Japanese had a war going on at the time so the Russians could provide aid for the U.S. since the Russians said they would join the war after the Nazis were brought down. Secondly, the atomic bomb was illegal to use, so the U.S. could of done conventional bombing instead of dropping the atomic bomb since conventional bombing wasn’t illegal. In the end, bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan was unjustified because other methods could of been used to sort out the problem between U.S. and Japan.
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...
To what extent was Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified?
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.
The dropping of the atomic bomb may be one of the most controversial topics in American history. Could there have been another way to end the war without obliterating two Japanese cities? Several historians have taken a side and stated their interpretation of the situation. There are numerous factors that can sway the argument either way depending upon how influential you determine those factors to be. Some main historians that debated this topic are Robert Maddox, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, and Gar Alperovitz. Each of these historians provides us with different insight, and a different answer to the question, was it necessary to drop the atomic bomb to end World War II?
The use of the atomic bomb against Japan was completely justified in both cause and impact. An intense weapon was necessary to force a quick Japanese surrender. The bomb saved thousands upon thousands of American and Japanese lives that would have been lost if the war continued or an invasion occurred. The bomb was the only way to end the suffering of the millions who were being held captive by the Japanese oppressor. The weapon of mass destruction also sent a powerful message to the shaky Soviet allies. The choice to use the atomic bomb was justified because it compelled a Japanese surrender, saved countless lives, served as retribution for the sufferings of many people, and acted as an anti-Soviet deterrent.
Throughout history, there have been countless wars between different groups of people because of race, religion, economic basis, and endless other reasons. More often than not the party that initiated the war was not justified in doing so based on Douglas Lackey’s “just war theory”. One action initiated by the United States that has been furiously debated since the decision was made is the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and later Nagasaki. While some argue that President Harry S. Truman was wrong in making the decision that he did, I will be arguing that he was correct in deciding to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima because there is clear evidence that shows his actions were justified with both statistical proof as well as that the choice coincides with the criteria for “just war theory”.
If they do not now accept our terms they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth.” (Truman).The justification of the bombs was the fact that the bomb was only in retaliation to a hostile nation and there refusal to cooperate with the American government. Japan was attacking with no fear they were unwavering because there military mind set was to never surrender because it was a sign of weakness it was against their nature. And so was the United States we were not going to give up though we were not gaining anything from this war only loosing we had the same sort of national mindset that we could to surrender for the fear of being preserved as week. So with the rejection of surrender the United States dropped the bomb in order to stop a more brutal war and to protect the United States from having to drop out of the
Under President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration the atomic bomb was being developed. After Roosevelt died, his vice president Harry Truman was appointed President of the United States. Truman was never informed about the bombs development until an emergency cabinet meeting (Kuznick 9). Truman had to make the fatal decision on whether the bomb was to be dropped on Japan. With the idea of going to war, Truman had to think about the lives of the thousand American soldiers. The American soldiers had begun using the method of island hopping, because the bomb was not available. The idea of dropping a bomb was that the war itself could possibly end in its earliest points. The dropping of the atomic bomb could also justify the money spent on the Manhattan Project (Donohue 1). With a quote by Franklin D. Roosevelt “This will be a day that will live in infamy”, Pearl Harbor was a tragic day for Americans. The United States had lost many soldiers, which they had claimed that they will eventually get revenge. The alternates of dropping the bomb was also discussed at the Interim Committee. The American government was trying to get an invitation response from the Japanese government. If the United States did not drop the bomb and ‘Operation Downfall’ ha...
President Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the direct cause for the end of World War II in the Pacific. The United States felt it was necessary to drop the atomic bombs on these two cities or it would suffer more casualties. Not only could the lives of many soldiers have been taken, but possibly the lives of many innocent Americans. The United States will always try to avoid the loss of American civilians at all costs, even if that means taking lives of another countries innocent civilians.
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. Hiroshima was a significant military city in the war. It confined two army headquarters and was Japan’s communication center (World War 2 Atomic Bomb 1). Hiroshima was also a huge industrial city and had not been bombed before so it would let Japan see the wrath of the United States (Koeller 1). The planning and actual event of the bombing went great. On August 6, 1945 at 8:15 in the morning the bomb was dropped. The bomb that landed in Hiroshima was called the “Little Boy” (World War 2 Atomic Bomb 2). The bomb ended up killing about 170,000 people. 70,000 people died the first day and 100,000 people died in the next few months due to the radioactivity of the bomb and burns fro...
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 ...
On December 7, 1941 Japan launched a surprise attack on a U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii with the possibility of forcing the U.S. to join World War II. About 2,400 Americans were dead, 21 ships had been sunk, and 188 aircraft were destroyed. On August 6 and 9 of 1945, the U.S. retaliated and dropped two atomic bombs called Fat Man and Little Boy on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The U.S. was not justified in dropping the atomic bombs on Japan because of the locations that were bombed, the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, and the lack of previous bomb testing. Firstly, the bombings were unjustified because of the locations where the bombs were dropped.
“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.
In August of 1944 the war in Europe was over and the face off between the United States and Japan had finally arrived. The United States had to choose between sending hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, to invade Japan killing and being killed by the hundreds of thousands, OR dropping a newly developed weapon called the atomic bomb on two cities in Japan which would result in tens of thousands of civilian lives with little cost to US servicemen. The only hope of ending the war quickly and honorably was to drop the bombs. Calls for surrender were ignored and the Japanese hierarchy, Okinawa and Iwo Jima had shown clearly what an invasion of Japan would be like. The decision was made, the bombs were dropped, the war was ended and both military and civilian lives were saved by both countries.
The decision that should Japan have had attacked Pearl Harbour has divided many historians and it is still debated today. Pearl Harbour was a strategic point, located on the Hawaiian island of Oahu. Its strategic point would have indefinitely helped the Empire of Japan in succeeding world domination. As well as this Pearl harbour was a suitable location for an offence, to seize the US from interfering with Japans expanding Empire. The attack was also a ‘revenge tactic’ to stop the US from growing, and becoming a more feared nation. Despite these arguments, Pearl harbour was a difficult and daring location for an offensive, and therefore it was not a reasonable decision