Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Reasons for hiroshima nagasaki bombing
Hiroshima and nagasaki day an essay
What was the justification for the bombing of Hiroshima
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Reasons for hiroshima nagasaki bombing
Dates That Shall Live In Infamy On August 6th, 1945, American planes flew over the city of Hiroshima in Japan. With them they carried an atomic bomb with a force unlike any previously imagined named “Little Boy”. It was dropped directly on Hiroshima in a necessary act of justice, as the United States likes to call it. Three days later, on August 9th, a second atomic bomb named “Fat Man” was dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, once again called necessary and just. The destruction brought an end to the war, but was it truly worth it? No, it wasn’t. America’s use of atomic bombs on Japan during World War II was not justified due to the murder of civilians and the American government’s neglect of scientific opinion. The American …show more content…
A survivor of the bombing on Hiroshima named Keiko Murakami shared her story, appropriately entitled “My Hiroshima”. She was eight years old at the time the bombs were dropped. Her father spotted the plane only seconds before the bomb dropped and he managed to get Keiko and her brother into their underground shelter just as the bomb hit. When the emerged from the debris, Keiko saw things no one should have to see, let alone an eight year old little girl. “All the neighboring houses were damaged. There was nothing left standing. We yelled for my mother. Soon the heap of rubbles moved; and she appeared with my baby sister in her arms. Many pieces of glass were stuck all over her body. Her right eyeball was out and drooped around her breast like a lump of blood.” (Murakami, Keiko. My Hiroshima.) That gorey picture is straight out of a horror movie. There is no excuse for causing that cause of trauma to someone. None. Keiko said later in life she was lucky she survived, as she was one mile away from the hypocenter. Several others were not as lucky in any sense of the word. “The initial death count in Hiroshima, set at 42,000–93,000, was based solely on the disposal of bodies, and was thus much too low. Later …show more content…
It is in fact true that Japan was given both of those. The Potsdam Declaration was a call for Japanese surrender from the United States, which states as follows. “We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurance of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction.” (Harry S. Truman. Potsdam Declaration.) The Potsdam Declaration was clear in its terms for surrender, and the warning threat is there. It is also true that Japan denied this surrender demand quickly. However, this measly declaration does not justify America’s actions against Japan. First, the terms for surrender were called “unconditional”. That’s never a good start. The terms for surrender should always have flexing room so a compromise can be reached, and it’s easier to convince the enemy both sides shall win in some way at the end. Second, the warning was vague. The way it’s worded leads little to no hint as to what is to come. It can easily be misinterpreted as a bluff, or a simple threat for military invasion. It lacks detail that would have possibly pushed Japan to at the very least think more about their decision, which would lean towards justifying the United State’s actions if Japan still chose to not surrender.
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 wantedunconditional surrender (Cite). 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 not come to an agreement over what terms would be acceptable for their surrender (Walker, 47)....
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.
In discussion of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, one controversial issue has the dropping of the atomic bombs being justified. On the other hand others believe that there were other ways of getting Japan to surrender and it was not justified, the only way we could get Japan to surrender was to invade them. Our strategy was to island hop until we got to Japan. Many more lives were at steak when doing that. Not only would just Americans would die, but a lot of the Japanese would have died as well, and the death toll would have much greater. 199,000 deaths came after the dropping of the atomic bombs. However, many American lives were saved, what the Japanese did to Pearl Harbor, and the treatment of our American soldiers while
We agree that, whatever be one’s judgment of the war in principle, the surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. The “8 Primary Pros and Cons of Dropping the Atomic Bomb” People also say how Japan was already defeated, concluding why the bombs were unnecessary. Although, many others say that the dropping of the atomic bombs saved their lives, but the debate over the decision to drop the atomic bomb will never be resolved. The war against Japan bestowed the Allies with entirely new problems as they encountered an enemy with utterly unfamiliar tactics.
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
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 ...
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. The statement by Maier
As World War 2, came to a close, The United States unleashed a secret atomic weapon upon the enemy nation of Japan that was quickly recognized as the most powerful wartime weapon in human history. They completely destroyed the entire Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and essentially vaporized countless innocent Japanese lives. Some historians believe that it was a foolish, brutal decision to use the atomic bomb on a weakened Japan, and that the civilians of the country did not deserve that kind of mass-annihilation. On the opposite side, other historians assert that dropping the bomb saved countless American and Japanese lives by ending the war faster than a regular invasion would have. What is undisputed is that this sad event dramatically changed the course of human history.
In August of 1945, both of the only two nuclear bombs ever used in warfare were dropped on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. These two bombs shaped much of the world today.
Continuing on, the bombing of Japan was also unnecessary due to the unacceptable terms of the Potsdam Declaration. After Germany’s surrender on May 7, 1945, the U.S. created a treaty, called the Potsdam Declaration, with terms of surrender for Japan (Lawton). Among those terms was one which stated, “We call upon the government of Japan to ...
“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 United States was justified in dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki for many reasons. First of all, just to start out, the bombings had nothing to do with Japan, it was about the Cold War and the real reason America used these weapons was to show Russia that the US possessed them. Second, the war in the Pacific had been raging for almost four years. The two battles immediately preceding the bomb decision were Iwo Jima and Okinawa, two battles where the Japanese fought to the death and the cost in American casualties was horrific. It was predicted that the invasion of the Japanese mainland at the Island of Kyushu -- scheduled for November of 1945 -- would be even worse. The entire Japanese military and civilian population would fight to the death. American casualties -- just for that initial invasion to get a foothold on the island of Japan would have taken up to an estimated two months and would have resulted in up to 75,000 to 100,000 casualties. And that was just the beginning. Once the island of Kyushu was captured by U.S. troops, the remainder of Japan would follow. You can just imagine the cost in injuries and lives this would take. Also It is not beyond the possibility that a million or more Americans could have been killed had we landed. The Japanese had correctly guessed where we intended to land, and were ready and waiting for us. The casualties would have been high. Another reason the atomic bomb was justified is the bomb was dropped with a desire to save lives. It is a matter of math. How many Americans lost their lives fighting how many Japanese at Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa. The mathematical formula showed the closer we got to Japan the more we lost.
“Little Boy,” the bomb dropped on Hiroshima killed 70,000 people with an additional 66,000 injured (30-39). “Fat Man,” the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, also carried its “share of America’s duty” by killing 40,000 people and injuring another 25,000 (30-39). The bombs also killed an estimated 230,000 more people from the after effects of the two explosions (30). The two bombings had opened the world’s eyes to the destructive power that could be unleashed by man. The bombs had raised hell on earth for those few minutes and produced a tremendous amount of casualties.
Consequently, when the Japanese refused to budge, the United States dropped two atomic bombs, the Little Boy and the Fat Man, on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As a result, the Japanese people faced their ultimate plight. The Japanese’s stubborn ways and refusal to cooperate were why the United States was forced to drop the two atomic bombs onto the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But there were also many downsides to the United States’ decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Using the atomic bomb was illegal anywhere on the earth, so the United States using it was not legitimate.