Fussel versus Walzer I believe that dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was inhumane and that the happenings of that war could have been solved in a different manner. Before reading both Fussel and Walzer’s opposing opinions on the droppings of the atomic bombs on Japan, I can confidently say that I agreed with Fussel to a certain extent. Many people’s gut reaction to something as huge as this would be “Better him/her than me”. What was so wrong with killing 100,000 to potentially save hundreds of thousands of American lives? That is what a lot of people asked themselves and still ask themselves until this day.
The Germans, immediately after sinking the ship, accused Britain of the Lusitania carrying munitions, not just passengers. The government tried to justify the sinking of the Lusitania by saying that the Lusitania contained weapons (“Sinking of RMS Lusitania” para. 2). The Germans must have known that the Lusitania held weapons, years before future historians and scientists would prove their existence true. If not, Germany would have looked at all the positives and negatives of sinking the Lusitania, and would have realized the cons outweighed the pros in this situation.
The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb Good and Bad One of the major questions regarding the study of World War II is whether or not the United States was justified in dropping the Atomic Bomb on Imperial Japan at the end of the War. Crimes against humanity, as never witnessed before, and hopefully to never be seen again, occurred during the course of World War II. The security of our nation and of other Allied nations was severely threatened, not only by the Germans, but also by the Japanese. The Japanese were a strong people willing to fight until it was no longer possible. It may even be said that they were suicidal, with their kamikaze pilots and no real hope of defeating the Allied nations.
Some deem this drastic event as necessary, some say it was cruel and ruthless, while others have yet to form an opinion between if it was entirely bad or essential. The atomic bombs, known as Little Boy and Fat Boy, left devastation all over Japan’s cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when two U.S. planes dropped them from above. The bombs were supposedly intended to end World War II, but yet the morality of the situation is often called into question when seeing the wake of their destruction. With any little bit of knowledge on what happened, one can become aware of the various viewpoints and grasp a new understanding of the material. These perspectives are often put into three categories: the question of “Was it truly Necessary?”, and its counter-argument, along with demolition and effects.
The Nazis felt like this political group was trying to undermine their “people’s community”. Hitler made it very clear that he did not want the communists in his people community when he and the Nazi party realised their 25 point programme of 1920.However the Nazis also portrayed the socialist and any other party of which had taken part in coalition governments during the Weimar republic as they collaborated with communism and Jewish democracy. Hitler wanted to introduce the policy of volksgeminschaft in this case because if he could eliminate the communists and the other parties who were associated as collaborating with them, the Nazis could then get their votes as they had a high amount of supporters, which would mean them having the majority and coming into power. Anybody who the Nazis believed that represented a threat to the racial purity of which Hitler wanted would come under the socialism categories. This included, Jews, gypsies and those who were seen as mentally or physically unfit.
John Hersey’s article ‘Hiroshima’, first published in the New Yorker on the 31st of August 1946, was influential in shaping both American and Global sentiment in regards to the deployment of nuclear weapons , startling a previously apathetic populace into confronting the horrors encountered by individuals in Hiroshima. Hersey bases his article around the experiences of six individuals present during the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, instead of recounting in totality the effects of the bomb, the focalisation on the individuals gives a distinctly human feel to the composition, a significant factor when referring to how the text directed sentiments, since the American population In particular only had limited exposure to the implications that the dropping of the bomb had, due to stringent censorship on Hiroshima related material and the exposure they did have, for example pictures taken of nuclear weapon testing on the bikini atoll failed to encapsulates the ‘human’ effect of the bomb. This victim’s point of
Life in California Before the Gold Discovery In reading "Life in California Before the Gold Discovery", my first thought is that the Americans appear to have been rather greedy and not trustworthy during that time. Of course, all of the accounts given were given by Californios, and so they are of a biased nature, meaning we don't get to see both sides of the story. It seems to me like they had a good thing going for them, a healthy and prosperous culture where they could all trust one another, and then the greed of the Americans gradually destroyed it and unhinged their society until there was nothing left. The changes brought about by the gold rush made California a very popular place for Americans to settle. The greed of the Americans, combined with becoming a part of the United States made the Californios mistrust Americans and look upon their arrival with fear or anger.
Source 15 backs up this point; it’s message is that the media has shown the royal families true colours, albeit very bland colours. It tells us that the media revealed that the hype over the monarchy was somewhat exaggerated and they weren’t really worth peoples excitement. We can also see this in the TV show “It’s A Royal Knockout” which was a great embarrassment to the monarchy. Source 16 both agrees and disagrees with this point. It tells us that the nation was very distraught after the death of Princess Diana, who was intensely followed by the media.
Ray Bradbury wrote this piece of writing while he was very disturbed. It was right after the atom bomb, and he saw the great destruction it cause, and even afterwards from the radiation. All this destruction came from technology. He wants us to stop and think before we use or invent technology about the after cause and consequences it cause. It’s very interesting to see how through out the whole story it describes how beneficial and helpful the extreme advanced technology in the house was for humans.
The United States government did not detonate the two nuclear devices on Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the intention of bringing an end to the war with Japan, but instead to intimidate the Soviet Union. The defeat of Japan proved that the United States bombed the country to show how strong the Americans are regarding nuclear energy versus the Soviets. Also, the undeniable truth that relations with the Soviet Union started to deter, showed that the United States wanted to frighten the U.S.S.R. by bombing Japan. Finally, competition for the post-World War II division of Europe proved that the U.S. wanted to scare the Soviet Union. Dropping the atomic bomb constituted a major factor in decision of Japan to accept the terms laid out at the Potsdam