Model Essay Student’s Name Section Number Why the Atomic Bombs Saved Japan. The decision to use nuclear weapons to stop the War in the Pacific by President Harry S. Truman in August, 1945 remains controversial to this day. Most of Truman’s critics, the so-called revisionist historians, argue that Japan wanted to surrender and had already been defeated, making the use of atomic bombs unnecessary. They say the bombs were used mainly to demonstrate America’s power to intimidate the Soviet Union. The historians who support Truman, sometimes called the traditionalists, agree that Japan had been defeated but argue that Japan was not ready to surrender and was, in fact, preparing for one last great battle that would have cost millions of lives.
And was the reason behind the decision to drop the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki purely to ‘save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans’? “We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans.” One of the biggest arguments in the debate on the necessity of dropping the atomic bombs is the argument that it saved American lives, which would have otherwise been lost in the proposed alternative: a land invasion of Japan. It was necessary to ‘completely destroy Japan’s power to make war’, and the best way to do this, to save American lives, was to drop the bombs. “Operation
This is a really hard argument because if you attack the enemy army which is attacking you, you have to think about the deaths of your own men. Since bombings where so unaccurate they might have missed and hit themselfs. But if you do attack factories you can slow down the production of weapons. The attack on Japan was not acceptable. The U.S did not have to kill millions of innocent civillians just to make Japan surreneder.
The decision to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had many influential factors effecting the decision. There certainly was the possibility of success for an invasion, but the decision not to invade far outweighed the decision to invade. Conventional bombing and Blockade were considered in the effort to force Japan into surrender. But, the fact that the Japanese military were controlling the Government and were in a state of mind of absolute refusal to surrender, meant that this was not a reasonable option. Political factors were greatly influential of Truman’s final decision to drop the bomb and the threat of Russian military who were soon to advance in the region had its impact.
Necessity of the bomb lies with the amount of people that would have been killed in a land invasion, although it was vastly exaggerated. If next generation were raised on the path the Japanese were taking, they would grow up to become monsters. it saved many American Soldiers lives by stopping a land invasion of Japan and prisoners of war were being abused. But the Atomic bomb used against Japan was not necessary to end the war considering the numbers of American lives saved was vastly exaggerated, They were sending their battleships and pilots out on suicide missions as they were desperate, there was a vengeance for pearl harbour and racism towards the Japanese people, many victims of the bomb were civilians that had nothing to do with the war, the only reason Japanese weren’t surrendering is because they didn’t want to give up there emperor to the “unconditional surrender” and to demonstrate their power over the world. The bombing of Hiroshima was necessary to end the war as it would save many lives as suggests in source A “should adopt a position that rather than throw to this bomb we should have sacrificed a million American and a quarter of a million British live”.
There were reports that some Japanese people were spying and developing a plan to sabotage the West Coast, however none of these claims were ever proven (Powell, page 135). The United States government became increasingly paranoid about this new problem and demanded action. On Thursday, February 19, 1942, President Roosevelt issued the Executive Order 9066, which called for mass evacuation of Japanese Americans on the west coast with the excuse of a “military necessity,” and that the Japanese “loyalties were unknown.” (Powell, page 132). Efforts were made to limit espionage or sabotage by the Japanese for national security. The government’s quick implementation of Executive Order 9066 in reaction to the public’s panic, not only was unconstitutional and violated Japanese American rights, but also resulted in needless effort and attention towards the internment camps, making this an act of racism, not a military necessity.
The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed millions of people, left families with nothing, and leveled cities. The war would have gone on for a couple more years if we had not dropped the bombs and sent troops to Japan instead. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified. This is one of the pros for the atomic bombing on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. One of the pros for dropping the atom bombs is that the Japanese would have not surrendered.
The atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August, 1945, brought World War II to a close. However, it is debated as to whether or not these bombings were absolutely necessary in order to force Japan into surrender. Japan experienced many victories after the bombing of Pearl Harbour in 1941, yet it was both the American desire to avenge Pearl Harbour; the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, Japanese unwillingness to accept unconditional surrender – and Allied refusal to discuss alternative surrender terms; and the desire to end the war whilst also saving numerous American lives, that ultimately led to the use of atomic weaponry. Several alternative methods had been considered by the Allies, and these methods have been discussed by historians in regards to their possible effectiveness at concluding the war, and as such whether the use of atomic bombs was inevitable. Rather than employing the atomic bombs, the Allies could have continued with incendiary bombings, planned an invasion of the home islands, and employed the strength of the USSR in order to force Japan into surrender.
The main reason I think the negative side won the debate is because the atomic bombs saved lives through preventing the invasion and conventional bombing of Japan. Also, by not allowing a conditional surrender, the United States helped Japan keep a stable society with their emperor without ruining national identity. An additional bonus to the success of the bombs was that the atomic bombs also asserted the United States as the dominant hegemonic power in the world. During the debate, the affirmative side argued that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not necessary to end the war because the United States used the bombs only to assert its global hegemonic dominance, and there were alternative options to ending the war such as negotiating with Japan to establish a conditional surrender, which Japan wanted, and using conventional bombs to invade Japan if the surrender failed. They stated that the United States only used the atomic bomb to show its power to the USSR.
Global Essay The main focus of the United States when it dropped the atomic bombs on Japan was to force Japans unconditional surrender in order to save American lives. Many documents in government history support that this was the main focus. In 1947 Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson had in his memoirs that he believed that the Japanese would fight to the death and very end. This meant putting more American lives at risk in the war. Although the U.S. would’ve defeated Japan in the war eventually, the bombs made it so that they would surrender quicker so lives would be saved.