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.
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
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. Popular opinion tends to side with the revisionists, but I will argue that Truman made the right decision, not only for the United States but also for Japan; in fact, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved Japan. Revisionists argue that the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima after Japan’s armed forces and over sixty of its major cities had been already been destroyed. Moreover, historians such as Howard Zinn argue that Truman knew that the Japanese were trying to surrender but that he ignored them because he wanted to use the Bomb (23). Gar Alperovitz, another revisionist, says that Truman’s main purpose in dropping the bombs was to demonstrate its power in order to intimidate the Russians (127).
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.
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”.
The entire world changed after the dropping of the atomic bomb on the Japanese islands of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It created a mass hysteria considering that now the world could be destroyed from the use of these awesome bombs. As the United States gradually slipped into the Cold War with the Soviet Union, people hoped that some ethical codes instilled within us all would prevent the obliteration of the earth by use of atomic bombs. Though the power of the atomic bomb has not been unleashed upon another civilization since Nagasaki, the hope that an ethical code can regulate interactions throughout all regions, states, and nations is erroneous. Blackburn, in his short introduction to ethics through the book “Being Good”, gives seven threats to ethics that denounces the ability to regulate interactions ethically.
Discuss the decision made to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. By August 1945 the Second World War was as its final stages. Only one last victory was need for the Allies in order to win the war, a victory over Japan. Ending the war with Japan during World War 2 was both difficult and problematic for the Americans. The decision to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had many influential factors effecting the decision.
Three days later, another atom bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. It is estimated that between 150,000 and 250,000 people were killed as a result of the bombings. However, once the Japanese government witnessed the destructive power of the bombs, they had no choice but to surrender. Had the bombs not been used, the war would have gone on for much longer.
The dropping of the atomic bombs on World War II on the city of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a very important part of World War II. The atomic bomb ended the war between America and Japan. This was just one of the important events during the battle in World War II. The Battle at Pearl Harbor, where the Japanese attacked U.S. soil was also why the americans bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Some believe that the United States was correct in dropping these bombs on Japan because of the attack on Pearl Harbor while others believe that it was very wrong to dropped the bomb.
The bombs affected the children of the future, who are not to be blamed for anything that took place in the war. They also violate the Just War Theory, and did not give the US any tactical advantage in the war- the bombings were simply experiments to show the world America’s military standing. Along with that, US should not have taken revenge for Pearl Harbor on such a large scale. Some people argue that the bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified as the Americans had the right to take revenge for the attack that occurred at Pearl Harbor. This isn’t true.