Kelly Shaver AMH 2030 Week 7 Individual Work What factors likely motivated President Truman to authorize the use of atomic bombs against Japan in August 1945? President Truman did not trust the Soviets. The Potsdam Declaration – July 26 listed U.S. policy also giving Japan a chance to surrender without guaranteeing that Emperor Hirohito would not be tried for war crimes committed by Japan. Japan was so cautious about their response that is was seen as a refusal on their part. The Japanese were seen as bloodthirsty savages willing to die rather than give up.
Therefore, the US created unconditional terms of surrender, knowingly going against the Japanese ethic of honour and against the institute of the emperor, whom most Americans probably wanted dead. Consequently, the use of the atomic bomb became a way to avenge America's fallen soldiers while also keeping the USSR in check in Europe. The Japanese civilian casualties did not matter in this strategy. Also, it did not prevent the Cold War, as the USSR was just a few years behind on a-bomb research. At the time, revenge, geopolitics and an expensive project that could not be allowed to simply rust away, meant the atomic bomb had to be hastily deployed “in the field” in order to see its power and aftermath – though little was known about radiation and its effects on humans.
I do agree of dropping the bomb because it did save a lot of lives. Franklin Roosevelt was trying to find a way to end the war very fast. Then Truman had to end Roosevelt’s idea of winning the war fast. Truman wasn’t looking for a way to not use the atomic bomb. The United States wanted to end the war fast because we wanted the lowest amount of casualties.
• Even though they were going to use the bomb the government kept recruiting people into the army. • Many people argued that if the government were going to use this amazing weapon why not just stop investing so much money into the military. E. Conclusion • The United States cannot be fully responsible for the bombing for Hiroshima but they do play a major role of the bombing. • Japan was warned that they would be bombed if they did not comply to American terms but because of this Japan refused to accept the terms and in return an atomic bomb was dropped over Hiroshima • President Truman had many other options that bombing Japan in order for them to surrender but since America is such a nationalistic country they wanted to prove to Russia their enemy before and after WWII that they were the stronger country. • Even though the bomb was dropped and Japan refused to surrender.
The Big Bang During the course of the war in Japan, we, the Americans, had a very important decision to make. One of the options was to drop a newly tested bomb on the Japanese hoping to get them to finally surrender. The other option was to have a mass land invasion on Japan and hope to overthrow with sheer force. We knew that no matter which option we took, there would be a significant amount of casualties. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuclear attacks near the end of World War II against the Empire of Japan by the United States at the executive order of U.S. President Harry S. Truman on August 6 and 9, 1945; these attacks prevented the death of many Japanese and American lives, while preventing the destruction
In World War two there were many battles fought. One of the most controversial issues for the United States was not even a battle though. It was the use of the atomic bomb on two Japanese cities. I believe that the US was right in using the atomic bombs on Japan. The Japanese planned a secret attack on the United States.
Should have America dropped the atomic bomb? In this essay I am going to say whether America should have dropped the atomic bomb. The two main points is yes they should have or the shouldn’t have. The first main point was that USA were worried by Japanese expansion so which they banned all their trading going to Japan, which stopped 80% of all the oil supplied to Japan in the summer of 1941. After this outbreak from the Americans the Japanese hit back with a surprise attack on the Americans which allowed the conquest of South-East Asia and the Pacific before the Americans had even recovered from the surprise attack.
The Civil liberties of the Japanese on the west-coast were more important than the common good because there was no valid evidence that the Japanese were planning an attack with their homeland. The Government illegally took away the Japanese’ civil rights, and it was unnecessary to remove the Japanese from their homes. First of all, there was no valid evidence that the Japanese were planning an attack on the United States with their homeland. During the world war, a man by the name of John Lesesne DeWitt, accused the Japanese people to have
Truman declared to drop the bomb onto Japan mainly because he didn’t want any more of his men to be slaughtered and because Japan was not agreeing to negotiate anything. Although the atomic bomb was dropped onto the two cities of Japan, it was still an unnecessary attack because many innocent civilians were killed. Since Japan was still continuing the war (before the bomb dropped), many deaths would have been sacrificed on both sides, the Japanese and the Americans and that is to say that’ll be millions of sacrifices if the war continued between both countries. The total death of the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima are approximately around 300,000 lives. The nuke drop on Japan is a devastating event but there are also beneficial outcomes that come out of it for example: learning how the radioactive dust kicked up into the atmosphere by large-yield weaponry, was economically cheaper than to do a full scale invasion on Japan, and it shows how much power the country has in terms of
Guy Fawkes 10/21/10 Was the dropping of the bomb a war crime? What do different national histories of the bombing signify? As J. Samuel Walker (quoted by Giamo) indicates, this is a very complicated question that can’t be answered by a simple yes or no. When analyzing the ethics of the dropping of the bombs, as with any single historical event, one must consider context: in this case, that includes Japanese imperialism and war crimes, the increasing acceptability of targeting noncombatants throughout the war, potential American, Japanese, and other Asian lives saved by the dropping of the bomb, the targeting of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in particular for their civilian populations, the forced militarization, loyalty, and sometimes persecution of Japanese citizens themselves by the Japanese government, and a plethora of other factors. Ideally, any public history that addresses the dropping of the bombs should take these factors into consideration, and as a result, most should come to a similar yes-and-no conclusion to Walker’s.