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.
Bush's administration sought and received permission from Congress to design a new class of nuclear weapons: "mini-nukes," relatively low-yield tactical nuclear weapons for use against underground bunkers and other small battlefield targets. Advocates of these new weapons point to the uniquely powerful, compact "punch" that can be delivered by a nuclear weapon; critics argue that even a small nuclear weapon may cause many civilian casualties, and, more important, that actual use of a nuclear weapon of any size would break the taboo on such use that has held since the end of World War II, making the use of larger, more destructive nuclear weapons more likely in future
The ones who believe this, do not comprehend the many different factors in war and how the route that was chosen was best for both parties that were directly affiliated with the bombings. The cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been fire bombed if the atomic bombs were not dropped, causing similar damage and death counts to the atomic bombs. According to Kyoko Iriye Selden, "The most influential text is Truman's 1955 Memoirs, which states that the atomic bomb probably saved half a million US lives— anticipated casualties in an Allied invasion of Japan planned for November. Stimson subsequently talked of saving one million US casualties, and Churchill of saving one million American and half that number of British lives"(1). With this amount of casualties projected, a land invasion would have trumped the death toll of D-Day.
More recently, there was Hitler's genocidal six-million-death final solution to the Jewish problem, and the Communists' ten of millions of mass murders continue to this day. All this has been done without benefit of nuclear power. Many made comments came at the beginning of the atomic or nuclear age, and while the source and the judgment deserve respect, experience has shown that nuclear power in Western hands deterred a third world war and ultimately caused the collapse of the greatest
Moreover, other countries claimed the right of nuclear weapons to defend their citizens. Consequently, the tragic bombings became the example of an arm’s race instead of peace. Furthermore, since Japan was already on the brink of collapse the bombing was unnecessary, and peace talks would have taken place within a decent time frame (even after the cancelled Hawaii summit). The millions of deaths calculated by Operation Downfall [the codename for the Allied plan for the invasion of Japan near the end of the Second World War, which was abandoned when Japan surrendered following the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki] actually show that only desperation and honour stood between Japan and unconditional
After multiple ideas along with deep thought, Truman along with the chiefs decided the most efficient, least costly and less bloody approach would to be dropping the atomic bombs on the Japanese home land. The essay states “evidence points to the conclusion that he acted for the reason he said he did: to end a bloody war that would have become even bloodier had invasion proved necessary” pg 175 Readings in United States History. The writer’s purpose of this essay is to educate the readers about the difficulty of this decision. I believe the writer did a fine job explaining the whole process. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombing are two greatly important milestones in the United States history, and the essay “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Bomb,” by Robert James Maddox is a perfect essay to be read over and discussed in a class like this.
The Japanese were seen as bloodthirsty savages willing to die rather than give up. Their defense of Okinawa and the thousands of kamikaze pilots only confirmed this fear in the eyes of the Americans. Truman felt the bomb would save more lives in the long run, due to avoiding another six or more months of carnage that the war was known for. Truman later said he estimated fighting losses numbered in the several hundred thousands, while bomb losses numbered in the tens of thousands since he intended to spare as many women and children as humanly possible. Using the bomb pretty much guaranteed that the U.S. would occupy Japan without the Soviets as well as sending a clear message to the Soviets to go slow and careful in Europe and it’s territories.
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 most notable change I believe was the increase of defense spending, which helped fuel the economy and pay for the cost of research to build nuclear weapons, jet plains, satellites, and consumer goods that were often the side products of military research. (Nash 648) Atomic nuclear weapons were first developed by America after Roosevelt had heard that the German’s were researching on making an atomic bomb. The first and only time there was a nuclear war started when America bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. America had boomed Japan to put an end the war, at the end of World War II America was the only country who had nuclear war power. In response to the bombing of Japan, the Soviet Union and Communist China developed their own nuclear weapons.
Countries should use nuclear energy because it is eco-friendly, it can produce a lot of energy, and it is the best energy resource we can use so far. People started to develop nuclear energy soon after the discovery of radioactive element such as radium. When people first discovered radioactive, they thought nuclear energy is unfeasible, because, though radioactive elements can produce a lot of energy, but high energy produced means short half-live for radioactive. However, in 1938 the idea of being impractical changed, because three German chemists discovered nuclear fission (Nuclear Power). “Nuclear fission is the process of breaking up atoms; the process will generate an enormous amount of energy in form of heat” (Nuclear Power and the Environment).