Truman made some decisions that ultimately had a huge effect in the build up to the cold war. When plans were made for the division of power after WWII, Truman originally opposed America ganging up against Russia and said he would keep the agreements that were made with them. But Truman wanted to appear decisive and tough and he was not prepared to accept any deal if he could not get the majority of it his way. When Truman went to the Potsdam Conference in July 1945, he went there only to advance American Interest and he believed that the atomic bomb was the way to do this. Though this treat he was able to have his way at the Yalta conference.
If the United States is clear that they do not want to make him a criminal but instead a national symbol then maybe the Japanese might agree and surrender. With this option the United States will have moral leadership and will be able to build a war of peace and democracy without stooping to the level of the enemy. If the United States does chose this option they are risking that the japes might take it as a sign of weakness and might encourage them to keep fighting. Another risk with this option is that if not all aggressive militarism is destroyed then we know that new dictators and wars will come up again. Option two is that the United States should drop an atomic bomb on a deserted island so that the whole world can see what power we have.
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.
Stalin’s view is supported by Admiral D Leahy, who in his memoirs writes ‘we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages’ This quote holds a substantial amount of weight to my argument due to Admiral D Leahy’s position as Roosevelt and Truman’s chief of staff, it would be expected for a man of such status to hold a view in support of America’s actions. Nevertheless, it is apparent that while Leahy may have condoned the dropping of the bomb to shorten the war, he would make no attempt to justify his country’s and his President’s actions. The moral implications were made apparent on the British mission to Hiroshima. Not only did the bombs claim the lives of over 200,000 civilians, the
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.
“ Truman was to drop the bomb on Hiroshima” How much do you agree with this statement. (look at both sides) I agree with the statement to a certain extent. I agree looking on the basis of a strategic point but not as a humane point. He knew that the Japanese didn’t approve of surrendering and would fight until the last man, just as they did in Iwo Jima. Therefore he could have though that he was saving a lot of lives by not sending in his troops.
In fact, the debates behind using the atomic bombs against Japan began even before the decision was made. Many of the scientists such as Leo Szilard and Dr. James Franck, who made great contributions towards the creation of the bomb, campaigned against its use. President Truman said “We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Amercicans”. It is completely understandable that President Truman’s aim was always to save the lives as many American people, but was it necessary to do it by dropping the atomic bombs on Japan? 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’?
Although he did approve of the bomb, Roosevelt was unconcerned about actually dropping the bomb on Japan. Instead he supported the idea that since Germany was possibly looking into the same type of destructive weapon, the U.S. needed to advance in the field in order to prevent detrimental attacks against them. He had the Great Depression on his hands as well and was less motivated during his time to destroy Japan to end the war more efficiently. On the other hand, Truman saw his opportunity of bringing the United States to the end of the war in a quick manner by releasing the bombs since Japan had no intentions of taking an easy surrender. To prevent going through an invasion, Truman made a hasty decision to drop the bombs.
His decision for expressing these words is mainly based on historical facts. King Archidamus claims that if their unprepared population decides to ignore these facts, it will bring a greater harm to their population. In contrast, their foe, the Athenians have access to a variety of essential resources such as, a strong navy and their numerous tax-paying allies allows them to achieve a higher chance of victory at war. (1.80). Therefrom, due to these important facts, the wise king Archidamus strongly encourages their population to postpone their attack and to prepare their army instead.
The question still lingers in our mind as to ‘Was America Justified in Dropping the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima?’, as evidence suggests, there is strong belief that the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima was in fact justified. This essay proves the fact that America was justified, after informing you about the main participants in the war, it will go on to state the arguments for and against dropping the bomb, and after that the effects and finally the conclusion. As Germany had surrendered, the war in Europe was now over. The USSR had gained most land in Eastern Europe; all that was left was the problem of Japan. And the clear solution to this problem and to one to end the war was to drop the bomb on Hiroshima.