What in Your Opinion Was the Short Term Significance of Use of Atomic Bombs in 1945?

1495 Words6 Pages
What in your opinion was the short term significance of the use of atomic weapons in 1945? (25) It would be simplistic to argue that the end of the war in the Pacific was the most important short term significance of the use of atomic bombs in 1945 against Japan. While the use of Little Boy prompted the Japanese Emperor’s ‘ordered surrender’ , and claimed the lives of thousands of Japanese civilians, it is my opinion that the bomb sparked the onset of the Cold War. As Eisenhower said ‘Before the atom bomb was used, I would have said, yes, I was sure we could keep the peace with Russia’. , highlighting that he believed without the use of atomic weapons, the Cold War was not an inevitability. Despite the pre-existing tensions between East and West, the use of atomic weaponry amplified the Soviet’s paranoia causing Stalin to authorise ‘a crash Soviet program to catch up’ , signifying the start of the Cold War which would shape the course of the twentieth century. A key significance of the use of atomic weapons in 1945 was the ethical implications that using such weaponry held. As Stalin stated ‘war is barbaric, but using the A-bomb is superbarbarity’ . 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
Open Document