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.
In August of 1945, atomic bombs were dropped on Heroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Both cities were destroyed and approximately 200,000 people were killed. Japan surrendered just six days after the bombs were dropped on August 15, 1945. The use of the atomic bombs were not necessary to end World War II, however using the bombs ended the war much faster and saved the lives of many soldiers and civilians. Even after the surrender of Nazi Germany on May 8th, the war against Japan continued.
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’?
The Ethical Merits of Truman’s Japanese Atomic Bombing Decision: Was it Justified? Name: Institutional Affiliation: Abstract Over the years since the end of World War II, there have been raging debates about the United States’ controversial decision to unleash nuclear atomic bombs on Japan. The decision that has sparked worldwide discourse among historians and scientists alike was made by the then US president, Harry S. Truman. One bomb hit Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 while a second bomb was dropped in the city of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945. The aftermath of the two bombings was catastrophic, with hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians buried and killed by the bomb debris.
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).
The U.S. believed that if the atomic bomb ended the war, the U.S. would establish postwar supremacy over the Soviets. In addition, the atomic bomb had cost 2 billion dollars and mobilized, at its peak, over 120,000 people. Linking this weapon to the end of the war would help justify that expenditure. In addition to the desire to force Japan's surrender, these considerations led the U.S. to proceed with the atomic bombings. (2) Why did it happen?
After that she figured out why so many people in Utah, including her family were found with cancer. The author tells the readers what situation took place from January 27, 1951 through July 11, 1962. It was a well known story in the Desert West, “The Day we Bombed Utah,” these were the years that atomic testing happened in Nevada. The author explains how much has been written about “American nuclear tragedy.” “Public health was secondary to national security.” (892) Williams explains how many people tried to make some protests to the United States government telling them to stop nuclear testing, but all these attempts failed. The United States said that the nuclear testing or radiation was not the cause why so many women were getting breast cancer.
Why does Michael Moore want to tell us that the USA/Bill Clinton bombed Serbia only one hour before the school killings at Columbine High School? He wants to tell us that what the USA does, affect what the people in the USA may do. Michael Moore interviews a young man who says: If you are a loser now, you are a loser forever. Our opinion: We think that if someone tells you, that you are a loser, you just get into ‘a deep hole’. But if someone tells you that you have to move on and try, it’s easier to learn and get a good life.
The americans that weren't in the attack, they lost their loved ones. Many innocent americans died because of this bombing. the bombing of pearl harbor would change how the american citizens and government viewed war and
Within the first four months after the bombings, thousands of other Japanese citizens lost their lives due to complications from burns, radiation poisoning, and other injuries. It is estimated that between 180,000 to 230,000 people, mostly civilians, died during and after the use of the atomic bombs. From the day after to 70 years later the bombings have been a major topic of discussion and debate between philosophers and scholars alike. Just War Theory: Set of conditions under which a resort or act of war is morally legitimate. Among the proposed conditions for the just resort to war are that the cause be just, that the authority undertaking the war be competent, that all peaceful alternatives be exhausted, and that there is a reasonable hope of success.