Examining The Use Of The Atomic Bomb

the United States dropped the atomic bombs on Japan during World War II, yet the controversy about the validity of this decision continues in scientific, political and general public circles. Most likely, due to the complexity of the issue and never knowing the outcome if the bombs were not dropped, it will remain unresolved. A lesson that is continually learned in the U.S.-once again in present times-is the importance of acting from facts and not from emotion. It is hoped that all pros and cons are very seriously weighed before any action is taken if and when such a serious decision must be made in the future.

1. Long after World War II and the use of the atomic bombs against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a great debate remains. It seems that there are two main potential arguments as to why the bombs were detonated and whether or not they were even necessary to begin with. The first theory surrounds the notion of the national security interests of the United States. In this theory essentially, Truman’s actions had been defended and justified as necessary in order to quickly end the war with U.S. causalities kept to a minimum.

Thank God for the Atomic Bomb by Paul Fussel is a provocative essay about the opposing views on the two atomic bombs that America dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan ending World War 2, the most defecating event to happen in history. Over a few million-innocent people died that day, and thousands of the survivors and their offspring have suffered or died since of the result of the chemicals used in the bomb. Fussel was a purple hearted second lieutenant military man frontline in the war. He writes about the difference of opinion of using the atomic bomb from two views: those with firsthand combat with the Japanese and those without firsthand combat experience with the Japanese. Paul Fussel’s essay has the primary aim of persuading the reader that the Atomic bomb was the best choice as a means to end the war and he uses the primary mode of evaluation to persuade. His secondary aim is referential, to inform and explain to those who had no firsthand experience in that war and he uses the secondary mode of description to do this, citing from those against the bomb and those with their hands in the daily blood.

I am a high school student writing to urge you to take a stronger position on the issue of the atomic bomb attacks against Japan in your textbook World History: The Modern Era. I understand your desire to examine the issue objectively and refrain from offending those with a personal connection to the event. However, it is my strong opinion that you should support one side of the issue, specifically the side in favor of the atomic bomb strike, for the reason that they were necessary. President Harry S. Truman’s decision to attack Japan with nuclear weapons, while criticized for moral reasons, was justified by the unyielding resolve of the Japanese people, the substantial remaining resources of the Japanese war machine, and massive estimated casualty rates associated with an invasion of Japan.

The views of the atomic bomb conflict are because some believe that though the bomb will swiftly end the war, many deaths will occur leaving lasting effects. In WWII in 1939, positives and negatives about the dropping of the atomic bomb are revealed through the past events and whether the bomb will be a catalyst for future events. Considering the advantages and disadvantages of dropping the atomic bomb is an important question in order to be able to understand the likelihood of more deaths occurring due to the war. If the bomb is dropped, it could assist the war’s swift ending with fewer deaths in the future from the war, but if it is not dropped, the slow termination of WWII will allow for a higher war death rate. It can be assumed that if the bomb is not dropped sooner, it will eventually

During the time period when Franklin D. Roosevelt was in office, it was during WWII. Japan attacked the U.S. on Dec. 7, 1941 and was known as Pearl Harbor. When that happened, Roosevelt did not hesitate to ask Congress to officially declare war on Japan. During the war, there was a proposal of an atomic bomb landing over Hiroshima and Nagasaki to finalize the war. To this day there is still controversy that if that atomic bomb was actually necessary to end the war, because of the number of innocent casualties suffered from the Japanese. The aim of this investigation is to answer the question: To what extent was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki necessary to end the war with Japan? To answer this question, the

The two sources that will be evaluated on their origins, purposes, values, and limitations are Miracle of Deliverance: the Case for the Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by Stephen Harper and Codename Downfall: The Secret Plan to Invade Japan—and Why Truman Dropped the Bomb by Thomas B. Allen and Norman Polmar.

This investigation focuses on the use and necessity of the atomic bomb in World War II. To what extent did the atomic bomb dropped by the United States during World War II save lives? This will be investigated using websites, books, military accounts, and newspaper articles. Military calculations of what potentially could have happened had the United States invaded Japan instead of dropping the bomb will be researched. Also, information from the Manhattan Project, reinterpretations of the event, and military strategies of several countries will be used. The physical effects of the bomb on the victims will also be considered. Alternate opinions of why the bomb was dropped will be discussed.

This investigation assesses to what extent the atomic bomb was necessary to end the Second World War. This investigation will be limited to the years 1939 to 1945, the duration of World War II, to assess the justifications for the bombing. However, this investigation will also examine sources as recent as the 2010s to evaluate the objective necessity of the bombing because it has remained a consistently controversial topic despite the time difference. Additionally, the necessity of the bomb is a matter that is independent from the initial bombing because its effect went beyond just ending the war, and, contextually, it is essential to examine its causes and effects with respect to events both before and after the war. Throughout this investigation, novels, memoirs, and web articles will be analyzed with evaluations of their origins, purpose, values, and limitations.

December 7, 1941, Japan performed a surprise attack on America at Pearl Harbor. "According to Japanese feudal code of honor, the idea of a surprise is recommended and it raises no moral problems" (Sulzberger 146). During Japan's attack, they broke the seal of trust. "Japan's Ambassador and Diplomatic agent were in Washington pretending to have been seeking a negotiated settlement between the two countries" (Sulzberger 146). America lost over 3,000 service men from this bombing. This type of betrayal could only cause anger and determination to strike back.

Thesis: The dropping of the atomic bomb during World War II by the United States on Japan was a justified act. Not only was the dropping of the atomic bomb used to save American lives, but it prevented the war from lingering on, taking the lives of more civilians. The bomb did not just make sense, but it saved lives, despite taking some, therefore making the atomic bomb a reasonable action. It is not war mentality to think of preserving the lives of innocent people when the safety of the world is at stake. World War II, taking place in Japan, was likely to continue to linger on which would produce more deaths in the long run. In a book entitled, Thank God for the Atomic Bomb, by WWII soldier, Paul Fussell, he noted that "The people who preferred an invasion to a bombing seemed to have no intention of proceeding to the Japanese front themselves. I have already noted what a few more days would mean to the luckless troops and sailors on the spot....on Okinawa, only a few weeks before Hiroshima, 123,000 Japanese and Americans killed each other. War is immoral. War is cruel". By saying this it proves that although dropping the atomic bomb had some consequences, not dropping it, and letting the war carry on had far worse outcomes, and those who did want an invasion were not willing to go fight for it, again proving the high demand for the wars end. Then, in a speech made by President Truman he explains, "My chief

When President Harry S. Truman ordered the nuclear attack on Hiroshima on the 6th of August, 1945, most people were supportive of it because it ended the war before an invasion became necessary. Seventy two years since the first and last nuclear attacks, many 'traditionalist' historians still believe that Truman made the best possible decision in the given circumstances. However, in the 1960's, Truman's critics, who reinterpreted history began to believe that the bomb played no significant role in ending the war and was thus unnecessarily used. These revisionist historians have gone so far as to characterize the use of nuclear weapons as “the single greatest acts of terrorism in human history” (Awan, 16). On the other hand, traditionalists argue that the bomb was an important

President Truman as the head of the committee of scientists protesting the use of the atomic bomb, I advise you to not use the atomic bomb as a military weapon. The committee and I would prefer if there was a demonstration of the bomb showing the nations how much of a threat the United States is without taking the action of exposing others to this nuclear power. One of the reasons I believe you should not use the atomic bomb is that after dropping the atomic bomb an arms race could occur within other countries causing them to have a mass production of weapons to use against us. Another reason that the atomic bomb should not be used is that after deploying the bomb in warfare, how the bomb was constructed will no longer be a secret and in a

The dropping of the atomic bombs was so devastating because no one saw it coming. Although, the bombs shortened the war the lives of thousands were taken including men, women, and innocent children. The United States did send the Japanese a warning stating what they were going to do, but the citizens refused to pay attention to the warnings.When the bombings took place there were a lot of different arguments that will be discussed in this paper. These events took place on August 6, 1945, and August 9, 1945, and about 225,000 people were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many individuals have shared their opinions stating why they are for or against the bomb.

This investigation assesses President Harry Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It will determine whether or not his decision was justified. This investigation will scrutinize the reasons that made Harry Truman feel inclined to drop atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Preventing further casualties along with the desire to end the war are two argumentative points that will be analyzed to determine if they were strong enough to justify the dropping