Webster’s dictionary defines hindsight as “the ability to understand, after something has happened, what should have been done or what caused the event”. It is a fair assumption that most people understand the old adage “hindsight is always 20/20”; alluding to the fact that, in our everyday lives, we as humans make decisions based on what we know, what seems right and occasionally what makes our lives easier. The average person does not have the mental capability to consider every possible outcome that a choice will have on his entire life, all within the thought process that leads him to reach a conclusion, however long and detailed that process may be. If we add massive amounts of pressure, contradictory advisement, the lives of …show more content…
While this is true, it becomes apparent that every option had its flaws and none seemed as immediate of a solution as dropping single highly destructive bombs on what Stimson (the secretary of war) named as “cities in Japan devoted exclusively to production” (p.287). The first alternative mentioned in the RTAP (page 273) was “continue and intensify the bombing and naval blockade of Japan”. The second option mentioned on the same page was to “wait for the Soviet Union to enter the war with Japan by attacking Manchuria” and the third option mentioned was to “allow the Japanese to retain their emperor with his power reduced to the status of a constitutional monarch”. Each option was unique in its requirements of effect, strategic planning, and man power. However, they all shared the distinct quality of baring absolutely no guarantee of Japanese surrender. The first option, invasion of Japan, was debated the heaviest. Truman, and several of his advisors, sighted the huge estimates of US casualties as the main reason for his hesitancy to proceed with bombing, blockades and ground attacks. In the excerpt of Prompt and Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of the Atomic Bomb against Japan, J. Samuel Walker argues that “even without the use of the atomic bombs, the war would probably have ended before the American invasion of Kyushu became necessary” (p. 277). He predicted that the destruction,
It was predicted that the invasion of the Japanese mainland at the Island of Kyushu, scheduled for November of 1945, would be even worse. The entire Japanese military and civilian population would fight to the death. American casualties for just the initial invasion to get a foothold on the island of Japan would have taken up to an estimated two months and would have resulted in up to 75,000 to 100,000 casualties and potentially up to 20,000 dead. And that was just to secure the beginning of the invasion. "If we were to go ahead with the plans for a conventional invasion with ground and naval forces, I believe the Japanese thought that they could inflict very heavy casualties on us and possibly as a result get better surrender terms.” said General Carl Spaatz who was in charge of the Air Force operations in the Pacific. He expresses in his words that he strongly believes that the Japanese knew they had a good chance of overcoming this invasion due to their potential to cause mass destruction in terms of outnumbering the American troops. Thus, due to the undesirable costs the alternative of invasion presented, the USA was justified in using the atomic bomb on Japan as the more ideal alternative.
Japan during the 1940’s was a nation that prided itself on the concept of never surrendering. It was something that they took fierce and obsessive pride in. Their culture dictated that they are never to give up, even if they fought until every single man,woman, and child living in Japan was slaughtered, they would never surrender. This doctrine was one of the key deciding factors that influenced Truman in making the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Several weeks before the Atomic bomb was dropped, The Untied States of Military issued a warning to the Japanese government. “It warned the Japanese to surrender immediately or face ‘prompt and utter destruction.” (Yes! Harry Truman’s Simple Decision) Unfortunately, a mere two weeks before the first atomic bomb dropped, the Japanese prime minister publically dismissed the warning and refused to surrender. Even after the bombing of Hiroshima, the Japanese government refused to stand down. Even though they had suffered over 225,000 civilian casualties in the attack, the Japanese military refused to surrender. It took until the second bombing of Nagasaki to finally force the Japanese to surrender on American
President Truman must have kept in mind the personal political implications of his decision to drop the bomb. With polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly supported the "unconditional surrender" of Japan and with his knowing the strong anti-Japanese sentiments of the American people, I must have felt that I had little political risk in dropping an atomic bomb on Japan."(Harry Truman) President Truman must have also considered his difficulty in explaining to American voters why the government spent two billion dollars to develop a superior weapon if he personally decided not to deploy it, especially if the war had dragged on with additional American casualties. Here is an entry from Truman's diary, "I have to decide Japanese strategy - shall we invade Japan proper or shall we bomb and blockade? That is my hardest decision to date. But I'll make it when I have all the facts."(Ferrell)
Technology has allowed for the furtherance of warfare, from the invention of gun powder to the splitting of the atom. These findings have propelled the leap of numerous nations’ in the ability to wage war against each other. Of these discoveries, the splitting atom spawned an invention that would hurl the world from conventional warfare into the nuclear age. These ideals were the brainstorming of some of the greatest minds in America and abroad. These scientists began to formulate the creation of the atomic bomb, a device that would change the world in ways that had never been imagined before.
Many debates have been provoked based on President Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The debate is not solely based on the bomb being dropped, but more on the actual necessity and intention of the bomb being dropped.
In 1945, World War Two was coming to an end. Following Adolf Hitler’s suicide, and Nazi Germany’s unconditional surrender on May 7, 1945, the war in Europe was finally over. The allies began began postwar planning for future, as well as establishment of post-war order and peace treaties issues. America’s war wasn’t done yet as they were still fighting Japan, eventually pushing them back to their main island. The Japanese’ plans of defending themselves was a group of final decisive battles on the Japanese mainland utilizing all people in Japan to fight to death against the Americans. Fearing costly land battles,
During WW2 Truman, the United States President at the time, was asked to make one the toughest decision in History. Choosing between dropping an atomic bomb or invading are both choices that will result in a lot of deaths. The huge diffrence between the two was who died wether it be the Japanese with the bomb, or the American soldiers with the invasion. Trumans decision was supposed to end the war sooner, hence reducing the amount of agony,deaths, stress or any other negative effects that could result in the continous war. Truman's decision on dropping the Atomic Bomb's was an efficient course of action for the Americans, but was deffinantly not the most educated decision. If I had been placed in Truman's shoes and had to make this
The Truman administration did not want to give Japan a conditional surrender and let them maintain their emperor because they feared that there would be a backlash from the American public who felt that the emperor was a war criminal. President Truman was also sold on this and there was really no moving him to change his mind. Herbert Feis in 1961 wrote that, “I think it may be concluded that the fight would have continued into July at least Unless…the American and Soviet Government together had let it be known that unless Japan laid down its arms at once, the Soviet Union was going to enter the war. That, along with a promise to spare the Emperor, might well have made an earlier bid for surrender effective” (Alperovitz 23). If the United States would have done this we could have been on the move to reconstructing the Japanese nation. Leaving the Japanes Emperor would have helped the Japanes feel some what better about the American invlovment at that time. On August 9 the Russian army invaded Manchuria and completely handled the
“Truman stated that his decision to drop the bomb was purely military. Truman believed that the bombs saved Japanese lives as well. Prolonging the war was not an option for the President,” (ushistory.org 1). President Truman and the United States government made a fair decision by dropping the atomic bomb on the Japanese citizens in Hiroshima and Nagasaki during 1945. The bomb allowed the United States to appear more powerful and led to them influencing the rest of the world. The dropping of the atomic bomb was also a just response to the previous atrocities committed by Japan to other countries including the United States. In the long run, the bomb saved more lives that would have been lost in the war, since the bombs caused the
President Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the direct cause for the end of World War II in the Pacific. The United States felt it was necessary to drop the atomic bombs on these two cities or it would suffer more casualties. Not only could the lives of many soldiers have been taken, but possibly the lives of many innocent Americans. The United States will always try to avoid the loss of American civilians at all costs, even if that means taking lives of another countries innocent civilians.
civilians. By the end of the year, 140,000 more people were dead as a result of radiation
On August 6, 1945 the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. This was an extremely controversial military strategy in the United States. Was the United States justified in the dropping of the atomic bomb? The U.S. feared the rise of communism and gave aid to any country against it. The U.S. also fought countries threatening the spread communism. One of these countries was Japan. We began a harsh and brutal war against Japan and against communism. This war was killing many soldiers and Japan was not backing down. President Truman decided to use the atomic bomb when things were getting worse. The decision to use the atomic bomb was a difficult one and many people wonder if it was the right
The dropping of the Atomic Bomb changed not only warfare forever, but also all international relations. With that being said, the decision to do so was one of the biggest decisions made by any government in the history of time. Nuclear warfare was way more destructive and way faster than any other form of warfare preceding. With the United States seemingly always viewed to be “the good guys” it is puzzling that this country is the same one who killed hundreds of thousands of people all at once and essentially ruined not one but two entire cities within minutes of dropping two single bombs. This decision was not taken lightly, and with basically two schools of thought, liberalism vs. realism, insisting to do so or not to do so, and realism won out. Realism and the many counterparts that strengthen this school of thought is what drove the decision to go ahead and drop the atomic bomb.
Imagine yourself making the toughest decision in your life, whether sacrificing a million of our men and thousands of war ships and plans, verses several thousand of Japanese civilian populists. This decision was on the shoulder of Harry S. Truman, the United States President, who had to make this decision by deciding whether or not to drop a newly designed weapon. The atomic bomb was tested in the sands of New Mexico, where it proved to be very successful. Harry S. Truman made a very successful decision, because he wanted to end the war quickly, show others that the United States had power, and the retribution of Pearl Harbor.
As the war continued and violence escalated, bombings caused enormous destruction and high death tolls, leading inevitably to the use of the atomic bombs. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki represented a culmination in the destructiveness of bombings, not a significant deviation from previous bombing practices. The alternatives to the use of the atomic bomb were likely to have caused equal suffering for the Japanese people. The use of the atomic bomb was no less moral than these horrific wartime practices. Harry Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan was justified by Japan’s refusal to immediately surrender. Harry Truman gave the Japanese time to surrender in order to preserve the existence of their people. They did not comply and as a result endured the consequences. (Walker) Yet an alternate perspective states that it was quite unnecessary to drop the Atomic Bombs in that Japan was practically an already defeated opponent. If a conditional surrender were to be issued by the United States to Japan in