The controversy surrounding the decision to drop atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has raged on for years. Others maintain that the bombing was needless and unjustified, while others maintain that it was vital to end the war and preserve lives and that it was important to end the war. In this paper, I will inspect, analyze, and criticize the argument on the bombing of Japan during World War Two that was presented by Kevin O'Reilly in his book "From Spanish-American War to Vietnam War." O'Reilly's thesis is found in "From Spanish-American War to Vietnam War." We are going to go over the essay paragraph by paragraph and analyze its goal, the type of support it provides, and the quality of that support.
O'Reilly begins
…show more content…
He presents evidence of the devastation inflicted by the bombs and makes the argument that the United States could have pursued alternative options, such as a naval blockade, to force Japan to submit rather than using the bombs. The major objective of this paragraph is to present evidence in support of the contention that the bombing was not warranted. The support that is supplied comes in the form of an appeal to ethics, as O'Reilly argues against the use of atomic weapons using a moral justification in his …show more content…
He argues that the long-term consequences of dropping the atomic bombs, such as the arms race and the development of nuclear weapons, outweigh any short-term benefits that may have resulted from their use. The nature of support in this paragraph is inductive reasoning. He then uses analogy to support his claim. He argues that both the decision to use chemical weapons in World War I and the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan were violations of international law and the laws of war (O'Reilly et al., 1985). The nature of support in this paragraph is an
Making his final justification, the author points out the possibility that the Japanese used the bombing of Hiroshima as an excuse to withdraw from the war, instead of the Russian invasion. Wilson suggests that “The bomb offered a convenient explanation to soothe wounded Japanese pride: the defeat of Japan was not the result of leadership mistakes or lack of valor; it was the result of an unexpected advance in science by Japan’s
The success of the petition lies in the ability of the author to convey his position on the use of the atomic bomb while at the same time acknowledging that situations exist where he may have to change this position. He skillfully appeals to the emotion of the reader by showing the history of the war and how the current efforts are getting dangerously close to the same tactics that the United States had previously condemned. The ability to obtain such a large support for the petition might be the authors greatest success in support of the
Dennis Kucinich, a representative from Ohio, in the persuasive text titled “We didn’t need to drop the bomb”, posted online in 2015, addresses the topic of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Kucinich supports the claim that the bomb was not needed to end the war, although some may disagree. The author’s overall purpose in the article is to persuade the audience that the atomic bomb had a negative effect due to the effect it had on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The author, Kucinich, also adapts an informative tone because he states facts and evidence to support his claim that the bomb was not needed to win the war. In short, I strongly disagree with the author because the bomb needed to be dropping in order to end the war.
He then goes on to add that if the United States were to go on and actually use the atomic bomb, it would do nothing but make them more ruthless; with this idea, it can make the reader begin to second guess their own opinion on the use of the atomic bomb. Earlier in the essay, he made the suggestion that Japan should be given the opportunity to surrender to the U.S. and that
The United States invasion of Japan led to numerous casualties and severe damage yet Japan stood its ground, proving it would fight to the death. At times violence is the answer; Japan had no intention of surrendering, no matter the consequence. U.S. Secretary of war, Henry Stimson, confirms that “only the complete destruction of her military power could open the way to lasting peace”.(Document B) Each day brought great suffering, and the only logical solution to dealing with millions of suicidal soldiers was to kill off the problem. After the Japanese repeatedly refused to surrender the United States was forced to put its nuclear warfare to use and bomb both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, doing what they believed was their only
After the war, most German observers still failed to read the results properly. They claimed that the Americans had not faced a serious opponent who would have exposed her military weaknesses. Professionals doubted that Americans would be able to fight in a battle against a European rival. Papers had said many statements during this. Europeans’ misunderstanding and mistrust of volunteer armies afflicted their judgment when it came to the Spanish-American War.
The decisions made to drop the A-bomb in Japan by president Harry Truman are often criticized, but to judge an opinion based off of the standards of this day and era is meaningless. Although everyone has different propositions, views, or opinions the decision that Truman made to protect his country seems like the only justifiable solution of ending this war. President Harry Truman had to make one of the most difficult decisions ever known to mankind. Many critics recognize the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as merciless acts to express the United States mobilization of their military superiority. Therefore, in question of this laborious outcome, how did the United States and Truman come to their commitment of terrorizing millions of lives
On April 25, 1898 the Spanish-American war began. The United States and Cuba eventually ended up benefiting from the Spanish-American war even though both had to overcome many losses. The United States had a great interest in Cuba. Having gained their independence 100 years ago from Great Britain, the U.S. knew exactly what Cuba was going through.
In their article, Document 4, Japan's largest and oldest English-language daily newspaper, Nippon Times, revealed that the United States had caused unnecessary deaths, basically going against an international war law. Nippon Times states in their article in 1945, “What meaning is there in any international law, in any rule of human conduct, in any concept of right and wrong, if the very foundations of morality are to be overthrown as the use of this instrument of total destruction threatens to do?¨ The essence of Nippon Times argument is that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is against the International War Laws that state the unnecessary suffering of people in a conflicted war. The United States, according to Japan, broke a law of war that should be respected and followed as it helps to maintain some humanity in armed conflicts, saving lives and reducing suffering. This example shows that the dropping of the atomic bomb wasn't a military necessity. Additionally in Document 4, Nippon Times responds by claiming “… if the very foundations of morality are to be overthrown as the use of this instrument of total destruction threatens to do?” which implies that the U.S. planned to threaten Japan to bomb them.
“A Petition to the President” In July of 1945, Leo Szilard and his fifty-nine cosigners created a petition for the President of the United States to ask him to refrain from using atomic bombs to attack the Japanese people in the phase of war. Szilard uses this appeal to help describe his reasoning on why he believes atomic bombs will do more harm than good for not only Japan, but for the entire world. He thought that by using nuclear bombs, a new era of destruction would occur, making the current war inferior. In Szilard’s essay, “A Petition to the President,” pathos, logos, and a positive tone are used to help sway his reader’s, which supports his argument and helps it become successful because it persuades the audience to believe that the use of atomic bombs is not necessary during the war.
There were many different perspectives when it came down to dropping the world’s first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. This essay will be focusing on the two most involved sides’ perspectives to understand how each of the two sides were thinking before the time, of that time, and the aftermath. John Hersey wrote a fiction novel about the Japanese’s perspective specifically in six of the survivors of the atomic bomb’s point of view and Robert Jay Little and Greg Mitchell wrote a nonfiction novel about the American’s perspective specifically in President Harry S. Truman’s point of view. What is the difference between the American and the Japanese’s perspective of the Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima when analyzing the literary devices, the tone,
Name: Course Instructor: Class: Date: Critical Book Review: Prompt and Utter Destruction Introduction Within weeks, word on the US dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki began to spread that the main reason behind the bombs was to save the lives of Americans (Bernard). It was put that hundreds of thousands of American military causalities were saved through the bombings.
the bomb’s code name was “Little Boy”. Three days later, on August 9th, 1945, America dropped another bomb on Nagasaki with the code name “Fat Man”. As many as 200,000 deaths were caused by “Little Boy” alone and many people would die of radiation for years to come. The dropping of the Atom bomb on Hiroshima is an extremely debatable issue with no right or wrong answer. In this essay I will describe both sides to the argument then conclude using my final opinion on whether I am for or against the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima.
However, if Japan was offered the opportunity to surrender and refused, then the decision to use the bomb should be reassessed (Szilard, “A Petition”). “A Petition to the President of the United States” by Leo Szilard provides a strong claim against the use of the atomic bomb supported by establishing credibility,
Imagine living in a period in which the realities of war encased the world, and the lethal potential to end all suffering was up to a single being. During World War II, tensions between Japan and the United States increased. Despite pleas from US President, Harry Truman, for Japan to surrender, the Japanese were intent on continuing the fight. As a result, Truman ordered the atomic bomb, a deadly revolution in nuclear science, to be dropped on the towns of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. President Harry Truman, in his speech, “Announcement of the Dropping of the Atomic Bomb,” supports his claim that the dropping of the A-bomb shortened the war, saved lives, and got revenge by appealing to American anger by mentioning traumatic historical events and