Through thorough analysis of reasons for the dropping of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and evidence proving the decision unnecessary, it was determined that the use of the atomic bombs was justified to a small extent. One could argue that the decision to attack the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic bombs was necessary. The bombs had to be dropped in order to achieve American victory and prevent casualties in America and Japan. The goals of bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to gain victory with the least amount of American casualties as possible. The aforementioned objectives were accomplished by the destruction of the two Japanese cities because in comparison to the hypothetical situation in which the American soldiers would fight and die, their lives were saved by the bombs.
Since Japan was a rising power they saw one country in the way from keeping their empire secure, the United States of America. Hence the attacked pearl harbor. Japan did this without thinking about the consequences that would later come. Unfortunately for Japan, the U.S. decided to end the war with two nuclear bombs, little boy, and fat man. These two bombs devastated Japan and caused them to surrender.
I am researching the effects of Hiroshima on the “hibakusha” to better understand World War II and the nuclear warfare narrative. The devastation left by the atomic bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima should serve as a reminder of the damage that it can do. The Manhattan Project allowed America to develop and research nuclear weapons. This would lead to the United States deploying Nuclear weapons on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, which would force Japan to surrender to the allies on August 15, 1945, unwillingly. The effect and impact of the atomic bombing of the Japanese people are understudied.
The written work of Eri Hotta entitled Japan 1941: Countdown to Infamy, narrated the succession of events which took place between Japanese officials and leaders which led to the attack of Pearl Harbor. It showed the political unrest and civic instability of Japan that resulted into the bombing. Eventually, such attack was not condoned by the military forces of the United States and they countered the aggression by also bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands of lives were lost and destroyed. Accordingly, the “ Japanese Emperor Hirohito was one of the Japanese officials who expressed reservations about going to war” (Timms).
The alternative for President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his advisors was doing nothing and letting Nazi Germany develop atomic power and going on to use it to conquer the world. The United States of America wanted to end World War II on both the Atlantic and Pacific fronts and needed the quickest possible method to do so. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s advisors concluded that hundreds of thousands of American lives would be lost on an assault on the island of Japan. The U.S. Armed Forces was over 16,000,000 strong and Franklin D. Roosevelt’s main motive for dropping the atom bombs was to save American lives.5
I think the United States should have not dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki because the atomic bombs was too expensive and it was not really worth it, they wiped out two entire cities, and Japan was planning on surrendering. The atomic bomb they used on Nagasaki cost 2 billion
Now that is my example of how the ends justifies the means. The President of the USA, and perhaps high officers had to weigh the ends so as to justify the means of how to bring an end to war with Japan. Japan started it by bombing Pearl Harbor on December 7th 1941. I am certain no sane Americans wished to kill thousands of Japanese people, as well as innocent kids. However, the war may have continued on for years.
Orthodox history represents the atomic bombing on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 as a significant tuning point because it brought WW2 to an end and the US wanted revenge for Pearl Harbour. On August the 6th 1945 in Japan, the US military dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as the US wanted Japan to surrender as quickly as possible, so they could bring WW2 to an end. Then four days later, the US dropped another bomb on Nagasaki. The action of the US created a turning point as it ended the war and brought insight to the world and why nuclear weapons shouldn’t be used in any war. The consequences of the horrific bombing were that thousands of people in Japan died or were left with severe injuries and diseases from the radiation.
The opposition would claim that the people were aware of a bomb and that the Japanese committed similar crimes by attacking pearl harbor. As for the claim that an attack was justified, one crime cannot justify another. And for the claim that the Japanese knew of the invasion, If all the 15 countries that Hitler invaded had pamphlets tossed at them from the sky warning them of an invasion just hours before he started his campaign would we still think of him as a murderer? would a warning change the fact that Hitler was a war criminal? as the evidence would later prove, Truman knew fairly well of that the initial targets of his Fat Man and Little Boy were not purely military because otherwise he would not have ordered dropping of pamphlets warning the citizens of an invasion.
The debate over the legitimacy of the atomic bombings of Japan generally revolves around what it was going to take to get Japan to agree to an unconditional surrender and what that might cost in American and Japanese lives. Those who supported the use of the bomb took the utilitarian view that it would end the war quickly and thereby save even greater numbers of American and Japanese lives by avoiding an Allied invasion of the home islands. In the context of The Just War Theory, however, the issue still comes down to the legitimacy of targeting civilians in industrial cities this line had already been crossed. Utilitarian considerations, such as the doctrine of double effect, only apply if the intended target is indeed military. Strategic bombing in World War II essentially was a decision to kill people not because of their military role, but because of their nationality.
Therefore knowing how the Japanese soldiers think about surrendering, the millions of lives saved by ending the war quickly and shortly, and the countless warnings given to the Japanese, I think dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was warranted and
After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in the Hawaiian Islands, President Truman dropped two atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Since then, there has been arguments whether the bombs should have been dropped or not. President Truman’s choice to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was really the only option he had back then. Today, the bombs that President Truman dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is thought as a horrible event, but Truman dropped the bombs to save American and Japanese lives, and in the end, shortened the war. Before President Truman decidecd to drop the two atomic bombs, the war with the Japanese had no end insight.
For years after the war and even today, people have debated over a massive question. Should the Americans have dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during WWII? There may never be a correct answer. In my own opinion, the U.S. made no mistake in dropping the two nuclear bombs on Japan.
An invasion on Japan was being planned next year, leaving a opening of time for which American and Japanese lives to be killed by one another during the war. However, the invasion didn’t happen because on September 2, 1945, Japan officially signed to unconditional surrender. The dropping of the atom bomb forced japan to surrender just like the U.S wanted.
Moreover, after the first bomb was dropped in Hiroshima, the Prime Minister, Kintaro Suzuki announced to the Japanese Cabinet that they had no choice but to surrender (Blum 2). However, they would not have time to do so since the second atomic bomb was dropped that same day in Nagasaki. This leads me to question Truman’s real motivation behind his decision. Why would you drop a bomb on a country that was on the brink of surrender? Even more questionable, why would you drop a second without giving adequate time for a