The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bomb Of Nagasaki

1445 Words6 Pages
On August 6th, 1945, the world was abruptly pushed into the atomic age. An American aircraft named Enola Gay hovered over Japan carrying “Little Boy”, a bomb weighing 9,700 pounds crafted from highly enriched uranium-235. Poised above Aioi Bridge in Hiroshima city, at precisely 8:15 a.m. local time, Little Boy dropped. The explosion destroyed 4 square miles of the city, about 90,000 people were killed instantly and 40,000 were injured. Just three days later, Major General Charles Sweeney dropped a second nuclear bomb on Nagasaki, killing around 37,000 people and injuring another 43,000. All together, the two atomic strikes on Japan killed an “estimated 200,000 Japanese civilians.” [1] (ihr.org) Aside from moral issues involved, were the bombings of Japan militarily necessary? The answer is, no, they were not. Many rationalized that the bombs were dropped to save thousands of lives that would otherwise be killed in battle with Japan, to justify the act by portraying it as a grave decision made by the United States in order to end the second World War and to limit the amount of casualties.[2] (historyextra.com) Yet the top American military leaders who fought in World War II, quite clearly stated that the atomic bombs were unnecessary. Japan, by June 1945, had been completely defeated militarily with almost nothing left of its once mighty Imperial Navy and Airforce, while American aircrafts and bombers “rained down” on Japanese cities. General Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme
Open Document