The use of the atomic bomb have been questioned for the past 73 years. Although the United States’ decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in the social and economic destruction of Japan, ultimately the bombings were justified as this action led to a quick end to the war and displayed the military might of the United States to other threatening and powerful countries. The creation and use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II was imminent as intense weapons were needed to end the war and coerce an immediate Japanese surrender. The progression towards the decision to drop the atomic bombs is extremely important here. The Allies had been battling a massive war with Japan since 1941.
Over the next four months, tens of thousands more people died due to various illnesses which were mainly caused by radiation exposure. In my opinion, I do not think that the atomic bomb should have been dropped, nor should it have not been dropped. The reason why the bomb should have been dropped on Hiroshima was because Japan was going too far with their attacks during the Second World War,
Julianna E. Filomena Mrs. E. Conn English Composition 7 February 22, 2018 Annotated Bibliography: Was dropping the atomic bombs in World War II justified? Bernstein, Barton J. "A Postwar Myth: 500,000 U.S. Lives Saved." Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol.
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. Many were left homeless.The debate over whether it was a successful event still remains contestable today.
The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki devastated the people of these cities. This, however, ended the conflict between the U.S. and Japan, but was it a good idea for the U.S.? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed, and over one-hundred fifty thousand people were killed in the atomic bombings of Japan. The bombings by the United States were necessary because Japan was a powerful adversary that the United States needed to overcome in order to defeat Germany. They had started World War Two and put the Jewish people and gypsies and people they deemed not good enough for society in concentration camps.
There are many differing opinions on the subject of whether the dropping of the atomic bombs was justified. One side, such as people in the US, argue that the dropping of the bombs were justified, as it allowed them to test the bomb and end the war quickly. However, another side which includes many people in Japan and pacifists, argues that the dropping of the bomb was not justified, as the effects of the bomb were too horrific. Even though this essay will be exploring both sides of the argument, the second atomic bomb should not have been dropped on Nagasaki. One of the few reasons that the dropping of the Atomic bombs was justified was the fact that Japan would not surrender.
There are many reasons why it could be argued that the dropping of the atomic bomb was justified. One reason is that Japan was warned, they were given plenty of opportunities to surrender such as the Potsdam declaration. The Declaration was issued to Japan by President Truman and the Allies of America after America had tested the Atom bomb on July 26th. The declaration was a proposition of surrender to Japan that linked directly to the dropping of the atomic bomb. If Japan agreed to the declaration, America would not drop the atomic bomb and Japan would
This devastating event has led to the debate between whether or not bombarding Japan with atomic bombs was truly justified. 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.
It 's a good thing we bombed when we did though because Russia was getting involved and other countries would 've joined and made the war worse. Where Japan didn 't get a warning about the bomb, they weren 't prepared and neither were the other countries so there was a better chance of nothing happening in return and nothing did. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen, not the entire country. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hit on target pretty well. Not all the Japanese were a target as well, just the military.
There are many advantages as well as disadvantages to launching a preemptive military strike. The advantages of a preemptive military strike are; to use this as a scare tactic, to portray that the United States is willing to use force. Therefore, will boost the United Sates’ power, as follows reinforcing their reputation. Aforementioned, after reaching to the top, this will urge them to succumb. An example of a comparable case, is when the United States dropped a bomb on two cities in Japan, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which took place in 1945, after Japan deliberately kept on fighting and did not stop.