Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 79 views

    08 - Was It Necessary To Drop The Bomb

    Uploaded by

    api-283373436
    The document discusses whether dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to end World War II. Proponents argue that the bombs were necessary to force Japan's prompt surrender and avoid a costly invasion of Japan that could have cost thousands more American lives. However, critics argue that Japan was already defeated and intelligence suggested Japan would surrender once the U.S. assured the emperor could remain in place and the Soviets attacked, making the bombs unnecessary. Some top military leaders, like Eisenhower, also believed the bombs were not needed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    08 - Was It Necessary To Drop The Bomb

    Uploaded by

    api-283373436
    79 views1 page
    The document discusses whether dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to end World War II. Proponents argue that the bombs were necessary to force Japan's prompt surrender and avoid a costly invasion of Japan that could have cost thousands more American lives. However, critics argue that Japan was already defeated and intelligence suggested Japan would surrender once the U.S. assured the emperor could remain in place and the Soviets attacked, making the bombs unnecessary. Some top military leaders, like Eisenhower, also believed the bombs were not needed.

    Original Title

    08 - was it necessary to drop the bomb

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses whether dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to end World War II. Proponents argue that the bombs were necessary to force Japan's prompt surrender and avoid a costly invasion of Japan that could have cost thousands more American lives. However, critics argue that Japan was already defeated and intelligence suggested Japan would surrender once the U.S. assured the emperor could remain in place and the Soviets attacked, making the bombs unnecessary. Some top military leaders, like Eisenhower, also believed the bombs were not needed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    79 views1 page

    08 - Was It Necessary To Drop The Bomb

    Uploaded by

    api-283373436
    The document discusses whether dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to end World War II. Proponents argue that the bombs were necessary to force Japan's prompt surrender and avoid a costly invasion of Japan that could have cost thousands more American lives. However, critics argue that Japan was already defeated and intelligence suggested Japan would surrender once the U.S. assured the emperor could remain in place and the Soviets attacked, making the bombs unnecessary. Some top military leaders, like Eisenhower, also believed the bombs were not needed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Was it necessary to drop the atom bomb on Japan?

    Sixty years later, scholars still argue about the decision to use atom bombs against Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a way to
    hasten the end of World War II

    YES
    The atomic bomb was necessary to end the war with Japan
    at the earliest possible moment. By the early summer of
    1945, Japanese leaders knew they could not win. But they
    fought on in hopes of securing better surrender terms.
    President Harry S. Truman considered several ways to
    convince Japan to quit the war: 1) intensifying the already
    heavy bombing of Japanese cities; 2) waiting for the Soviet
    Union, an ally in defeating Germany, to join the war against
    Japan; 3) allowing Japan's emperor, Hirohito, to remain on
    his throne; and 4) invading Japan.
    The first three options were far from certain to compel a
    Japanese surrender quickly, however, and each posed
    serious military, political, and diplomatic risks. More than
    55,000 Americans had already died fighting the Japanese in
    the Pacific. An invasion was certain to be very costly in
    American lives.
    When the atomic bomb became available in July 1945, it
    appeared to be the most promising way to end the war as
    soon as possible and without the drawbacks of the
    alternatives.
    The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and then Nagasaki
    persuaded Emperor Hirohito, who had wavered for weeks,
    that the war must end immediately. Combined with the
    Soviet entry into the conflict, the atom bombs brought about
    Japan's surrender within a few days.
    The bomb was necessary to accomplish Truman's primary objectives of forcing a prompt Japanese surrender and saving American
    lives, perhaps thousands of them.
    J. Samuel Walker, Author
    Prompt & Utter Destruction: Truman and the Use of Atomic Bombs Against Japan
    NO
    When General Dwight D. Eisenhower, then the Supreme Allied Commander, was informed by the Secretary of War that the atomic
    bomb was going to be used, he later recalled saying it was unnecessary because Japan was already largely defeated. Eisenhower
    said the bomb was "no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives." At one point after the war he said bluntly, "It
    wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
    Before the bomb was used, U.S. intelligence officials believed the war would likely end when two things happened: When the U.S.
    let Japan know their Emperor could stay on as a figurehead, and when the Soviet army attacked. The U.S. did tell Japan the
    Emperor could remain, and the Soviets declared war, as agreed, on August 8.
    But U.S. officials chose not to test whether this intelligence was correct. Instead, Hiroshima was bombed on August 6, and
    Nagasaki on August 9. Because of logistics, an invasion of Japan could not begin for another three months, so the U.S. could have
    waited to see if Japan would surrender before dropping the atomic bombs.
    Most top World War II military leaders are all on record agreeing with Eisenhower. Admiral William Leahy, President Truman's
    Chief of Staff, later called the bomb a "barbarous weapon" that was unnecessary. Leahy wrote, "The Japanese were already
    defeated and ready to surrender. . . . In being the first to use it, we . . . adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of
    the Dark Ages."
    Gar Alperovitz
    Professor of Political Economy
    University of Maryland

    You might also like