To this day, one of the most, if not the most, controversial decisions of World War II was the American bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many questions can be asked about the decision: was the decision necessary to win the war? Did Truman make the best decision for the United States? Was it the right decision? While all of these questions seem similar, they all have different answers.
To address the first question: no, the atomic bombings were not necessary to win the war. The Japanese military was already on its way out, and they had been reaching out to the Soviet Union asking them to be a 'middle-man' in negotiations with the United States. Japan was isolated from other nations, so would sooner or later run out of food or other resources. However, America did not wait around for this to happen (as it seemed at the time like Japan would never surrender), but rather went on the aggressive and dropped the atomic bombs.
To address the second question: yes, Truman did make the best decision for the United States. First of all, the country had already spent billions of dollars producing this bomb. To not use it would be both politically and economically demeaning for the nation. In addition, the entire nation, civilians and soldiers both, were extremely war-weary. Nobody wanted the fighting to go on, they just wanted to get it done as quickly as possible. Finally, if the Americans were not to use the bomb, the next plan would probably be an invasion of Japan. This would cost hundreds of thousands of American lives, and would be extremely expensive. From Truman's perspective at the time, there was no question of whether or not the bomb should have been used.
To address the third question: we are not sure whether or not it was the right decision. The use of atomic bombs was arguably a main cause of the Cold War (and, more specifically, the Arms Race) which has raised nuclear tensions which are ever-expanding today. However, many American lives were saved, and the bombs hastened the end of the war, two short-term (in the big picture) effects that can not be ignored. So, the answer to whether or not it was the right decision in the long term has yet to be answered.
I think that the decision to bomb Nagasaki and Hiroshima was something that, while definitely could've been handled better, was necessary to end the war, at least to a degree. I at lease think that the first bomb was necessary to keep the Japanese military from sending thousands more soldiers to their deaths when there was no way they could win. However, there could have been much better ways to show our military power. We could have warned the people that lived in these bombing zones and give them an opportunity to evacuate the area. We could have detonated the bomb in a less populated area.
ReplyDeleteSo, while I believe that the bombs were effective, we definitely didn't need to kill so many people to get the Japanese military to surrender.
I find it interesting that you said the atomic bomb was the cause of the Cold War. I disagree in that it may have assisted the tensions during the cold war, but not started it. The Cold war between the USSR and the United States would still have happened without the possession of a certain bomb. And I do agree that the decision to bomb Hiroshimo and Nagasaki was controversial and extremely difficult. Both sides of the argument can easily be debated.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that you said that the atomic bombs were not nessary to end the war, however I disagree with this. Yes, the outcome of the bombings were bad, however if not used the outcome would have been much worse. The continuation of the war would mean that more people would have died rather than the bombings. Because the bombings were in such concentrated areas, that area and its surrounding would solely be affected however if the war had continued on the death areas would be less concentrated and be more wide spread. The bombing although many death, there are some cases where death did not occur but other terrible things that did still let more people live. However, in many cases during war some people are not easily spared even if they are not helping in the war. The bombing also used less of the navy, army, and air force making there be a less amount of waste on our resources. SO in my opinion I believe that the use of the bombs were nessary to end the war because more lives were saved and less resources were wasted.
ReplyDeleteIt's an often debated question regarding whether or not America should have dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, and the same arguments for both sides are consistently given. The fact of the matter is, the United States did use the atomic bomb, and since then the United States has been forced to feel guilt for it. But rarely do we ever consider what would have happened if another country beat the United States in the creation of the atomic bomb. I will always remember the words of a Japanese veteran in one of the documentaries we watched in class: "If Japan had it, we would have used it."
ReplyDelete