The atomic bomb that the United States dropped in Japan over Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War remains a debate to date. Several individuals have different arguments about whether the move was necessary. According to several people, there was a need to drop the atomic bomb to avoid invasion during the war and to save several lives. However, others argue that dropping it was unnecessary because of various reasons. Therefore, over the past years, there have been debates whether the United States was right to drop the atomic bomb on Japan some weeks before the Second World War ended.
Summary of the Articles
Historians Reassess: Did We Need to Drop the Bomb?
Before the United States dropped the atomic bomb, Japanese civilians and military, had plans to surrender. They had realized that they had been defeated, and as several historians argued, it was evident that Japan could not defeat Russia and the US. Gar Alperovitz (1998) assesses whether there was a need for the United States to drop the atomic bomb and he explores several arguments that historians put across about the topic. There were ongoing secret peace negotiations between the country and the United States, and the readiness for the state to surrender was enough not to call for the move to drop the bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Alperovitz, 1998). Furthermore, the United States would have explored other options in Japan such as Machiavellian methods. However, it was evident that there was an ongoing battle on whose terms the war would have ended instead of how and when it would stop.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Several historians argue that America was in a move to impress the Soviet by dropping the atomic bombs and it also involved testing them. Hence the decision was primarily political and military, and not for the interest of the Japanese who had surrendered (Alperovitz, 1998). The decision destroyed several lives, and this is against the argument of several ignorant people who argued that the move saved several lives that would be lost if there had been an invasion. A strength of the article is that Alperovitz (1998) extensively uses evidence from historians to argue that the atomic bomb dropped on Japan was unnecessary because the country had decided to surrender as it had accepted defeat from Russia and America. Additionally, he analyzes speeches and diaries of various leaders to discuss and support his arguments.
The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb
Truman had a tough time to decide whether to drop the atomic bombs in Japan or not, and he wrote that he would choose what is best after gathering enough evidence. The atomic bomb was necessary because Japan’s position was not clear. The military had sufficient power over the country, and it was not clear whether they would defy the emperor’s order to surrender (Maddox, 1995). They were determined to fight for their country until the end; hence making it hard to decide against dropping the bombs on them.
Furthermore, the unit had done a lot of damage in the country as it had sent several individuals to the battlefield. Robert James Maddox (1995) argues on the ground that there was a need for the atomic bomb because it assisted in saving several American and Japanese lives that would have been lost of Japan had attacked. He notes that the evidence presented regarding the estimated lives that would be lost did not reach him, but it remained with the military. Therefore, the move to drop atomic bombs on Japan resulted from the predictions of Japan’s unwillingness to surrender as well as the estimated lives that would have been lost in the case of the country’s invasion.
Several reasons prompted Truman to make a move to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. There was a myth that several top military officials attempted to prevent Truman from taking action. However, there was no recorded evidence to suggest that this happened. In this case, the author points out the myths that motivated Truman to drop the atomic bombs in Japan as World War II ended. Furthermore, the casualty projection of 31,000 warned Truman that his strategy meeting had become meaningless (Maddox, 1995). The decision was primarily military as it was meant to prevent foreseen negative impacts that an invasion would have had. Additionally, it is believed that word about the country’s move to surrender were cooked; hence justifying America’s attack. Therefore, several factors motivated the step that the United States made to drop two atomic bombs on two towns in Japan. One weakness of the article is that it does not present hard evidence such as speech or diaries from the leaders.
The Decision to Use the Bombs
Various reasons prompted the United States to drop the atomic bombs in two towns in Japan. In his article The Decision to Use the Bombs , P.M.S. Blackett (1949) evaluates the factors that influenced the United States to decide on using the atomic bombs in Japan. The author gathers evidence from past articles, diaries that leaders wrote, as well as letters and speeches to support their arguments. He chronologically narrates the events that led to the decision of the US as he explores whether American leaders thought it was necessary to notify Japan of their plans (Blackett, 1949). He states that there was no evidence of Japan’s willingness to end the war. The arguments that the leaders made was that the move shortened the Second World War. Therefore, Blackett makes a stand that there was no compelling military reason for hurriedly developing the atomic bomb; but there was a compelling diplomatic reason to balance power in the post-war world.
A Post-War Myth: 500,000 U.S. Lives Saved
President Truman argued that one of the reasons to drop the atomic bombs was to save the lives of innocent civilians, especially Americans, from the invasion. Barton Bernstein (1986) narrates that the Joint War Plans Committee (JWPC), a high-level advisory group to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, used three different scenes to predict the possible number of scenarios of American deaths and injuries to reach the contingency plan. Initially, the number of expected victims was 200,000 but exaggerated afterward. According to Bernstein, there were no basic facts to support the myth of 500,000 American lives saved (Bernstein, 1986). One weakness of the article is that it is too short and analyzes only one factor that did not primarily impact the decision to drop the atomic bombs. Still, the United States authorities exaggerated the expected number of casualties that would be witnessed if the US had not dropped the atomic bombs.
Thank God for the Atom Bomb
Some individuals, if asked today, will state that the atomic bomb that the United States dropped on Japan had various positive impacts. Paul Fussell (1981), the author of the article explores the positive aspects of the atomic bomb dropped in Japan and uses substantial evidence to present his stand. He elaborates that the decision was a great move because it ended the Second World War and the brutalities and cruelties of the period (Fussell, 1981). Furthermore, it prevented the loss of lives that would have resulted from the invasion that was going to take place during that period. In this case, the article explores the positives of the atomic bomb and declares that it is something that people should thank God for because it ended the Second World War, as well as expected adverse consequences.
Racing to the Finish
Several arguments emerge about the United States’ decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan. One reason that may have made America to drop the bomb was a move to protect American lives that would have been lost after the attack. Furthermore, the United States was determined to show Russia how powerful it was during the war. Stanley Goldberg (1995) explores how General Leslie R. Groves and his War Department superiors played a significant role in the steps they took to ensure that the atomic bomb increased the chances of ending the World War II (Goldberg, 1995) : They pushed towards the completion of constructing the project’s major industrial and laboratory facilities.
Furthermore, Leslie R. Groves pressured the management of the above systems to ensure sufficient production of fissionable material. The move ensured that the atomic bombs were quickly available and ready for use. The general also pressed his representatives on the Island of Tinian to hurriedly send the atomic bomb-carrying B-29s on their way to Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Goldberg, 1995). Goldberg uses sufficient evidence such as recordings to present the role of the general in making the atomic bomb. One of the weaknesses of the article is that it fails to explore the role of other prominent leaders in facilitating the production and use of the atomic bombs. The article notes, however, that General Leslie R. Groves and his War Department superiors were instrumental figures in making the atomic bomb that they believed would significantly stop the Second World War.
Similarities and Differences
One similarity in the articles is that they revolve around evaluating the decision by Japan to surrender before the United States dropped the atomic bomb on them. They point out that the decision was a military one and the primary argument was that the decision aimed at saving people’s lives. However, the difference is in their ways of approaching and discussing the issue. Stanley Goldberg’s article ‘ Racing to the Finish ’ took another turn as it explained how General Les_lie R. Groves and his War Department superiors hastened the development of the atomic bomb to ensure that it played a significant role in ending the Second World War. The article is unique as it explores the atomic bomb from the perspective of its development and facilitation; hence its strength is that it values contributions of other military officers in building it. The articles provide a stand of their support for or against the atom bomb as the authors narrate the events leading to the United States’ decision to bomb Japan.
Conclusion
The Second World War ended weeks after the United States dropped atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Several historians attempted to explain whether the decision was justifiable. What is not clear is whether Japan was on the verge of surrendering and accepting defeat because the military was determined to fight to the end. Therefore, the decision to drop the atomic bomb over the two towns in Japan was primarily military action rather than a need to balance power after the end of World War 11. However, the US would have explored other ways of reducing the war that did not involve choosing between the lives of innocent civilians. The questions that remain unanswered or with conflicting answers to date are: Would Japan have surrendered during World War II? Did the atomic bomb drop save the number of estimated casualties that would have resulted from an invasion? In conclusion, the debate whether President Truman’s move to drop atomic bombs on Japan remains as several historians have explored the possible consequences if he had not made the decision.
References
Alperovitz, G. (1998). Historians reassess: did we need to drop the bomb?. Hiroshima’s
Shadow , 5-21.
Bernstein, B. J. (1986). A postwar myth: 500,000 US lives saved. Bulletin of the Atomic
scientists , 42 (6), 38-40.
Blackett, P. M. S. (1949). The decision to use the bombs . Whittlesey House.
Fussell, P. (1981). Thank God for the atom bomb. Thank God for the Atom Bomb and other
essays .
Goldberg, S. (1995). Racing to the Finish: The Decision to Bomb Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. Journal of American-East Asian Relations , 117-128.
Maddox, R. J. (1995). The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic
Bomb. American Heritage , 46 (3), 70-76.
