There is a lot of debate about the legitimacy of the United States use of the

There is a lot of debate about the legitimacy of the

This preview shows page 3 - 5 out of 9 pages.

There is a lot of debate about the legitimacy of the United States use of the atomic bombs on Japan however for this essay I will only be concerned with those who are presenting evidence towards the use of the bombs as a necessary means of ending the war between Japan and the United States. In Berstein’s article, The Atomic Bombs Reconsidered, he argues that the issue of morality in using the bombs was lost as a result of the war being a total war with many instances to which aggression towards non- combatants is present. I agree with this argument because how can one country expect to attack another (i.e. The Japanese and Pearl Harbour) and in return not be attacked as a direct result of this. He also argues that the United States public opinion would have been against Truman due to his recent claim at presidency and the public opinion that Americans had towards the Japanese thus forcing him to act based in so much that the public would not resent him. There has also been much debate as to the United States using the bombs as a means to show the world their power and the advanced technology that they controlled especially towards the Soviet Union to make “Stalin more agreeable 3
Image of page 3
[Type text] [Type text] [Type text] to the interests of the Allies.” 1 I agree with Landesman however in how he downplays this notion as to whether or not it actually was a reason for the dropping of the bombs even though it wasn’t mentioned by President Truman, and if anything was a side objective if anything. My thesis/hypothesis is that the atomic bombs used by the United States were a unnecessary means to bringing the Japanese into surrender and forcing them to end the war. My argument will begin with the American situation at the time due to their final push towards the Japanese homeland by conquering the various islands surrounding Japan. This thrust was long and strenuous on American forces in so much that upon reaching the Japanese mainland they were exhausted and fatigued. In order for the Japanese to ultimately surrender the United States forces would have to directly attack the Japanese mainland because there were still roughly five million troops still spread out across various islands that were still able to fight if necessary. 2 This attack would be costly in both time and casualties for the Americans however, the use of the bombs cut the head off of the proverbial snake whereby once the initial attack had been made the rest of Japan surrendered. 3 Secondly the Americans knew through intercepted messages that the Japanese were not going to surrender easily and were holding out to hoping that American morale in an invasion and through prolonged war would offer Japan the chance 1 Charles Landesman, “Rawls on Hiroshima: An Inquiry into the Morality of the use of  Atomic Weapons in August 1945.”  The Philisophical Forum,   vol. 34, no.1, 2003: Pp 24 2 Louis Morton, “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb,”  Journal of Foreign Affairs 2004: pp. 341 3 Henry, Stimson. “The Atomic Bomb and the Surrender of Japan” in  On Active Service  in Peace and War . 1947: 612-633. 628 4
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 9 pages?

  • Winter '20
  • World War II, japan, Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, text]

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture