100%(2)2 out of 2 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 4 - 5 out of 5 pages.
This idea was strengthened by the fact that not all members of the American military or leadership supported the atomic bombing of Japan. For example, Dwight Eisenhower, who was the Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Forces in Europe during World War II and later became the 32nd President of the United States, famously disagreed with the use of the bombs. The following statement highlights his feelings on the atomic bombing of Japan. “In 1945, Secretary of War Stimson visited my
headquarters in Germany, [and] informed me that our government was preparing to dropan atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act....During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and thatdropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and second because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face.' The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude, almost angrily refuting the reasons I gave for my quick conclusions.” This statement shows thatnot all of the military leadership in the United States supported the use of the two atomicbombs in World War II. First, some have suggested that the United States could have carried out a naval blockade of the island nation and forced the Japanese leadership into surrendering. The blockade would have prevented any resources from entering the country and would haveforced Japan into a situation where they did not have enough resources to survive. Therefore, this would have forced them to surrender before they reached a crisis point. Second, some historians have proposed the idea that the United States could have used the atomic bombs in a different way that didn’t directly harm innocent civilians. For example, it has been argued that the United States could have dropped an atomic bomb in an unpopulated area of Japan or in the harbor of a major city as a way of demonstrating the power of the technology without causing mass deaths. Another argument against the use of the atomic bombs as the end of World War II was that it was immoral for the United States to use two atomic bombs against Japan so quickly together. For example, while some people agree that an atomic bomb may have been necessary to end the war, many argue that two atomic bombs went too far especially considering the time period. The next argument against the use of the atomic bombs was that the United Statesonly used it as a way of scaring the Soviet Union. During World War II, the Allied nations of Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union faced off against the Axis nations of Nazi Germany, Italy and Japan.