Was the Atomic Bomb necessary to end the Second World War?

70

By USHISTORY4YOU

See all 5 photos
This is the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th 1945 (Little Boy)
This is the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th 1945 (Little Boy)

It seems the debate about the dropping of the two atomic bombs on Japan began almost the day after the first bomb was dropped. In truth in began before that. Many of the scientist and physicists who had worked on the Manhattan Project had serious doubts about the use of the bomb on a civilian population and they had made their views known to the higher ups.

It's sad that the atomic bomb had to be used on innocent civilians but there wasn't really much of a choice. It was estimated that it would cost the United States forces that took part in the invasion of Japan more than half a million casualties just to establish a beach head on the southern most of the Japanese home islands. That's just American causalities. The Japanese had already proven themselves a maniacal foe in their residence to America's approach to their homeland. American military forces invading Japan was going to be the cause of a terrible blood letting on both sides. Millions would have died.

The development of the Atom Bomb had cost more than two billion dollars. Plus the cost to develop the aircraft able to deliver the atomic bomb(The Boeing B-29) cost another two billion dollars plus. Now if President Truman had chosen not to use the atomic bomb against Japan, and instead gone ahead with the invasion. Let's just say that I wouldn't have wanted to be in his shoes once the dust and blood all settled and the American people found out that he had available to him the means to maybe prevent these half a million young American Boys from dying.

Even after the bombing of Hiroshima the majority of the Minister's in the Japanese cabinet were opposed to ending the war by surrendering. It's augured by many and in my opinion it's a valid point that it wasn't so much the atomic bomb that forced the Japanese leaders to capitulate finally, but Russia's declaration of war on Aug.8th that forced them to see the hopelessness and futility of Japan's continuation of the war.

It's my opinion the the Atomic Bombing of Japan saved lives,both Japanese and American. Millions of Japanese were prepared to fight to the death to resist the invasion of their homeland,and hundreds of thousands of Americans would have died in the invasion of Japan. It was a lose lose situation pretty much. In the end Harry Truman did the right thing.

This is the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki August 9th 1945 (Fat Man)
This is the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki August 9th 1945 (Fat Man)

Comments

Luke Martens 3 weeks ago

It isn't far to the japan with the atomic bomb dropped on Hirosima and Nigesaki and we should done it to japanese with the suffifers hve the radasaon to the people. United States shoulded done that to japan and they should have a waring to japan.

Paladin_ profile image

Paladin_ Level 5 Commenter 6 months ago

Part of the problem with Japanese peace overtures was that the government wasn't exactly unified. The military leadership (who still had incredible influence) was much more fanatical about extending the conflict than was the civilian leadership.

As I understand it, even after the first atomic bomb was dropped, the Japanese military leaders insisted to the Emperor that it was all just an American ruse -- that we had used conventional, not nuclear, weapons on Hiroshima.

This is also part of the reason dropping the second bomb was so important. The Japanese had to believe that we had an ample supply of these terrible weapons, and that their continued resistance was completely and utterly hopeless.

USHISTORY4YOU profile image

USHISTORY4YOU Hub Author 6 months ago

I have my doubts about which high level officials made these 5 separate overtures. January 20th 1945 was before the B-29's had begun to firebomb Japanese cities,and also before the invasion of Iwo Jima or Okinawa.I doubt if any truly high placed Japanese officials were making peace overtures on that date.

M J Dowis profile image

M J Dowis 6 months ago

This is a tough question and thank you making an attempt to answer it. You did leave out one key point though.

"In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512.)

This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:

Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.

Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.

Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.

Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.

Release of all prisoners of war and internees.

Surrender of designated war criminals."

--qouted from http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    Please wait working