The Atomic Bomb: Good or Bad?

 

    The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki opened the eyes of many to the great and terrible  power that was able to be utilized by the major countries at the time. Since then, there has been a great deal of speculation concerning President Truman’s decision to use the atomic bombs. Naturally, there were two opposing sides: those who believed in the use of the atomic bomb and those who did not. Reasons supporting the bombing includes exacting revenge for the attack on Pearl Harbor, the atomic bomb was a decisive way to end the war, which in turn saved lives, and the United States needed to display something that would show the Japanese they could not win. Opposition to the President’s decision includes that the bombings were quite immoral, the United States could have offered a demonstration of the nuclear power they possessed, and that Japan was on the verge of surrendering due to the pressure of the B-29s thus making the atomic bomb unnecessary.

    A feeling that resided in the hearts of  Americans during the war was vengeance for Pearl Harbor. Thousands of soldiers lost their lives that day and it is easy to understand that the families of those who lost their lives felt that the Japanese had crossed a line. As a result, many individuals saw the bombings as punishment for Japan’s actions which they had inflicted upon themselves. Also, the bombings provided a decisive victory in the Pacific for the United States, saving lives. Immediately after the bombs were dropped, Japan surrendered. Estimates show that if America had decided to invade Japan, the amount of lives lost would have exceeded the casualties of the atomic bombing. People saw this as saving lives because the war was quickly dealt with instead of allowing it to continue and take the lives of more soldiers. The Japanese had also shown that they were not going to quit; wave after wave of kamikazes would be thrown at American ships and their belief in death before surrender made them extremely hard to subdue. Therefore, the United States had no choice but to demonstrate their desire to end the war and show the Japanese there was no possible way to win, which the atomic bomb was perfect for.

    There were also a great amount of people who felt strong opposition to the use of the atomic bombs. The most popular evidence for this claim is that the bombs were completely immoral, as they leveled the two cities and left the survivors to die from radiation poisoning. Gruesome stories about people having their flesh melted together, living the rest of their lives in pain due to cancer, and watching their loved ones be incinerated in front of them are unfortunately quite common. Many people felt it was wrong to subject the Japanese to this kind of treatment despite their actions at Pearl Harbor. Once the atomic bombs had been perfected, the United States also considered giving the Japanese a demonstration of the bomb so that they could choose to surrender. However, this plan was deemed impractical and quickly rejected, but if the Japanese had seen the bomb tested on somewhere besides their home, the probability of them surrendering then would have been very high. After the war, Japanese commanders were interviewed and told journalists that their surrender would have been inevitable if the B-29 firebombs continued to drop, therefore making the atomic bomb an unnecessary military decision.

    After considering all (or at least some of) the evidence from both sides, which argument do you find to be most valid?