Wilfred Burchett, an Australian Journalist visited the once thriving Japanese city of Hiroshima, just one month after the devastating atomic bomb and did not approve of the devastation it caused. The bomb (little boy) was dropped over the city, killing over 70,000 people and injuring the same number. He was the first correspondent to enter Hiroshima after the bomb was dropped. “I was people in who … are dying … from these effects of bombing … They lost their appetites, their hair fell out … their flesh began rotting away from their bones” (Source A.). While his statement did not disapprove of the bombing, you can tell that he was distraught by the devastation caused by little boy. 2. In many ways the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima was …show more content…
He is thankful that the bomb was dropped, therefore saving the life of him and several other prisoners of war. Although he understands the horrific result of the bombs dropped, he still holds hatred upon the Japanese due to the way he was treated as a POW.” When that apology is forthcoming, when I will endeavour to forgive. However, I will never forget. Nor will I ever trust the Japanese as a nation.” (Source B, Tom Morris). I personally would ask how harsh the Japanese were on him to influence his …show more content…
He felt responsible that his knowledge of the structure of matter was used to cause devastation and loss of millions of lives. Ultimately I don't believe that Tom Morris could have persuaded Sir Mark Oliphant even if he wanted to, the pearl harbor bombing occurred first yet the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima would never be able to compare. I believe Sir Mark Oliphant would not have been persuaded by Tom Morris's very biased opinion. “So I remain sad, fifty years later, that the search for knowledge of the structure of matter, and hence of the universe, became the source of a killing agent” (Source C, Sir Mark Oliphant). You can tell that he did not approve at all of the Americans taking advantage of something that was used as a devastating