The decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan during World War II remains one of the most controversial events in modern history. Three primary arguments regarding this decision are presented in “Speech to the Association of Los Alamos Scientists” by Robert Oppenheimer, “A Petition to the President of the United States” by Leo Szilard, and “The Decision to Drop the Bomb” by Henry Stimson. While each author presents a unique perspective, this essay argues that Oppenheimer’s argument is best supported by evidence and reasoning.
The "Speech to the Association of Los Alamos Scientists" is an effective text because he creates credibility as a scientist and leader, appeals to both reason and emotion, emphasizes the moral consequences of their job, and emphasizes the need for cooperation and responsibility. This speech argues that dropping the bomb was necessary to end the war quickly and save lives. He claims that traditional bombing campaigns had been ineffective in forcing Japan to surrender and that an invasion would have resulted in massive casualties. He points out that Japan had
…show more content…
Szilard contends that Japan was already seeking peace negotiations. He believes that using atomic weapons would lead to international condemnation and ultimately harm US interests. Furthermore, he suggests that using diplomacy instead of force could have achieved similar results without causing immense human suffering. The text states "scientists who refused to work on atomic weapons because they believed it went against their moral principles". This suggests that the author makes valid points about the ethical implications of using such devastating