The Pros And Cons Of The Atomic Bombs

Should the U.S. have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan? Some people believe that the U.S. should not have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan, while others believe that the U.S. did the right thing by dropping the bombs. One thing both sides should agree upon is that the atomic bombs dropped on Japan ended the war faster than it would have if the U.S. did not drop the bombs. The atomic bombing on Japan was necessary for the war to end because it stopped the fighting and additional casualties that would have occurred if the war had not ended. The U.S. did the right thing by dropping the atomic bombs because they prevented the additional casualties that would have occurred. To be specific, if the U.S. had invaded Japan, both the Allies

Specifically, as I have stated above, the Japanese had an extremely strong will and would not surrender even if they had lost many of their men. According to “Arguments Supporting the Bomb” by Michael Barnes, “Some in the leadership argued that there was no way the Americans could have refined enough fissionable material to produce more than one bomb. But then the bombing of Nagasaki had demonstrated otherwise, and a lie told by a downed American pilot convinced War Minister Korechika Anami that the Americans had as many as a hundred bombs. . . Even so, hours of meetings and debates lasting well into the early morning hours of the 10th still resulted in a 3-3 deadlock. Prime Minister Suzuki then took the unprecedented step of asking Emperor Hirohito”. As my quote above illustrates, even after the first and second bomb Japanese leaders were reluctant and did not come to an agreement to surrender-that is until the emperor came with the decision to surrender. Hence, the bombing was absolutely necessary, for it was one the only things that would cause them to

Although the bomb did kill many innocent Japanese civilians, as Karl T. Compton says “All war is inhuman” such as the Japanese invasion in China and throughout the Pacific. One event that described the cruelty and inhumane acts of Japan was The Rape of Nanking. According to “The Rape of Nanking or Nanjing Massacre (1937)” the author writes,”The Japanese troops were encouraged by their officers to invent ever more horrible ways to slaughter the Chinese population of the city. . . Batches of Chinese civilians were rounded up and herded into slaughter pits. Here the grinning Japanese soldiers would either bury them alive, hack them to death with their swords, use them for bayonet practice, or pour petrol on the victims and burn them alive. . . After looting Nanking of anything of value, the Japanese started fires that gutted one third of the city”. This quote above proves the argument that war itself is not humane, but this does not change the fact that the bombing ended the war and prevented additional casualties upon both the Allies and the