Four Arguments For The Ethical Use Of The Atomic Bomb

Then the question of the ethical use of the bomb emerged. Many scholars agreed that “it is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it.” Men like Barton J. Bernstein began to counter many arguments for the use of the atomic bomb, including using the bomb to intimidate Russia. https://www.nps.gov/articles/trumanatomicbomb.htmHowever, the Truman was given four alternatives which included conventional bombing of the Japanese home islands, ground invasion of the Japanese home islands, and demonstration of the Atomic Bomb on an unpopulated/populated area. Moreover, Japan would have collapsed before the invasion due to its internal problems of political, military, and the economy. These possible alternatives to end the world gives insight into the lengths the United States would go to prove their dominance during a war.
Japan had been already aware of the retaliation that was made upon the United States, so having Russia enter the mix would also convince Japan of their “inevitability of complete defeat.” Truman even included his perception of Stalin decision to enter the war by realizing the importance of how fast the war will end and prevent more lives to be taken away. He realized that the invasion was an option, but the Japanese would admit to unconditional surrender for it meant a national extinction. This further made Truman convinced that the bomb was necessary in order to save lives in the invasion. http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/ However, Truman was aware of the effects it would have on the Russians’ plans in Manchuria, which was invade and declare war. This event meant that Stalin could “no longer act as a