If The Atomic Bomb Had Not Been Used Rhetorical Analysis

In response to Karl T. Compton article “If the Atomic Bomb Had Not Been Used,” Compton attempts to persuade readers that the atomic bombings were needed im to stop the war from causing further destruction. The atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary in order to stop the war.

Karl T. Compton builds his argument in hopes to appeal to the audience's emotional standpoint or pathos. Compton’s use of pathos was evident on the first page third paragraph in which he wrote “ I believe, that the atomic bombs saved hundreds of thousands- perhaps several millions- of lives, both American and Japanese..” This specific quote justifies the act of the droppings of these bombs because he is implying that the bombings were not wrongful.
Another example of a strong use of pathos in this article can be found on the first page second paragraph in which he states “ It is easy now, after the event, to look back and say that Japan was already a beaten nation, and to ask what therefore was the justification for the use of the atomic bomb to kill so many thousands of helpless Japanese in this inhuman way;..,” these are both great uses of pathos because he uses words like saved, kill,helpless, and inhuman. This is a strong use of pathos because he uses words that will potentially evoke emotions from the readers and make them really think about the acts of America. Even though this is a strong use of pathos these two statements contradict one another because the first statement is saying the atomic bomb droppings were necessary and the second statement is saying these acts were inhuman and that the Japanese were helpless.

Compton attempts to use ethos which is using credibility or an important figure and or someone readers can trust and believe to persuade them. The use of ethos is found in the first paragraph in which he wrote “About a week after V-J Day I was of a small group of scientist and engineers interrogating and intelligent, well- informed Army officer Yokohama,” this is an amazing use of ethos because Karl states that the army officer is intelligent, well informed of WWll and war in general which is an implication and Compton also met with a group of scientist that have had to have information about the war. Even though this is an amazing use of ethos Karl does not have enough use of ethos in his article to say he had a strong use of ethos to persuade the readers that the atomic bomb droppings were necessary in order to end the war and stop further destruction and casualties.

Karl uses logos in his article which is the act of using facts and logical reasoning to persuade the audience that the bomb droppings were significant in putting an end to the war.
Karl’s use of logo can be found on the second page third in which Compton wrote “General MacArthur’s staff anticipated about 50,000 American casualties and several times that number of Japanese…,” another example of logos can also be found on page two in the first paragraph which he wrote “Compare this with the results of two B-29 incendiary raids over Tokyo. One of these raids killed about 125,000 people, the other nearly 100,000,” even though these appear to be an accurate use of logos because Compton uses words like anticipated, about and nearly these words imply that the numbers used are estimates and not facts because use exacts numbers for example if an author were to say about fifty million each year that would not be a strong use of logos because in reality 55.3 million people die a year. When using logos the facts should be exact because appeal to emotion and trust isn’t enough for some readers most readers base their decisions on factual statements about the topic. Karl does attempt to use factual statements to persuade the readers but doesn’t seem sure of the evidence himself meaning Compton did not use logos
effectively.

Karl does not build a very strong argument as to why the bombs were a necessity. Karls use of emotional appeal is not strong because he contradicts himself in one piece of evidence he says that the bombings were necessary but in a different piece of evidence he says that the bombings were inhuman readers aren’t sure if they were necessary or inhuman and wrong but if he wanted to say they were inhuman but necessary to stop the war and stop war crimes and stop the death rate from increasing it would have been less confusing. Comptons use of ethos is strong in the aspect of trustworthiness and believable information but he does not use enough of it throughout his article to prove his argument is valid and people who have a connection to war really grasp the reader's attention. Comptons use of logos is inaccurate because of his word choice words like about,nearly, and anticipated give readers a feeling of uncertainty and estimation logos is the use of facts and words like such are not factual. Karl’s has strong points and weak points in this article that raise more red flags than green flags this article is not as persuasive as he could have made it because his use of ethos was strong and if he would’ve used more of it throughout the entire piece he could have potentially persuaded more. Karl’s argument as a whole is confusing contradicting and unorganized even though he does target some of the exact requirements of ethos,pathos, and logos it is simply not as effective as it could potentially be.