Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

The Bombing of Hiroshima Led to End the War in the Pacific

Best Essays
2492 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Bombing of Hiroshima Led to End the War in the Pacific
Hiroshima: Necessary Warnings

Bill Eckley
HIST560
4026624

“The final decision of where and when to use the atomic bomb was up to me. Let there be no mistake about it. I regarded the bomb as a military weapon and never had any doubt that it should be used.”1 –President Harry S. Truman

By the closing stages of the Second World War the Generals and Admirals had very little to do with how the war was to end. Truly the decision to drop the atomic bomb was a precipitous change in the Machiavellian relationship between war and politics. Before the generals and admirals were the experts in how to place their weapons to maximum effect making policies and doctrine based upon their initiative and insight from ‘in the field’ or ‘on the ground’. The employment of Atomic weapons though was new territory and the use and employment of said weapons proved to be political territory. The controversy surrounding this pivotal turning point in American global politics will continue to confuse and confound any and all who would attempt to plumb its depths for the proverbial ‘truth’ surrounding why the United States dropped not only one but two atomic bombs on Japan.

Time has done little to clarify the proverbial ‘truth’ of our leader’s motivations. Modern historians have many theories about what the deciding factors for dropping the bomb were. Most modern theories provided leave much to be desired and don’t offer the same feeling of substantive rightness that those closer in time to the event provide. Certainly a combination of many factors influenced the scales of decision President Truman used to decide on the best course of action. Unfortunately for historians much of the Manhattan project and the events of early 1945 were shrouded in secrecy for several decades. By the time archival documents had been released to the public the prevailing stories had been firmly set into the American historical perspective. This has led to deep dividing lines between some groups of historians with regards to this one decision to drop the bomb. These viewpoints I will generalize under three different titles; traditional interpreters, revisionists and middle grounders. Some may include another perspective in these titles, namely the Japanese perspective, however I would consider this subset as part of the revisionist group for reasons that should become apparent. The traditionalists perspective can be summed up as following; Truman felt that saving American lives and ending the war in the Pacific quickly was ultimately the most humane path.

“We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans. We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan’s power to make war.”2 –President Harry S. Truman

While traditionalist historians admit the moral implications to the bombing Hiroshima they contend that Truman bombed the city in order to take a stand for ending the war in the Pacific. Truman stood up for American soldiers and against the transgressions of the Japanese. Furthermore that Truman used it as punishment against what he saw as the dastardly attack by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor. The traditional argument stems from the belief that firstly the bomb was seen as a legitimate weapon. The leaders at the time felt that the bomb was simply a more powerful weapon. The political ramifications hadn’t been examined or critiqued amongst the world community. Necessarily the bombs development had been secret so open discourse concerning whether the bomb was legal had not been enacted. Unlike the restrictions against the use of Dum-Dum bullets or chemical weapons there was no precedent for restricting the use of the atomic bomb.

Traditionalists also contend that the decision to drop the bomb was carefully thought out. Pre-invasion estimates for the invasion of Honshu and Kyushu range anywhere from 40,000 to nearly 1 million American casualties. This part of the traditionalist viewpoint makes the use of the Atomic bomb seem like a bargain when viewed against the death of 250,000 Japanese military and civilian. A main point of secondary contention between the traditionalist and revisionist historians lie with this disparity of numbers.

The traditionalist perspective also maintains that there was no ‘true’ alternative to the use of the bomb was available in order to quickly end the war. The deeper meaning of this statement goes into the realm of potentials. This point is the main difference between the revisionist theoreticians and the traditionalists. The revisionists feel that Japan was on the brink of collapse and the atomic bomb was unnecessary. Traditionalists hold that Japan was, in the words of Truman – “savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic”3 The traditionalist may not all have such racist beliefs, however, the predominant way of thinking of the time led the U.S. to not believe reports of Japanese willingness to surrender. Traditionalist also maintain that the bomb was necessary for military purposes both because of the tremendous amount of effort and funds that went into producing it but also because of the lives that would be saved by forcing the surrender.

Revisionists as has been mentioned earlier believed that the use of the atomic bomb was unnecessary. They see dire motives being the primary movtives for Truman to drop the bomb. Among these assertions lay the belief that the casualty estimates were unnecessarily inflated to make the use of the bomb politically feasible to the American public. Some revisionists maintain that the use of the bomb was more of a political statement to the Soviets following the uneasy peace following the completion of the war in Europe. Revisionists believe that many of the relevant facts have been withheld from the public and hidden under a shroud of secrecy for this reason. Revisionists generally feel that the bomb was dropped on dates and in a drastic hurry in order to force a peace before the Soviets could enter the war and take guardianship of large areas of Asia. Revisionists also attempt to cast doubt on Trumans decision through interviews and biographies from other sources. Undoubtedly the debate that continues to this date will muddy relevant facts and draw modern historians into irrelevancies and needless debate. The following follows my attempts to draw the ‘truth’ from these contending viewpoints. I feel after my own research that I am more of a Middle grounder.

The early part of 1945 several events transpired which helped shape the context that Truman was to base his decision on. The United States was preparing to invade the Japanese homeland in an operation creatively named Operation Downfall. Truman’s advisors gave him just a few options to force the Japanese surrender; tightening the naval blockade with continued aerial bombardment, a negotiated peace, invasion, or the atomic bomb. The first two options were political dead ends for a war weary country. After the conclusion of the war in Europe the United States wanted a quick and decisive end to the war against Japan. A negotiated peace was also an option however, the Suicidal tactics employed by Japanese in defense of Okinawa and Iwo Jima served its intended purpose of convincing American planners that the Japanese resolve to fight had not been broken and that any attack of the Japanese homeland would be a bitter fight for every inch. The atomic weapon was another option and of the alternatives as the most attractive both politically and militarily. As has been mentioned before original estimates place casualty estimates at the low end 40,000 Americans. This estimate was obviously provided before intercepts and military analysis noticed that the Japanese had correctly guessed where the American invasion was to take place. It is logical to suspect that after that point and given the context of the determined and suicidal tactics that had recently occurred in Okinawa and Iwo Jima that the American casualties would be a magnitude greater.

Though Truman was the President who would be responsible for the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan the bombs development had started years before under President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration. At the outbreak of World War II Hungarian scientist Dr. Leo Szilard sent a letter to Albert Einstein. In this letter Szilard outlined the Nazi’s efforts to develop an atomic bomb.4 This letter subsequently led to the creation of a Top Secret military program Code Named S-1. This program more popularly known as the Manhattan Project was to become one of the largest scientific-industrial programs in history and one of the war’s most closely guarded secret. Though recent evidence points to the Soviets penetrating the program fairly early on. It is also interesting to note that the fact that the US was developing a Nuclear weapon was not lost upon the Japanese. This was drawn from the fact of the embargo by the US in the build up to the war of fissionable materials.5
The primary reason for the American rush to developing its own atomic weapon was fear… The fear was that Germany was developing its own atomic weapon. This fear was to prove to be unfounded due to German scientists inability to produce fissionable materials in sufficient quantity to produce a bomb.6 This fact, however, was undiscovered until after Germany’s surrender in 1945.
With the death of President Roosevelt in April of 1945 President Truman was faced with the necessity of achieving a Japanese surrender. At hand was the untested and unknown quantity of the atomic bomb. At the time of Roosevelt’s death only a few key military and civilian officials knew of the Manhattan Project. Once Truman was in office he was ‘read-in’ to the program. Henry Stimson, Secretary of War, and James F. Byrnes, Truman’s representative for atomic matters, kept President Truman informed of the developments of the project.

During this period of great achievement in the realm of nuclear physics there was hardening of Japanese resistance in the Pacific. Japanese units refused to surrender and continued to fight against overwhelming odds. During the battles of Okinawa and Iwo Jima, American casualties were elevated to their greatest numbers. The Japanese defenses employed past experience and suicidal tactics to devastating effect. American planners were forced to plan for the worst as hundreds of thousands of Japanese soldiers and civilians were sent into defenses prepared throughout the south of the Japanese homeland. The planners estimated 250,000 casualties of American forces for any invasion of Japan. Doubtless the enemy military and civilian casualties added to the numbers of American dead played into the grim arithmetic that led to the decision to drop the bomb.

The atomic bomb was successfully tested on 16 July 1945 in New Mexico. With the dawning of the nuclear age Truman was given additional options, which could make an invasion unnecessary. The invasion plans of Kyushu still proceeded apace and the Big Three met at the Potsdam Conference. At the conference the leaders of the US, Great Britain and China issued the Potsdam Declaration calling for; the removal from power or influence those leaders which deceived and mislead the Japanese people into war, occupation of Japanese territory, cut back of Japanese territory limiting it to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and others, disarmament of Japanese military forces and war trials for war criminals. The sole mention of “unconditional surrender” was specified solely for the military forces mentioned at the end of the proclamation.

“We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction.”7

The fact that the test for nuclear bomb occurred on the first day of the conference is a fact that is seldom noted and leads one to speculate about the full meaning of the last lines of the declaration. It has also been shown that with the successful test the US essentially told the Soviets that they were in possession of a new weapon which could devastate Japan. Japan had no clue what was coming its way and felt secure that the prompt part of their utter destruction was a ploy.

In the meantime the Japanese government attempted to negotiate with the Soviets to mediate a peace settlement, however the Japanese did not address the United States or any other of the participants of the Potsdam declaration. Whether the Japanese were attempting to call a bluff or buy time will remain unknown. That fact that they failed to deal directly with the signatories of the Potsdam agreement shows that the war was far from over. On 6 Aug 1945 all of Truman’s hopes for a negotiated peace before unleashing the weapon ended. The fact that Japan still refused to surrender 3 days later shows that indeed the Japanese were resolved to fight it out to the end. The second atomic bomb showed taught the Japanese the strength of Truman’s resolve.

Works Referenced
Bungei Shunju Senshi Kenkyukai. The Day Man Lost: Hiroshima, 6 August 1945. Tokyo: Kondansha International LTD, 1972.

Dower, John W. War Without Mercy. New York: Pantheon Books, 1986.

Truman, Harry S. Memoirs by Harry S. Truman: Year of Decisions. New York: Doubleday, 1955.

Truman, Harry S. Memoirs by Harry S. Truman: Years of Trial and Hope. New York: Doubleday, 1955.

Truman, Margaret. Harry S. Truman. New York: Avon Books, 1973.

Truman, Harry S. Off the Record: The Private Papers of Harry S. Truman. Edited by Robert H. Ferrell. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1980.

McCullough, David. Truman. New York: Touchstone, 1992.

Feis, Herbert. The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1966.

Spector, Ronald H. The Eagle Against The Sun: The American War With Japan. New York: Vintage Books, 1985.

Barton J Bernstein. "Truman and the A-bomb: Targeting noncombatants, using the bomb, and his defending the "decision"." The Journal of Military History 62, no. 3 (July 1, 1998): 547-570. http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/ (accessed May 28, 2011).

Aperovitz, Gar and Kai Bird. “Was Hiroshima Needed to End the War?”. “Christian Science Monitor (August 6, 1992) (Boston, MA).: 19. http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/(accessed May 28, 2011). Asperovitz, Gar. “Enola Gay: A New Concensus…” The Washington Post ( February 4, 1995) A17. http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/(accessed May 28, 2011).

Leffler, Melvyn. “Was Hiroshima Necessary” The Weekend Australian (July 29 1995) http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/(accessed May 28, 2011).

Neal, Steve. “Truman Saved Lives With A-Bombs” Chicago Sun-Times (August 8, 1995) http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/(accessed May 28, 2011).

Lyle W. Dorsett. “Pendergast Machine”. Midcontinent American Studies Journal.(unk): 16-27. https://journals.ku.edu/index.php/amerstud/article/viewFile/2200/2159 (accessed June 15 2011).

Clare, John D. “Truman Doctrine/Marshall Plan”. Modern World History GCSE revision site. http://www.johndclare.net/cold_war8.htm (accessed June 15 2011).

History Learning Site United Kingdom. “Harry Truman and Civil Rights”. History Leraning Site. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/Harry_Truman_civil_rights.htm(accessed June 15 2011).

The Wall Street Journal. “Presidential Approval Ratings History”. Wall Street Journal Digital Network. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-presapp0605-31.html . (accessed June 15 2011).

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Why Did Truman Choose Ww2

    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The first reason why President Truman made the correct choice was because war ended much faster. This war ended much faster because in wars, usually there’s not much damage but this war caused a lot of destruction and there were lots of deaths in seconds. These deaths were caused by radiation and “black rain” after the bomb exploded. Radiation makes a…

    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    American Dbq Analysis

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In Doc A, Truman believes that it was necessary to save as many American lives as possible. This would keep them out of the way of the kamikazees that were flying through and only cause the persistant Japanese to lose lives. Also, from Doc C, the atomic bomb was a way for America to show our might against the Russians.…

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many people were in favor of his overall decision. They took into consideration that many more lives from the opposing side would be lost in the war with this deadly weapon. This would ultimately lead to the overall surrender from the Japanese. According to research, Truman and his troops targeted two military bases which included Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Research also identified where the bomb was pulled. In 1945, President Truman decided to take action and proceed with the bombs. The bombs were pulled over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This caused widespread devastation throughout Hiroshima and surrounding areas. More than 70,000 people were killed instantly and the Japanese military base was wiped out. Why did many individuals support Truman’s decision? According to research, Truman wanted to end the war, so he chose the best available option, which was setting off the atomic bomb. This saved untold lives on both sides in the process. The ultimate responsibility for Hiroshima and Nagasaki lied within the Japanese. Truman sought to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid an overall invasion of Japan. Truman and many others thought morally throughout the time of questioning. In the end, the use of the atomic bombs was not only necessary, but moral. Truman and his supporters provided evidence that proved why his decision was indeed the best for the Americans.…

    • 999 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The money that was involved in the creation of the atomic bomb was tremendous. It was massive, if it wasn’t experimented on then it was believed that the Americans would be highly disappointed. After the Japanese attack, President Truman took that as a great opportunity to use the bombing. The outcome was successful because it caused an atrocious amount of deaths in…

    • 537 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Harry Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb was a good decision. If he had not decided to drop the atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the war would have continued and more Americans, as well as Japanese, would have continued to die. Since the Japanese were using ruthless methods of war like kamikazes or killing themselves rather than be captured, it was hard to tell how far Japan was willing to go in order to win the war. Thus, Truman’s decision to bomb Japan is justifiable by the cause of not knowing to what extents Japan was willing to go. I believe Truman wanted to show the Japanese that the United States was willing to do anything to win the…

    • 125 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    A key reason for Truman’s decision to drop the Atomic Bomb was the alternative options were not proper solutions. Dropping the bomb wasn’t the only considered option. The main “runner up” was a mass invasion of Japan. This idea was very dangerous. The casualties for the US were projected to be over 1,000,000 soldiers, and 5,000,000 japanese soldiers. One of the other alternatives was the idea of displaying to true power of the atomic weapon to Japan through a test. Such an idea had way too many flaws to be applicable. There was only enough Plutonium and Uranium available to the US for two bombs, (Little Boy, Fat Man). Also this idea was a risk because if the weapon did not detonate, the US would look even weaker to the Japanese. The idea of barricading the Japanese was also a considered solution, using Naval vessels to trap the Japanese in until the US “starved them out”. The fault in this idea was the unreasonable amount of time and resources it would consume. After weighing the options, and thinking it through carefully, President Truman made the correct choice to drop the bomb.…

    • 498 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The decision to drop two atomic bombs on Japan in August of 1945 was made by a complex group of technological, political and military influences. History has it that the bombs were dropped in order to save American lives by avoiding the invasion of Japanese homelands, at least, that was what President Truman told the American public at the time. “For years, this simple view has been challenged by a seemingly more sophisticated academic perspective that the bombs were wrongfully used against innocent civilians, did not genuinely factor into the surrender of Japan, and would have better served the war effort as part of a diplomatic “carrot and stick” package.” (Beason 1). Some argue that the first bomb may have been required to achieve Japanese surrender, but the second one was a needless act of barbarism. According to Admiral William D. Leahy, the President’s Chief of Staff, “The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war over Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender…” (Beason 1). However, I have many facts to counteract all of these criticisms and to support President Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb.…

    • 1290 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The reason Truman decided to drop the bomb was because the Japanese were fighting for their country that was the only reason they were on the battlefield, The Americans had to think of something to get them to surrender. Having them drop the Atomic Bomb on their country was the best way to get them to surrender because if the Americans kept on bombing their country then they had no point of fighting because Japanese kept dying all around their country so their only solution was to…

    • 536 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Presidents of the United States of America have a very demanding profession while in office, one that requires them to constantly make difficult decisions that often affect hundreds of millions of people. These decisions become even more plentiful and complicated when the U.S. is fighting a war. President Harry S. Truman was one such unlucky individual who had to step up and be the man to make the hard choices on what the U.S. was to do in the bloodiest war in history, World War II. He only held that position for the last six months of the war, but he had the toughest moral decision presented to any world leader during the entirety of the war. He had to decide whether or not to use a new and immensely powerful weapon to quickly put an end…

    • 1319 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nuclear Bomb Dbq

    • 268 Words
    • 2 Pages

    U.S. President Harry S. Truman publicly announced his decision to support the development of the hydrogen bomb, a weapon theorized to be hundreds of times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Japan during World War II. He approved of the funding for the nuclear weapon because of several events prior to his public announcement. One of the reasons was the fact that the United States had lost its nuclear supremacy when the Soviet Union successfully detonated an atomic bomb at their test site in Kazakhstan in 1949. Another reason why he decided to fund experiments for nuclear weapons is because the British and U.S. intelligence discovered that Klaus Fuchs, a top-ranking scientist in the U.S. nuclear program, was a spy for the Soviet Union.…

    • 268 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I believe that President Truman did what he had to do in order to stop the war and keep the atomic bomb in the hands of trustworthy governments, such as, the United State’s. Under critical conditions, President Truman made a lasting effect on the world by stopping World War II and saving the lives of…

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Truman's Ideal

    • 119 Words
    • 1 Page

    Next Truman didn’t have another good alternative option to efficiently end the ongoing war. Countless members like Secretary of War Henry Stimson, also didn’t’ approve of the idea of using the nuclear weapon, however couldn’t find an alternative solution. The dangerous nuclear weapons “stopped the fire raids, and the strangling blockade; it ended the ghastly specter of a clash of great land armies” (Henry Stimson, Document 3). Again others argue that this is a crime against God and humanity. However, like mentioned earlier from the source of ethics the utilitarian approach back up our country’s decision. I agree using this destructive weapon to end a dispute isn’t ideal, but to an extent Truman had to lookout for our country.…

    • 119 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In Pearl Harbor and the Coming of the Pacific War by Akira Iriye, the author explores the events and circumstances that ended in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, an American naval base. Iriye assembles a myriad of primary documents, such as proposals and imperial conferences, as well as essays that offer different perspectives of the Pacific War. Not only is the material in Pearl Harbor and the Coming of the Pacific War informative of the situation between Japan and the United States, but it also provides a global context that allows for the readers to interpret Pearl Harbor and the events leading up to it how they may. Ultimately, both Pearl Harbor and the subsequent Pacific War between Japan and the U.S. were unavoidable due to the fact that neither nation was willing to bow down to the demands of the other.…

    • 1748 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    My fellow leaders and advisors held exceedingly ambivalent views, when our American Allies first issued the Potsdam Declaration late July. They demanded unconditional surrender of all our armed forces! If this wasn’t disreputable enough, they threatened imminent and complete destruction of not only our forces, but they insured absolute devastation of our homeland if we failed to comply with their egregious policy! One consequential condition declared on the Potsdam Declaration undoubtedly resonated with me personally and many other leaders and advisors. The declaration specified “elimination for all of the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into…

    • 1150 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    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.…

    • 578 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays