Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
04/10/2017
The creation of the hydrogen bomb was not the worst mistake the United States made
during world war 2. Making the decision to use the bomb was perhaps the most inhumane action
taken in the history of the United States. President Truman had alternatives for ending the war in
Japan. I think the research showed the destruction capability of this new weapon and that should
have been enough to deter the use of the nuclear bomb. Also I agree with the people who say that
Some of the alternatives to dropping the bomb on Japan were waiting for Russia to enter
the war, giving a demonstration to Japan of the bombs capabilities, altering the unconditional
surrender terms, and the fact that we could have continued to use incendiary bombs to force them
into submission. The logic to use the Atomic bomb before attempting any of the alternatives
makes me think of the United States as a bully. I think the most important alternative was
President Truman had the option to change the terms of the surrender so Japan could keep
their emperor. However, if Japan agreed to the terms the emperor would have to be made into an
powerless figure in their society. I definitely think this was a viable solution if the United States
war department guaranteed the Japanese they would not be completely destroyed if they did
Another alternative was to give the Japanese a demonstration of the power of the nuclear
weapon before destroying a half a million people. The bomb demonstration could have wielded
the capability to force a surrender. Or it could have atleast made the emperor terrified enough to
cause him to make some strategic mistakes if we invaded the main island instead.
Next is why couldnt Truman wait for the Russians to enter the war. Truman was
informed by the russian leader that they would declare war on Japan on August 15th 1945. The
mere presence of the red army would have spelled out the inevitable defeat of Japan. Making it
more likely for Japan to surrender unconditionally, as requested by the United States.
The last alternative to using the atomic bomb was to just continue with the relentless
incendiary bombing. Prior to dropping the bombs the United States called for a 3 hour bombing
of major Japanese cities where more that 1000 bombs were dropped. I know if this continued
across the country they would eventually have to submit before nothing was left.
Furthermore I believe the use of the bomb was illegal according to international law. In
1938 the league of nations made the bombing on civilian populations with a specialty condition
placed on bombing from the air. President Truman was well aware of this law and ignored it.
Although the United States was not apart of the league of nations at the time, we claim to be a
model for human rights and thus should therefore abide by the standard agreed upon by the rest
of the world.
Lastly I strongly believe that the use of the atomic bomb was influenced by the prospects
of postwar negotiations with Russia. I agree with Gar Alperovitz, the bombs were used to gain an
upper hand in those negotiations as sort of a scare tactic. However I dont think the trade off of
killing hundred of thousands of civilians was worth the position America had in the post war
world.
In conclusion altering the terms of surrender to allow Japan to keep their emperor,
displaying the destructive force of the atomic bomb, waiting until the Russians to enter the war a
week later, or continuing the bombing of japan could have made the Japanese surrender without
killing so many civilians. Besides that I think the use of the bomb was morally wrong and illegal
by the standards of the rest of the world. Finally I think the idea of having a leg up in post war
Work Cited
Dag, O. "Hiroshima, Nagasaki..." Two atomic bombs which were dropped on Japan. N.p., n.d.
<http://www.historyonthenet.com/authentichistory/1939-1945/1-war/4-Pacific/4-
abombdecision/3-against/>.