Restatement of my Thesis: The dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan was unjustified because the number of people killed from the blasts and the subsequent damages that followed far exceeds any mission that may have been accomplished by this type of annihilation.
The above link is an interview with Dr. Leo Szilard concerning his professional opinions about the dropping of the atomic bombs. Dr. Leo Szilard is a Hungarian-born physicist who helped President Roosevelt to launch the A-bomb project. However, after years went by he became a key figure among the scientists opposing use of the bomb. This article effectively supports our thesis statement because Dr. Szilard offers an alternative to the dropping of the bombs when he says, "There was no need to demand the unconditional surrender of Japan. If we had offered Japan the kind of peace treaty which we actually gaver her, we could have negotiated peace."
This article describes the entire reasoning behind the dropping of the bombs. It also includes an explanation of the process of decision-making that the United States faced. Although it addresses both sides of the argument, I believe it helps to address many key points in proving the bombings as being unjustified. They provide the readers with useful information that there is no substansive evidence that exists about the bombing being "necessary" to make Japan surrender. They stated that the Japanese had already attempted to sue for peace in July of 1945 and were only hesitant because they distrusted the terms of unconditional surrender that the Allies demanded. This article even adds that Japan was utterly destroyed by the war (before the bombing) and that the United States's blockades prevented the island from getting the necessary food to survive, much less maintain any type of threat against America.
This is an excerpt from the novel, Hiroshima (which was written by Dwight Eisenhower) that is most likely the strongest piece of evidence that the dropping of the bombs was unjust. In his novel he exposes the horrors of nuclear war from the perspective of actual people that lived who through it. It discusses the lives of six people that lived through the bombings and discusses the devastation and trepidation of World War II. This compassionate and moving document has become a classic "that stirs the conscience of humanity".
Similar to another website on this page, this link addresses both arguments of historians about the morals of bombing Japan. At the bottom of the page is an interview section where you can read about the opinions of several historians. The interviews that pertain to my argument are with Admiral William Leahy and General Dwight D. Eisenhower. They clearly state that dropping the atomic bombs on Japan is the biggest mistake the United States ever made.
This particular site brings up specific questions that help to narrow the moral controversies of this debatable subject. This site asks the questions: Were there alternative to the use of the weapons? If there were, what were they and how plausible are they in retrospect? Why were alternatives not pursued? This site also provides U.S. documents that help to shed light on the considerations that induced Japan's surrender. It mentions many credible scientists and leaders of the time period and their perspectives on why dropping the bombs were unethical.
 |
The total area devastated by the atomic strike on Hiroshima |
This is a very strong piece of evidence that we found while researching World War II. This interview is with a man that survived the bombings and talks about how he received a large dose of radiation from the bomb and suffered large consequences. He reveals that he can't think of anything productive that came from the Hiroshima bombing. He provides an interesting opinion on the interests of the United States on dropping the bomb. He believes that although the U.S. wanted to end the war, another reason for bombing Japan could be because they wanted to test the effects of their new atomic weapon.
No comments:
Post a Comment