The debate over whether President Truman should have dropped the atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki has occurred over decades. There are many people who the favor other options to dropping the bomb, because they feel as if the thousands of innocent Japanese citizens who lost their lives could have been spared. They believe dropping the bombs were not necessary to winning the war. However, this researcher has come to the conclusion that, though this incident was tragic, nuclear warfare was the best decision in the end.
This researcher’s ideas are based off those of scholars who have done intensive investigation over the topic and written books and articles, and given informative lectures about it.
As previously stated, this researcher …show more content…
Some people more than likely have the opinion that invading Japan would have been the best option because it quite possibly could have ended the war without the loss of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Japan. Operation Downfall was the name given to the planned final invasion lead by General Douglas MacArthur (Marc). The plan called for 2.5 million American soldiers and it was broken up into two different parts. It is estimated that the deaths resulting from this alternative would greatly outweigh the deaths from the atomic bombs, but there is no way to know for sure. It is for this reason that it is understandable for people to prefer this option over Nuclear Warfare; plus the the lives lost would not be helpless innocents, such as women, children, and the elderly. By waiting and letting Russia invade Japan, the United States soldiers could have avoided casualties and would not be to blame for unleashing the nuclear warfare that killed so many innocent people. Many people say that Japan was close to surrender anyway, and they most likely …show more content…
In option of the U.S. invading Japan and losing thousands of soldiers is not a favorable alternative. Research shows that the estimated casualties for pursuing this option would have been much higher than those that resulted from the detonation of the bombs. As stated above, the name given to the planned invasion of Japan was Operation Downfall. It consisted of two parts, Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet (Operation Downfall). After research constructed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the estimated number of total casualties between Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet would add up 1.2 million, with 267,000 deaths (Operation Downfall). These numbers do not include the deaths of Japanese soldiers. It is feasible that choosing to enact Operation Downfall would have resulted in a far higher death rate than that of the detonation of the bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thouh the lives lost from the bombs were innocent men and women, there would have been many more lives lost if the president had pursued another course of action. Dropping the atomic bomb also resulted in a quick end to the war. If Japan had ever intended on surrendering before The United States detonated it, they probably would have; especially due to the naval blockade and conventional bombing. In addition to the benefit of a quick end to the war and spared American lives, it has
This researcher’s ideas are based off those of scholars who have done intensive investigation over the topic and written books and articles, and given informative lectures about it.
As previously stated, this researcher …show more content…
Some people more than likely have the opinion that invading Japan would have been the best option because it quite possibly could have ended the war without the loss of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Japan. Operation Downfall was the name given to the planned final invasion lead by General Douglas MacArthur (Marc). The plan called for 2.5 million American soldiers and it was broken up into two different parts. It is estimated that the deaths resulting from this alternative would greatly outweigh the deaths from the atomic bombs, but there is no way to know for sure. It is for this reason that it is understandable for people to prefer this option over Nuclear Warfare; plus the the lives lost would not be helpless innocents, such as women, children, and the elderly. By waiting and letting Russia invade Japan, the United States soldiers could have avoided casualties and would not be to blame for unleashing the nuclear warfare that killed so many innocent people. Many people say that Japan was close to surrender anyway, and they most likely …show more content…
In option of the U.S. invading Japan and losing thousands of soldiers is not a favorable alternative. Research shows that the estimated casualties for pursuing this option would have been much higher than those that resulted from the detonation of the bombs. As stated above, the name given to the planned invasion of Japan was Operation Downfall. It consisted of two parts, Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet (Operation Downfall). After research constructed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the estimated number of total casualties between Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet would add up 1.2 million, with 267,000 deaths (Operation Downfall). These numbers do not include the deaths of Japanese soldiers. It is feasible that choosing to enact Operation Downfall would have resulted in a far higher death rate than that of the detonation of the bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thouh the lives lost from the bombs were innocent men and women, there would have been many more lives lost if the president had pursued another course of action. Dropping the atomic bomb also resulted in a quick end to the war. If Japan had ever intended on surrendering before The United States detonated it, they probably would have; especially due to the naval blockade and conventional bombing. In addition to the benefit of a quick end to the war and spared American lives, it has