The Holocaust, the Holodomor, and the Ottoman Greek genocide – all examples of infamous massacres throughout the history of the world. Each of these genocides were committed during times of war, and their lack of ethicality is rarely questioned; most come to the consensus that these massacres were inhumane and unjust. But there is one genocide in the world’s history whose ethicality is frequently debated – President Truman’s decision to drop the Atomic bomb on Japan during World War II; this decision led to the death of copious amounts of Japanese citizens, and although the decision is not irreproachable, ultimately it was the proper decision in order to end the war. The brutality and inhumanity the innocent Japanese citizens suffered through
…show more content…
Whether it was through the loss of loved ones or the grotesque disfiguration many experienced, the catastrophe the Japanese people suffered through cannot be justified morally by America’s incentive of winning the war. Aside from the devastating physical ramifications, the actions of President Truman also had significant political implications. The reveal of the atomic bomb to the world affected the way the rest of the word viewed warfare as well as “showed how each super power would use any tactic possible to gain an advantage over their enemy” ("The Effects of the Atomic Bomb Politically and Socially"). This ultimately changes the standards of morality during war time and leads to the rapid advancement of military technology. Because the impact of the atomic bomb was so devastating, it prompted many other nations to respond with the development of their own weapons of mass destruction. By approving such an inhumane military act, Truman essentially condones the idea of unrestricted warfare as well as the use of brutish military tactics …show more content…
In an effort to end the war, the American military had been planning a two-phased invasion of the Japanese homeland on November 1, 1945, code named Operation Downfall. This operation involved the taking of the southern third of Kyushu, the southernmost main Japanese home island, several air and naval bases, and the securing of the Tokyo-Yokohama region (Hasegawa). This invasion, each phase more intricate and treacherous than the last, could only result in tremendous bloodshed and destruction for both the Japanese and Americans. In order to prevent further massacre of both parties, Truman made the political decision to utilize the atomic bomb in attempting to defeat Japan. “The principal political, social and military objective of the United States in the summer of 1945 was the prompt and complete surrender of Japan. Only the complete destruction of her military power could open the way to lasting peace” (Stimson). The dropping of the Atomic bomb, if not the deciding factor, played a significant role in forcing the Japanese surrender. Had Truman not made the decision, World War II could have been prolonged by a significant amount and resulted in further amounts of futile bloodshed. Truman’s decision was one not of a genocidal tyrant; rather, it was a decision from a leader of a great nation, attempting to save his people from further bloodshed and end an already extensive and vicious war. The debate of the ethicality of dropping the atomic bombs on Japan is
Whether it was through the loss of loved ones or the grotesque disfiguration many experienced, the catastrophe the Japanese people suffered through cannot be justified morally by America’s incentive of winning the war. Aside from the devastating physical ramifications, the actions of President Truman also had significant political implications. The reveal of the atomic bomb to the world affected the way the rest of the word viewed warfare as well as “showed how each super power would use any tactic possible to gain an advantage over their enemy” ("The Effects of the Atomic Bomb Politically and Socially"). This ultimately changes the standards of morality during war time and leads to the rapid advancement of military technology. Because the impact of the atomic bomb was so devastating, it prompted many other nations to respond with the development of their own weapons of mass destruction. By approving such an inhumane military act, Truman essentially condones the idea of unrestricted warfare as well as the use of brutish military tactics …show more content…
In an effort to end the war, the American military had been planning a two-phased invasion of the Japanese homeland on November 1, 1945, code named Operation Downfall. This operation involved the taking of the southern third of Kyushu, the southernmost main Japanese home island, several air and naval bases, and the securing of the Tokyo-Yokohama region (Hasegawa). This invasion, each phase more intricate and treacherous than the last, could only result in tremendous bloodshed and destruction for both the Japanese and Americans. In order to prevent further massacre of both parties, Truman made the political decision to utilize the atomic bomb in attempting to defeat Japan. “The principal political, social and military objective of the United States in the summer of 1945 was the prompt and complete surrender of Japan. Only the complete destruction of her military power could open the way to lasting peace” (Stimson). The dropping of the Atomic bomb, if not the deciding factor, played a significant role in forcing the Japanese surrender. Had Truman not made the decision, World War II could have been prolonged by a significant amount and resulted in further amounts of futile bloodshed. Truman’s decision was one not of a genocidal tyrant; rather, it was a decision from a leader of a great nation, attempting to save his people from further bloodshed and end an already extensive and vicious war. The debate of the ethicality of dropping the atomic bombs on Japan is