Szilard's Petition Analysis

Improved Essays
Critical Evaluation of Szilard’s Petition The use of nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 was not a popular decision amongst experienced scientists. A Petition to the President of the United States by Leo Szilard and Cosigners in 1945 was a plea to the president from experienced scientists who not only assisted in developing the atomic bomb but they wished for other options instead of using it. The approach of this appeal to the president deemed it unsuccessful and the bombs were utilized without the blink of an eye. Leo Szilard was born in Hungary, immigrated to the United States in 1938 where he eventually assisted in organizing research into developing the atomic bomb (Chambers 1). As an experienced scientist in the field of atomic research, …show more content…
Szilard relied on his name itself and assumed the reader would know and respect him without any explanation of his credentials. This mistake be Szilard was a small fallacy in his simply written petition. Szilard could have laid out his pedigree and his specific history in dealing with nuclear research to better capture the attention and respect of the president. For most of Szilard’s petition he played to the president’s emotions and utilized the pathos appeal in his historical petition. Szilard repeatedly explained his thoughts and outlook on the world post-atomic bomb. He projected the use of atomic bombs would change the way war is looked at and strategized for the future if these weapons were used (Szilard 1). Szilard described the atomic bombs as “primarily a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities” (Szilard 1). Szilard used a logical approach or a “logos” appeal as well. “Thus a nation which sets the precedent of using these newly liberated forces of nature for purposes of destruction may have to bear the responsibility of opening the door to an era of devastation on an unimaginable scale” (Szilard 1). With this statement he made a reasonable comparison to the possibilities facing our nation if these bombs were …show more content…
There is no way of confirming the truth of his argument but the likelihood is certainly present. A scientific argument relies mostly on history and past observations. In this case, nuclear weapons were never used in the past so Szilard was relying on his scientific knowledge which made his approach unsuccessful. The approach of explaining the results and/or aftermath of using the atomic bombs was a tactical approach at utilizing the pathos appeal of persuasive writing. This is the angle that Szilard excelled at. The explanation of the destruction these weapons could cause was a genius way of hooking the reader into the petition and tugging at their emotions. Hinting at the killing of innocent Japanese people and the possibility of retaliation against innocent Americans would have been an exemplary maneuver by Szilard if the president ever did read this

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    The bombing of Hiroshima, Japan in 1945 proved to be a controversial ending to the Second World War. There were several reasons why the bomb was dropped, but it still remains that the main reason given to the public was to end the war. However, the US used this opportunity to initiate a sense of power over the Soviet Union in order to discourage the spread of communism. President Harry Truman spoke of this bombing at the White House to inform the American public of his reasoning for this atomic bomb, and how it will be known for much more than “the size of the enterprise, it’s secrecy, [or] its cost.”. The immense amount of destruction and devastation seen by the innocent people of Hiroshima is unbearable to come to terms with.…

    • 1517 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Beside President Truman motivations which was to end the war, he was still new to this idea of the atomic bombs. Stimson Secretary of War brief him on the topic and advised Truman to drop the bombs. Stimson reasoning for doing this was to first end the war with Japan and secondly to scare the USSR. Since Truman wanted to know more so that he make the right decision and with Stimson they help formed the Interim Committee. It included high ranking military officials and top scientist from the Manhattan Project as advisor like Oppenheimer, Fermi, Lawrence, and Arthur Compton.…

    • 1049 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    ...Scientists of other countries will be spurred on to develop atomic bombs of their own in self-defense. This in turn will lead to further emphasis on the military applications on our own part. The result will be an armaments race, with all its disastrous possibility.” (Physicists Predict a Nuclear Arms Race, 1945). These excerpts from the statement have been proven true in the future, and it is obvious how the Manhattan Project had essentially created the start of the Arms Race. The statement had given some precautionary measures that may have helped including intensive research and development of weapons for…

    • 1709 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Atom Bomb Effects

    • 1368 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Certainly, the threat of mutual assured destruction was the foundation of the atom bomb’s appeal as a weapon, but more importantly that it could there was a weapon that could destroy the entire planet if a nuclear war should ensue between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. These factors define the effects of the atom bomb as a major change in the view of “world war” and the holistic view of the power of nuclear energy that would prevent human beings from using these weapons under these circumstances. No longer could any single nation wage a war against another nation because of the total destruction that the atom bomb would bring to the world. Therefore, the Cold War Defined the era of mutual assured destruction, which is still an extremely relevant way to understand how nuclear weapons are viewed in the context of war and geopolitical…

    • 1368 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    64). Evidently, if there had been so much research on uranium and plutonium in order to create an atomic reaction that transformed mass into energy, why not experimenting it on the hated Japan. In fact, the bomb had not yet been tested on such large scale, and this could really be a turning point for America in the eyes of the…

    • 1817 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However the use of nuclear weapons would appear to be a solution to properly satisfy the United State’s end of the war military agenda. By 1945 the focus of the war began to shift, and the Japanese military leaders foresaw an inevitable final stand against, the Americans. The Japanese military government began informing civilians to throw themselves at any American Infantry in an attempt to halt the American invasion. The Atomic bombs would be purposed to eradicate the Kamikaze spirit the brainwashed people of Japan. With cryptic detail American officials would decide the matter in which to purpose the Atomic Bomb.Officials aimed to use the bomb’s to amass the greatest possible damage to Japanese industrial factories, and the civilians who worked at said factories.…

    • 1286 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In his essay he argues one of the reasonings for the use of the bomb was to scare the Soviets and to prevent an invasion of the Red Army in Manchuria. He also uses diary entries from Stimson and Byrnes to prove his argument. “And at the end of May, according to Szilard, Byrnes saw the bomb as a way to make Russia more manageable in Europe”(Alperovitz, 411). Then using the primary sources such as Stimson’s journal entries it is clear to see his second thoughts over the use of the bomb. He states “In many quarters it [America’s development of the atomic bomb] has been interpreted as a substantial offset to the growth of Russian influence on the continent”(Stimson, 1945).…

    • 1359 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To a certain degree, this perception is true, America certainly did have other options available. Unfortunately, the soundest counterfactual evidence available suggests that none of the alternative options could appropriately resolve the operational and political realities facing America at the conclusion of world WWII. More importantly, the historical evidence also indicates that framing atomic warfare as a positivistic choice between use and nonuse is problematic. Americans were pressured into developing their atomic weapons technology based on the perceived certainty that Germany would use the technology first. The specific provocation for atomic technology development came from scientist Albert Einstein wrote “President Roosevelt warning that Germany might be bent on an atomic weapons program and suggested that the United States should study the possibility itself” (Keegan 584).…

    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to an article about the pros and cons of dropping the atomic bombs, the government claimed that one reason for dropping the bombs was to instill fear into the Japanese people. The United States ' possession and usage of the bombs demonstrated their strength to not only the Japanese but also the rest of the world. A counterargument to the bombs is that great tension was created between Japan and the United States ("Pros and Cons of Dropping the Atomic Bomb"). The United States was able to scare the Japanese, thus forcing them to surrender. Although a strong tension was created between the two countries, it would not have been much different had the Americans invaded Japan and killed thousands of their people in that fashion.…

    • 2015 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The US could have continued to fire bomb Japan with the risk of prolonging a war that was practically done, it could have demonstrated the power of the atomic bomb away from civilization with the risk that Japan would still not surrender or that the US would appear inept if the demonstration did not work. I believe Truman tried to follow the policies already established by Roosevelt to bring the conflict to end with unconditional surrender by the enemy and bring Americans back home. He was correct for his time, critics have all the time in the world to judge. I propose this, what if America did not use the bomb? Would America seem like a weak nation having power and not having the fortitude to use it or would Truman hide the technology as long as possible until it was needed.…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays