Although the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought a quicker end to the war, they were not needed to force Japan to surrender.With the previous incendiary bombings of various Japanese cities the industrial capacity of the country was destroyed, and embargoes prevented Japan from receiving shipments it needed to supply the military and provide food for civilians. The United States had already defeated Japan; surrender was imminent with or without the dropping of the bombs. Instead of using the atomic bomb the United States could have demonstrated the power and destruction of the bomb on an island.
Before the United States dropped the atomic bombs on Japan, they had already used B-29 Superfortresses to bomb many Japanese …show more content…
As the military and industrial capacity of the country had been destroyed, Japan would not have been able to defend against the US. Within six months, the US would have been able to defeat Japan without the droppings of the atomic bombs (Szilard, Document F). Along with US invasions, the Soviet invasion of Japan would have also helped in defeating Japan. Japan was not ready for a Soviet invasion, and were not able to fight against the Soviets. Their entrance to the war, in Japanese leaders eyes, was a bigger blow than the atomic bombs. (Wainstock, 129) While the US was worried of Soviet influence, dropping of the bombs would have not made Soviet influence easier to contain in Europe. (Szilard, Document F) Dropping of the bombs, however, may have prevented Soviet influence in southern Asia and Japan, and although the US would have been able to defeat Japan through land invasions, projected casualties on both sides could have exceeded the amount killed in the atomic …show more content…
It would have shown that the US has the power to completely destroy cities without using the bombs on actual cities. As the US had already tested the atomic bombs, a demonstration of the power would have been able to be set up and observed. Doing so could have convinced Japanese leaders to surrender, as they now knew what could be used against them. A testing of the bomb could have possibly not convinced Japanese leaders to surrender, and the demonstration would have been useless. If the United States had tested the bomb and it failed to persuade Japanese leaders to surrender, they would have been left with one bomb to use before more were produced.
The United States could have pursued options other than the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan. Incendiary bombings had already destroyed multiple cities, destroying the war and industrial capacity of the country, and with the embargo in place, there was no way for them to receive crucial materials for production. Japan had already been defeated, and would have surrendered with or without the dropping of the bombs. An alternative to the bomb could have been a demonstration of the power, convincing Japanese leaders to
Before the United States dropped the atomic bombs on Japan, they had already used B-29 Superfortresses to bomb many Japanese …show more content…
As the military and industrial capacity of the country had been destroyed, Japan would not have been able to defend against the US. Within six months, the US would have been able to defeat Japan without the droppings of the atomic bombs (Szilard, Document F). Along with US invasions, the Soviet invasion of Japan would have also helped in defeating Japan. Japan was not ready for a Soviet invasion, and were not able to fight against the Soviets. Their entrance to the war, in Japanese leaders eyes, was a bigger blow than the atomic bombs. (Wainstock, 129) While the US was worried of Soviet influence, dropping of the bombs would have not made Soviet influence easier to contain in Europe. (Szilard, Document F) Dropping of the bombs, however, may have prevented Soviet influence in southern Asia and Japan, and although the US would have been able to defeat Japan through land invasions, projected casualties on both sides could have exceeded the amount killed in the atomic …show more content…
It would have shown that the US has the power to completely destroy cities without using the bombs on actual cities. As the US had already tested the atomic bombs, a demonstration of the power would have been able to be set up and observed. Doing so could have convinced Japanese leaders to surrender, as they now knew what could be used against them. A testing of the bomb could have possibly not convinced Japanese leaders to surrender, and the demonstration would have been useless. If the United States had tested the bomb and it failed to persuade Japanese leaders to surrender, they would have been left with one bomb to use before more were produced.
The United States could have pursued options other than the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan. Incendiary bombings had already destroyed multiple cities, destroying the war and industrial capacity of the country, and with the embargo in place, there was no way for them to receive crucial materials for production. Japan had already been defeated, and would have surrendered with or without the dropping of the bombs. An alternative to the bomb could have been a demonstration of the power, convincing Japanese leaders to