Melissa Morales
Mrs. Adams
United States History – Period 4
16 December, 2016
Atomic Bomb Essay It was 1945. WWII was beginning to grow tiresome, and the United States wanted to end the massive amount of deaths that the constant fighting resulted in. Scientists had recently discovered how to split the nuclei of certain elements, creating an immense amount of energy. More studies led to the creation of the atomic bomb, and the U.S. began to test it, preparing for attack. The bomb seemed to be the only way to get Japan to surrender, of course it was very extreme, and seemed far too aggressive, despite the rage both countries had against each other. However, the United States government thought otherwise and dropped not one, but two atomic bombs …show more content…
If the U.S. government wanted a strong offense on Japan to end the war, then Japan’s environment should not have been affected. In fact, the bomb’s effects spread on for miles, contaminating land, food, and water, which made it hard for the people to move on, even after Japan surrendered. For a long time after the bombings, the survivors struggled to stay alive. ”[They] stole corn from people’s fields. [But they] didn’t know everything was irradiated”. (White Light Black Rain). That was just the food though, plenty of other environmental factors were also strongly impacted by the bomb. Evidently, the scientists and much less the United States government, had no clue what to expect from the first atomic bombs. The disastrous after effects are something they should be held responsible for. Overall, the atomic bombs had short term effects, but the much less expected long term impacts were also significant to Japan and its people.. The contaminated environment made it increasingly difficult for Japan to recover after WWII, and would be something that isn’t excused as an act of war. Therefore, the U.S. was unjustified to drop the atomic bombs because they not only were unaware of their effects, but they also didn’t think about how Japan would recover from …show more content…
The United States was also wrong to attempt to counteract Japan’s violence with even more violence. It’s true Japan raided and set fire to multiple towns in China and other places, but did dropping two atomic bombs really fix that? It’s like putting out fire with fire, and two wrongs most definitely don’t make a right. The U.S. should have been wiser not continue on with war atrocities, but obviously that wasn’t the case. The estimated total deaths from the atomic bombs in Nagasaki and Hiroshima are over 200,000, not including those who died to radiation years later. Sources state that “it is not unlikely that the estimates of killed and wounded in Hiroshima (150,000) and Nagasaki (75,000) are over conservative” (Hiroshima and Nagasaki Death Toll). There were also many causalities due to Japanese atrocities, but the point is that innocents shouldn’t be killed for revenge or for anything that is outside of their control. The United States government shouldn’t defend their actions by comparing death tolls, because killing those who did nothing to deserve it has no
Mrs. Adams
United States History – Period 4
16 December, 2016
Atomic Bomb Essay It was 1945. WWII was beginning to grow tiresome, and the United States wanted to end the massive amount of deaths that the constant fighting resulted in. Scientists had recently discovered how to split the nuclei of certain elements, creating an immense amount of energy. More studies led to the creation of the atomic bomb, and the U.S. began to test it, preparing for attack. The bomb seemed to be the only way to get Japan to surrender, of course it was very extreme, and seemed far too aggressive, despite the rage both countries had against each other. However, the United States government thought otherwise and dropped not one, but two atomic bombs …show more content…
If the U.S. government wanted a strong offense on Japan to end the war, then Japan’s environment should not have been affected. In fact, the bomb’s effects spread on for miles, contaminating land, food, and water, which made it hard for the people to move on, even after Japan surrendered. For a long time after the bombings, the survivors struggled to stay alive. ”[They] stole corn from people’s fields. [But they] didn’t know everything was irradiated”. (White Light Black Rain). That was just the food though, plenty of other environmental factors were also strongly impacted by the bomb. Evidently, the scientists and much less the United States government, had no clue what to expect from the first atomic bombs. The disastrous after effects are something they should be held responsible for. Overall, the atomic bombs had short term effects, but the much less expected long term impacts were also significant to Japan and its people.. The contaminated environment made it increasingly difficult for Japan to recover after WWII, and would be something that isn’t excused as an act of war. Therefore, the U.S. was unjustified to drop the atomic bombs because they not only were unaware of their effects, but they also didn’t think about how Japan would recover from …show more content…
The United States was also wrong to attempt to counteract Japan’s violence with even more violence. It’s true Japan raided and set fire to multiple towns in China and other places, but did dropping two atomic bombs really fix that? It’s like putting out fire with fire, and two wrongs most definitely don’t make a right. The U.S. should have been wiser not continue on with war atrocities, but obviously that wasn’t the case. The estimated total deaths from the atomic bombs in Nagasaki and Hiroshima are over 200,000, not including those who died to radiation years later. Sources state that “it is not unlikely that the estimates of killed and wounded in Hiroshima (150,000) and Nagasaki (75,000) are over conservative” (Hiroshima and Nagasaki Death Toll). There were also many causalities due to Japanese atrocities, but the point is that innocents shouldn’t be killed for revenge or for anything that is outside of their control. The United States government shouldn’t defend their actions by comparing death tolls, because killing those who did nothing to deserve it has no