Respectively on August 6th and 9th, 1945, the massive nuclear atomic bomb under the command of president Harry S. Truman, hit Hiroshima, a Japanese location of military installment and Nagasaki, which was place with major seaports and industrial plants. This day was marked not only into history, but literally into the beings of the Japanese people. There are countless interpretations that are brought up about the occurred bombings, some being positive and some being negative. President Truman’s motives are still being questioned by historians today and his decision will remain a mystery. Although many argue that Truman found himself in a complicated diplomatic situation. People that have studied this world even believe he wanted to frighten
…show more content…
used the bombs was his belief that the U.S. had to keep adding military pressure in order for the Japanese emperor and his military advisers to surrender. “I felt that to extract a genuine surrender from the Emperor and his military advisers, they must be administered a tremendous shock which would carry convincing proof of our power to destroy the Empire. Such an effective shock would save many times the number of lives, both American and Japanese, that it would cost” (Stimson 101). Stimson believed this was the best way to prove the power of the U.S., by obtaining the Emperors surrender. Stimson’s convincing publication did quite serve to quiet down the critics, but not the historian Gar Alperovitz. Alperovitz strongly holds his opinion that the deployment of the atomic bombs was unnecessary. He asserts the Japanese were on the verge of surrendering and the bombs were just an inhumane thing to do. Alperovitz quotes the memoir written by admiral officer, William Leahy whom was on active duty during WWII which states, ‘“the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender….in being the first to use it, we…adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages”’(Alperovitz). Quotes like these from high standing U.S. military leaders are used in Alperovitz favor in order to gain credible perspectives that the atomic bombs deployed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not a matter of military
used the bombs was his belief that the U.S. had to keep adding military pressure in order for the Japanese emperor and his military advisers to surrender. “I felt that to extract a genuine surrender from the Emperor and his military advisers, they must be administered a tremendous shock which would carry convincing proof of our power to destroy the Empire. Such an effective shock would save many times the number of lives, both American and Japanese, that it would cost” (Stimson 101). Stimson believed this was the best way to prove the power of the U.S., by obtaining the Emperors surrender. Stimson’s convincing publication did quite serve to quiet down the critics, but not the historian Gar Alperovitz. Alperovitz strongly holds his opinion that the deployment of the atomic bombs was unnecessary. He asserts the Japanese were on the verge of surrendering and the bombs were just an inhumane thing to do. Alperovitz quotes the memoir written by admiral officer, William Leahy whom was on active duty during WWII which states, ‘“the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender….in being the first to use it, we…adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages”’(Alperovitz). Quotes like these from high standing U.S. military leaders are used in Alperovitz favor in order to gain credible perspectives that the atomic bombs deployed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not a matter of military