FREE ESSAY ON HIROSHIMA

HIROSHIMA

On August 6, 1945, a B-29 bomber named Enola Gay dropped an atomic bomb, little boy on
Hiroshima, Japan. Hiroshima had been almost eradicated with an estimated 70-80,000 people
killed. Three days later, a second, more powerful bomb was dropped on the Japanese city
of Nagasaki, killing over 100,000 people. Since Japan was economically and militarily
devastated by the late summer of 1945, the use of the atomic bombs on an already overcome
Japan was unnecessary and unwarranted in bringing about a conclusion to the war in the
Pacific.
By the end of the war, the U.S. forces had pushed the Japanese far back into their
country, leaving them no access to any resources from the Indies. Japanese cities and
factories were being endlessly bombarded by American bombers. Louis Morton, an author on
the situation felt that since . . . The Pacific Fleet had driven the Imperial Navy from
the ocean and planes of the fast carrier forces were striking Japanese naval bases in the
Inland Sea. . . Clearly Japan was a defeated nation.1
The decision to use the atomic bomb was validated by the U.S., who said that the force
was necessary to end the war, which, in turn, would save lives of both American and
Japanese soldiers. However, many believe that since Japan was already of the verge of
surrender when the bombs were dropped, this argument cannot be morally validated. If
Japan was almost beaten by August 1945, many say that the reason the U.S. dropped the
bomb was simply to test it on living humans. Aside from the ground test in the New Mexico
desert, no one knew what destruction atomic weapons were capable of. Throughout the war,
the city of Hiroshima had been left virtually untouched by U.S. attacks. It is inferable,
then, that the United States government hoped to see the full effect of nuclear power by
detonating the atomic bomb on this locality, as they could be sure that any damage was
from the atomic bomb alone. A similar reasoning could be applied to the usage of the
second bomb, fat man, which was dropped on Nagasaki three days later. One could wonder if
the motive behind this second attack was similar to the first; the only difference being
that the bomb to be tested this time was considerably more powerful.
The final say on whether or not to drop the bomb came from President Harry Truman, who
had help from a special committee known as the Interim Committee. This organization was
made up of Secretary Stimson as chairman; President Truman's personal representative,
James F. Byrnes; the Under Secretary of the Navy, William L. Clayton; and the Assistant
Secretary of State as well as many others. The work of the Interim Committee was to
discuss the uses of the bomb and whether or not it would be wise to use nuclear force
against Japan in combat. On July 1, 1945, the committee submitted a report to President
Truman stating that:
1. The bomb should be used against Japan as soon as possible.
2. It should be used against a military target surrounded by other buildings.
3. It should be used without prior warning of the nature of the weapon.
The Interim Committee decided against warning the Japanese about the atomic bomb because
they claimed that they weren't sure if it would detonate. Not one of the Chiefs nor the
Secretary thought well of a bomb warning, an effective argument being that no one could
be certain, in spite of the assurances of the scientists, that the 'thing would go off.'2

This was refuted by many as being quite ignorant. For example, the atomic bomb was tested
in Trinity Site, New Mexico, USA. It was viewed by the media, U.S. government officials
and the military. Viewing the destruction firsthand should have convinced the United
States that nuclear power was a real and tangible danger. They should have been quite
sure at this point that the bomb would, indeed, detonate.
The US wanted a quick and effective way to end the war. However, there were many other
possible alternatives to dropping the bomb that should have been considered. Truman
wanted an 'unconditional surrender' from Japan, but his offer to them threatened the
position of their Emperor. The Japanese were unwilling to accept this as a condition to
their surrender, as the Emperor in Japanese culture was considered to be godlike.
Obviously, they were therefore unwilling to accept unconditional surrender. To
compromise, the US could have assured Japan the retention of the status of the Emperor in
the terms of surrender. It is possible that Japan would have ended the war themselves,
without the U.S. ever having to use nuclear force.
The United States also could have threatened Japan with a Russian invasion. The Japanese
were counting on Russia to help them make peace with the U.S. without unconditionally
surrendering, which they believed would result in the loss of their Emperor. If the U.S.
had have convinced Japan that Russia would use force, the Japanese may have felt that it
was necessary to give up, as at the time Russia was the only nation with whom Japan
maintained a neutrality contract.
Finally, the United States could have warned the Japanese about nuclear power as a final
resort. Surely if the Japanese had known about the astronomical and devastating effects
before the bombs were dropped, they would have seriously considered surrendering, no
matter what the cost to their culture. The Committee on Political and Social Problems
submitted to President Truman a report called The Franck Report on June 11, 1945. This
committee was opposed to dropping the bomb without prior warning. From this point of view
a demonstration of the new weapon may best be made before the eyes of representatives of
all United Nations, on a desert or a barren island. The best possible atmosphere for the
achievement of an international agreement could be achieved if America would be able to
say to the world, You see what weapon we had but did not use. We are ready to renounce
its use in the future and to join other nations in working out adequate supervision of
the use of this nuclear weapon.3 This logical advice was therefore available to the U.S.
government, and it is a shame that they chose to ignore it.
Because the United States chose not to thoroughly consider all of their options in
forcing Japan to surrender and end the war, the decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki
was impulsive and rash. Had they considered all of the alternatives, and had only used
the atomic bomb as a last resort, many lives could have been saved. It was completely
hypocritical of the Americans to say that they wanted to save lives, when, instead they
destroyed them.