Was it Worth Dropping an Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima

Table of Content

August 6th, 1945m 70,000 lives were ended in a matter of seconds. The United States had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Today many argue over whether or not the U.S. should have taken such a drastic measure. Was it entirely necessary that we drop such a devastating weapon? Yes, it was. First, look at what was going on at the time the decision was made. The U.S. had been fighting as massive was since 1941. Morale was most likely low, and resources were probably at the same level as morale. However, each side continued to fight, and both were determined to win. Obviously, the best thing that could have possibly have happened would have been to bring the war to a quick end, with a minimum of casualties. What would have happened had the A-bomb not been used? The most obvious thing is that the war would have continued. U.S. forces; therefore, would have had to invade the home island of Japan. Imagine the number of casualties that could have occurred if this would have happened. Also, our forces would not only have to fight off the Japanese military, but they would have to defend themselves against the civilians of Japan as well. It was also a fact that the Japanese government had been equipping the commoners with any kind of weapon they could get their hands on. It is true that this could mean a Japanese citizen could have anything from a gun to a spear, but many unsuspecting soldiers might have fallen victim to a surprise attack! The number of deaths that would have occurred would have been much greater, and an invasion would have taken much longer period of time. The Japanese would have continued to fight the U.S. with all of what they had; spears, guns, knives, whatever they could get their hands on, just as long as they continued to fight the enemy.

As mentioned before, it is a fact that some civilians had been ready to fight our military with spears! What made it possible that the Japanese would resort to using spears? Why wouldnt they use guns or other weapons? Well, the truth was, the government just didnt have the resources to give out a gun to just any citizen. U.S. naval blockades are one of the major reasons that Japan was so low on resources, and main point opponents of the decision to drop the bomb constantly bring up. Japan obviously was very low on resources. Japanese civilians were ready to die with spears in their hands; surely the military would do the same. Besides, the Japanese military did still have some resources to go on. So again I must bring out the fact that Japan could have continued to fight, and they would have. And Im sure anyone can realize what would happen if the war continued; more deaths. Admiral William Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman, wrote, By the beginning of September 1944, Japan was almost completely defeated through a practically complete sea and air blockade. If that was true, how could they have continued to fight and rack up enemy kills? If the Chief of Staff to the President figured they would soon surrender around September 1944; why were they still fighting almost a year later? And how can we be so sure that any other estimates on when the war would end would be correct? Basically, we cant. For all anyone knows, Japan would have kept fighting. It was the atomic bomb that forced Japan to surrender and in turn saved thousands if not millions of lives.

This essay could be plagiarized. Get your custom essay
“Dirty Pretty Things” Acts of Desperation: The State of Being Desperate
128 writers

ready to help you now

Get original paper

Without paying upfront

How can anyone be so sure that Japan would continue to fight? No one can say exactly what would have happened, because lets face it, no one really knows. Its possible Japan was just about to surrender, but most evidence would not agree with that statement. Im sure most have heard of a group of men called Kamikaze were suicide pilots. They would load an airplane up with explosives and try to nose-dive it into an enemy target. Think about what must be on this pilots mind. Imagine the undenying love he must have for his country. He would fight until the end, for his emperor and his country. The scary thing about this is the majority of the Japanese military thought this way. The fact that the enemy is ready to die so long as you die with him is not something a soldier wants to think about before going into battle. Once more I must bring into the picture the fact that a longer war means more deaths, and it appears that a longer war is exactly what Japan had in mind.

Most opponents of the bomb say that it was immoral to drop the bomb on such targets as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but you cannot deny the fact the major manufacturing of wartime products was being conducted here. Now, Im going to be honest, I dont believe Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the best places to bomb, because of the high civilian numbers; however, it is still my belief that the Atomic Bomb was necessary to end the war. Also, leaflets and warnings had been issued to the people of those cities warning them of an attack. Some say that the United States should have warned what kind of attack it would have been. This however seems ridiculous to me. It shouldnt matter what kind of warning is given, a threat under such conditions should be taken seriously, and the citizens should have evacuated. One might also point out the fact, however brutal this may seem, that ever since Shermans March to the Sea of the American Civil War, which was a turning point in modern warfare, civilian population centers are also considered fair game to the military. The more issue of dropping an atomic bomb is very controversial. Especially since radiation is a major side effect of such a weapon. On the other hand though, fire-bombings of other Japanese cities had left other civilians equally scarred. If one wanted to argue the issue of radiation as a side effect of atomic bombing, they would have to find a way to argue the side effect of bombing altogether. Is it immoral to use a bomb? No; its not very nice, but its not immoral. These are the kinds of things that happen in war, however unfortunate they are.

Despite the other arguments, the Atomic Bomb was a necessity. Without it, the number of men that would have died on both sides far surpasses that of the number that were killed in the droppings of both Atomic Bombs.Lets face it, the goal of waging a war is victory with the minimum losses on ones own side, and if possible a minimum amount of losses on the enemys side. The Atomic Bomb cut losses to a minimum and drew war to an end quickly. It was a military necessity.


Cite this page

Was it Worth Dropping an Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima. (2019, Feb 22). Retrieved from


Remember! This essay was written by a student

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

Order custom paper Without paying upfront