0
Why do many people still argue about the decision to drop the decision to drop atomic bombs on japan in 1945?
Verified answer
The attacks ended the war, but killed many civilians and alarmed the Soviet Union
Some say that Truman wanted to send a message to the Soviet Union ~apex
In a 1986 study, historian and journalist Edwin P. Hoyt nailed the "great myth, perpetuated by well-meaning people throughout the world," that "the atomic bomb caused the surrender of Japan." In Japan's War: The Great Pacific Conflict(p. 420), he explained:
"The fact is that as far as the Japanese militarists were concerned, the atomic bomb was just another weapon. The two atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were icing on the cake, and did not do as much damage as the firebombings of Japanese cities. The B-29 firebombing campaign had brought the destruction of 3,100,000 homes, leaving 15 million people homeless, and killing about a million of them. It was the ruthless firebombing, and Hirohito's realization that if necessary the Allies would completely destroy Japan and kill every Japanese to achieve "unconditional surrender" that persuaded him to the decision to end the war. The atomic bomb is indeed a fearsome weapon, but it was not the cause of Japan's surrender, even though the myth persists even to this day."
In a trenchant new book, The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb (Praeger, 1996), historian Dennis D. Wainstock concludes that the bombings were not only unnecessary, but were based on a vengeful policy that actually harmed American interests. He writes (pp. 124, 132):
... By April 1945, Japan's leaders realized that the war was lost. Their main stumbling block to surrender was the United States' insistence on unconditional surrender. They specifically needed to know whether the United States would allow Hirohito to remain on the throne. They feared that the United States would depose him, try him as a war criminal, or even execute him ...
Unconditional surrender was a policy of revenge, and it hurt America's national self-interest. It prolonged the war in both Europe and East Asia, and it helped to expand Soviet power in those areas.
General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific, stated on numerous occasions before his death that the atomic bomb was completely unnecessary from a military point of view: "My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender."
General Curtis LeMay, who had pioneered precision bombing of Germany and Japan (and who later headed the Strategic Air Command and served as Air Force chief of staff), put it most succinctly: "The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war."
Source: Weber, Mark "Was Hiroshima Necessary? Why the Atomic Bombings could have been avoided" The Journal of Historical Review, May-June 1997 (Vol. 16, No. 3), pages 4-11.
In a 1986 study, historian and journalist Edwin P. Hoyt nailed the "great myth, perpetuated by well-meaning people throughout the world," that "the atomic bomb caused the surrender of Japan." In Japan's War: The Great Pacific Conflict(p. 420), he explained:
"The fact is that as far as the Japanese militarists were concerned, the atomic bomb was just another weapon. The two atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were icing on the cake, and did not do as much damage as the firebombings of Japanese cities. The B-29 firebombing campaign had brought the destruction of 3,100,000 homes, leaving 15 million people homeless, and killing about a million of them. It was the ruthless firebombing, and Hirohito's realization that if necessary the Allies would completely destroy Japan and kill every Japanese to achieve "unconditional surrender" that persuaded him to the decision to end the war. The atomic bomb is indeed a fearsome weapon, but it was not the cause of Japan's surrender, even though the myth persists even to this day."
In a trenchant new book, The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb (Praeger, 1996), historian Dennis D. Wainstock concludes that the bombings were not only unnecessary, but were based on a vengeful policy that actually harmed American interests. He writes (pp. 124, 132):
... By April 1945, Japan's leaders realized that the war was lost. Their main stumbling block to surrender was the United States' insistence on unconditional surrender. They specifically needed to know whether the United States would allow Hirohito to remain on the throne. They feared that the United States would depose him, try him as a war criminal, or even execute him ...
Unconditional surrender was a policy of revenge, and it hurt America's national self-interest. It prolonged the war in both Europe and East Asia, and it helped to expand Soviet power in those areas.
General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific, stated on numerous occasions before his death that the atomic bomb was completely unnecessary from a military point of view: "My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender."
General Curtis LeMay, who had pioneered precision bombing of Germany and Japan (and who later headed the Strategic Air Command and served as Air Force chief of staff), put it most succinctly: "The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war."
Source: Weber, Mark "Was Hiroshima Necessary? Why the Atomic Bombings could have been avoided" The Journal of Historical Review, May-June 1997 (Vol. 16, No. 3), pages 4-11.
In a 1986 study, historian and journalist Edwin P. Hoyt nailed the "great myth, perpetuated by well-meaning people throughout the world," that "the atomic bomb caused the surrender of Japan." In Japan's War: The Great Pacific Conflict(p. 420), he explained:
"The fact is that as far as the Japanese militarists were concerned, the atomic bomb was just another weapon. The two atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were icing on the cake, and did not do as much damage as the firebombings of Japanese cities. The B-29 firebombing campaign had brought the destruction of 3,100,000 homes, leaving 15 million people homeless, and killing about a million of them. It was the ruthless firebombing, and Hirohito's realization that if necessary the Allies would completely destroy Japan and kill every Japanese to achieve "unconditional surrender" that persuaded him to the decision to end the war. The atomic bomb is indeed a fearsome weapon, but it was not the cause of Japan's surrender, even though the myth persists even to this day."
In a trenchant new book, The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb (Praeger, 1996), historian Dennis D. Wainstock concludes that the bombings were not only unnecessary, but were based on a vengeful policy that actually harmed American interests. He writes (pp. 124, 132):
... By April 1945, Japan's leaders realized that the war was lost. Their main stumbling block to surrender was the United States' insistence on unconditional surrender. They specifically needed to know whether the United States would allow Hirohito to remain on the throne. They feared that the United States would depose him, try him as a war criminal, or even execute him ...
Unconditional surrender was a policy of revenge, and it hurt America's national self-interest. It prolonged the war in both Europe and East Asia, and it helped to expand Soviet power in those areas.
General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific, stated on numerous occasions before his death that the atomic bomb was completely unnecessary from a military point of view: "My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender."
General Curtis LeMay, who had pioneered precision bombing of Germany and Japan (and who later headed the Strategic Air Command and served as Air Force chief of staff), put it most succinctly: "The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war."
Source: Weber, Mark "Was Hiroshima Necessary? Why the Atomic Bombings could have been avoided" The Journal of Historical Review, May-June 1997 (Vol. 16, No. 3), pages 4-11.
Answer:
The attacks ended the war, but killed many civilians and alarmed the Soviet Union.
Explanation:
All they wanted is to warn them.
Note To Moderators:
Please don't delete this answer I'm just trying to help others.
The attacks ended the war, but killed many non-soldiers. (apex0
Some say that Truman wanted to send a message to the Soviet Union.
Why did the president that dropped the atomic bomb?
President Truman dropped two atomic bombs, the first ever created, on Hiroshima and Nagasaki because he thought that would be a good strategy to make the ever fighting Japan surrender in WW2
In what part of the world was World War 2 still being fought when Truman became President?
All of it. The wars in Europe and the Pacific did not end until after he was president. It was Truman who authorized the use of the Atomic Bombs on Japan.
Which president dropped the most bombs?
president Truman was the president who decided to drop the a bombs president Truman was the president who decided to drop the A bombs
Did President Truman threaten to use the A-bomb upon USSR unless Stalin was to step down as their ruler and just leave it forever did he even consider saying it to that deranged despot?
No, Truman never even began to consider such a thing. Truman's main priority following the use of Atomic Bombs in WW2 was to see that they never be used again. In fact the only orderTruman ever issued on his own initiative (not just a continuation of orders and policies determined by FDR) during WW2 about the Atomic Bomb was to stop the bombing when Japan sent their intentions to surrender on August 14, 1945 (by this time Los Alamos had already finished the third Atomic Bomb and shipped it to San Fransisco, when it arrived in San Francisco on August 18, 1945 it was returned to Los Alamos because of Truman's order, instead of being flown to Tinian to prepare it to drop on Japan).Note: the Manhattan Project had the factories built and operating and production plans scheduled to make a total of 23 Atomic Bombs to drop on Japan before the end of 1945, if necessary. Not just the 2 used.
What president was inaugurated in 1933 and what were some of the changes made by this administration?
Franklin D Roosevelt, one of the arguably greatest presidents we have had. He came in during the great depression and created countless programs that jumpstarted our economy and job growth, he was there for us in world war II and died just before Japan was bombed by the Atomic Bombs
Why do people still argue about the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan?
Some say that Truman wanted to send a message to the Soviet Union - Apex
What do many people still argue about the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan in 1945?
The attacks ended the war, but killed many civilians and alarmed the Soviet Union. ~ apex
Why do many people still argue about the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan in 194?
some say that truman wanted to send a message to the soviet union
Who argue against the use of the atomic bombs state that?
Millions will die and the earth will be destroyed.
What president made decision to drop atomic bombs on japan?
Truman
Those who argue against the use of the atomic bombs state that?
Millions will die and the earth will be destroyed.
Who made the decision to use the atomic bomb against?
The American President, Harry Truman, made the decision to drop atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Which president made the decision to drop atomic bombs on japan?
President Harry Truman
What was Truman's big decision in World War 2?
To drop atomic bombs on Japan
What decision did President Truman make in 1948?
Drop atomic bombs on Japan while they were in WWII.
What did harry Truman make the decision to drop on japan in August 1945?
apex= atomic bombs
How important a factor was the atomic bomb in the decision to surrender?
Japan was in total disaster after the atomic bombs and Japan had no remedy what so ever. They had to surrender.
