Best Answer

Helen Hunt Jackson

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: A century of dishonor 1881 which chronicled the dismal history of the native American-white relations was authored by?
Write your answer...
Still have questions?
magnify glass
Continue Learning about World History

How would the world be different if the atomic bomb had not been dropped?

Half (if not all) of Japan would have been part of the Soviet Union and the rest free (USA) and Japan probably wouldn't be as powerful and developed as it is now. This is one of the most complex questions of all time. There is no easy, pat answer to such a highly charged, emotional issue. This is a question that calls for an opinion: in my opinion, the simple answer is yes, The Bomb had to be used. Yet the pros and cons may be strongly argued on both sides. Even Albert Einstein, whose theoretical physics helped create The Bomb and who initially advocated building it because he feared the Nazis were building one, later changed his mind and argued strenuously against its use on humanitarian grounds.One of the main arguments against the use of the nuclear weapon is that because of the sheer power of a single bomb, it is more cruel and unusual than conventional bombs. Also, conventional bombs do not kill their victims weeks, months or even years later due to radiation. Certainly the sheer horror of the use of The Bomb as we saw the evidence in Hiroshima and Nagasaki have helped prevent its use again - so far (that's what the "Cold War" was all about). The U.S. has the dubious distinction of being the only nation in the world ever to have dropped a nuclear weapon in anger, while Japan remains the only nation in the world ever to have undergone a nuclear attack.On the other hand, The Bomb undoubtedly ultimately saved far more lives than it took. The question has first, I think, to be looked at in the context of the times. In 1945, the Japanese simply would not quit! (For that matter, neither would the Germans, and had The Bomb been ready by April, 1945, it probably would have been dropped on Berlin instead.) It is far too easy now, after more than 60 years of peace, friendship and economic co-prosperity with modern Japan to say that we should not have dropped The Bombs. From the perspective of the present, it seems cruel, even bestial to have used this most powerful of weapons ever devised against a nation that, by 1945, was so badly beaten as to be well nigh defenseless.Yet it is precisely because the Japanese were so badly beaten by 1945 that President Truman unhesitatingly made the decision to drop The Bomb, because the Japanese military government, despite having been decisively defeated on every battlefield, kept right on fighting, hoping for some miracle leading to a negotiated peace, or at minimum to die to save the National Honor.Before 1945 the Japanese were a highly aggressive military state. Well before the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the Japanese armed forces had practically imposed a military dictatorship on Japan, with the acquiescence of Emperor Hirohito. Lacking sufficient natural resources in the Home Islands for their war machine, the Japanese, believing that their Manifest Destiny (an American term from the 19th Century) was to rule all of Asia, began attacking neighboring countries. In 1905, after a victory over the Russians, Japan gained control of Korea and Taiwan. They continued to expand while they were still part of the alliance against the Central Powers in WW1, and in 1931 they occupied Manchuria and attacked China. The Japanese resented any interference by Western powers in their aggressive campaign to create what they called the "Greater Southeast Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere," which was to be dominated, of course, by Japan.One has to look at the conduct and mindset of the Japanese soldier of the period up to 1945. Steeped from birth in the Samurai tradition of Bushido, the "Way of the Warrior," a code of conduct that emphasized Death Before Dishonor, the Japanese soldier was almost impossible to capture alive. One of the worst ways a warrior could dishonor himself was to surrender to an enemy. Throughout WW2, for a Japanese soldier to surrender was the exception rather than the rule. So ingrained was this medieval concept of honor, the Japanese even extended it to the prisoners they took. The infamous Bataan Death March after the Fall of Corregidor in 1942 has been blamed, at least in part, on the Japanese notion that the Americans and Filipinos who surrendered had dishonored themselves by not fighting to the death, so they were unworthy of decent treatment by their captors. This, then, was the soldier we were fighting up to 1945.To see clearly the effect of the Code of Death before Dishonor, all one has to do is look at Japanese casualty figures for the island campaigns of 1942-1945, especially towards the end in the fights for Iwo Jima and Okinawa. On Iwo Jima, of 22,000 Japanese troops engaged, only 216 survived! They, however, took a terrible toll of the 70,000 U.S. Marines that came against them. Iwo was the only battle where the Marines lost more killed than the enemy, but they were not there to get themselves killed. The Japanese were.Much the same thing happened on Okinawa, where about 66,000 Japanese defenders lost their lives while causing over 72,000 American casualties, which was more than twice the number of casualties on Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal combined. Most of the Japanese still refused to surrender, preferring to throw themselves on their swords, or grenades, or to lead suicidal charges against the Americans. Moreover, close to 150,000 Okinawan civilians died, many by throwing first their children and then themselves off the cliffs into the sea. For the Americans, it was a horrifying foretaste of what they could expect when they invaded The Home Islands of Japan, which was next up after Okinawa.The Americans also had to contend with Kamikaze attacks - airplanes loaded with explosives and piloted by men who had no intention of coming out alive (there's a modern parallel with the radical Islamist suicide bombers). The Kamikaze had first appeared in 1944, but by Okinawa there were hundreds of attacks resulting in the sinking or heavy damaging of at least 30 U.S. warships by over 1400 suicide attackers. This was the enemy we were fighting in 1945.Okinawa was a bitter lesson for the planners of the invasion of the Home Islands: the Japanese had shown without doubt that they would fight to the literal death. The Japanese were arming and training women and children with sharpened bamboo staves to use against the Americans on the beaches. The Japanese leaders were actually debating whether it was better for the entire population of Japan to immolate themselves rather than face the national dishonor of surrender! For American planners of the final invasion of The Home Islands, called Operation Downfall, the estimates of casualties on the Allied side ran to the millions (!) and on the Japanese side to the tens of millions (!). But the problem remained that the Japanese simply would not give up, even though it's probable that their leadership had known they were beaten as early as 1943. We had the grisly examples of Iwo and Okinawa to remind us how savagely the Japanese would fight. More than a million young American men stood to lose their lives …Unless …In Total War, nations strive to totally destroy one another's ability to fight. This includes destroying civilians and cities because cities are centers of the manufacture of war matériel, and civilians man the factories that produce it. Throughout WW2 all belligerents had been bombing cities flat. By 1945, the U.S. Army Air Force was nightly dropping thousands of tons of incendiaries on Japanese cities (made largely of paper and wood), incinerating tens of thousands of people, but it hadn't made a dent in the Japanese will to resist. The Japanese Navy was largely on the bottom of the Pacific, including the two largest and most powerful battleships ever launched. The Japanese Air Force was reduced to crashing itself into our ships. The Army, what was left of it, was drawing its battle lines to defend The Home Islands while the government issued sharpened bamboo staves to children. The clear fact was that what was needed was a weapon so powerful, so devastating, so unutterably shocking that the Japanese would finally realize that we would simply annihilate them without giving them the chance to take any of us with them.And we had that weapon in the atomic bomb.On July 16, 1945, a secret program know as The Manhattan Project successfully detonated a plutonium cored implosion-type weapon in New Mexico. It yielded an explosion roughly equivalent to 20,000 tons of T.N.T. A B29 Superfortress of the day could normally carry 20,000 pounds of bombs (not all of which was active explosive), but a little way oversimplified arithmetic shows that a single B29 carrying a single bomb similar to that exploded in New Mexico was the equivalent of about 2000 B29s each carrying a standard bomb load.President Truman was immediately informed of the success of the test and that we had two more combat ready bombs, one a uranium device, and the other another plutonium bomb. Truman unhesitatingly gave the order to use one of the weapons on a target city in Japan. (If Germany hadn't surrendered in May, Berlin might have been the target.)Truman always said he never lost any sleep over the decision to use The Bomb. There was a suggestion that we might do a demonstration by dropping a Bomb over an unpopulated area, but that idea was rejected primarily because, [1] if the Japanese were forewarned they might successfully shoot the plane down, but more to the point, [2] if the bomb failed to detonate we would have accomplished nothing. No, the only way was to essentially drop The Bomb with no warning on a military/industrial city and then if it didn't go off there'd be no harm done. If it did go off, we'd have made the shocking point we intended.On August 6, 1945 a uranium bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. About a minute later it exploded about 2000 feet above the city with a blast equivalent to about 13,000 tons of T.N.T. The radius of total destruction was about a mile, with 90% of Hiroshima's buildings being pretty much flattened. Possibly 90,000 people were killed outright, and more died later as the result of burns and/or radiation. We had delivered the shock we intended.Yet, amazingly, the Japanese government still waffled, some even believing that we didn't really have any more of the super weapons, so three days later we dropped a second bomb on Nagasaki, not doing quite as much damage, even though this plutonium weapon was more powerful, because the bombardier missed his aiming point due to clouds. It still killed about 70,000 people outright. We finally had the Japanese government's attention. The Emperor personally stepped in, declared the war lost and broadcast a surrender message. The lives of tens of millions had been saved by the sacrifice of tens of thousands.The political and military implications have, of course, lasted to this day, not to mention the ongoing threat of one of these things somehow getting loose, especially in the current crisis of terrorism. But long ago I personally concluded that, so long as we had built it, the use of the Atomic Bomb, while no less morally reprehensible than anything else done in Total War, was justified in that it finally jolted the Japanese into giving up without our having to invade the Home Islands. You can argue the morality of it forever, but to the American boys who came home alive to have their families and live out their lives, there was little doubt in their minds that the decision to drop it had been the right one.

How did Henry VIII treat elizabeth?

I believe that he loved her. You see, Henry was married to Queen Katherine of Aragon for quite some time, and after several stillbirths and miscarriages, they had only one, living child, Princess Mary. Henry loved Princess Mary, but it was important to have a MALE heir, to be a strong successor. If he left his kingdom to Mary,he would have to find her a husband, probably from another country, and risk a war, which is not something that he wanted. So, he decided to think of a way to divorce Katherine, so that he could marry his latest mistress, Anne Boleyn. Katherine was first married to Henry's older brother, Arthur. However, shortly after their marriage, he died, and Katherine swore their marriage wasn't consumated, and she fell in love with Henry, and married him. However, Henry said that Katherine was lying, and used a verse from the Bible that said God doesn't want a man to marry his brother's wife. So, on those grounds, he divorced Katherine, claiming their marriage null and void. In that, he disowned Princess Mary, making her illegitimate. He then married Anne Boleyn. Quick note: Anne Boleyn was a lady-in-waiting to Katherine, which is how Henry met her. Anne didn't have a problem with Katherine, but she was in love with Henry, and therefore was willing to let him divorce Katherine to marry her. She meant no dis-respect or dishonor to her...and Anne Boleyn was the mother of Elizabeth 1. Henry claimed to love Elizabeth, and said that boys would surely follow. Anne, like Katherine, had miscarriages, the last to be presumed a boy. Henry was angry by then. So angry, that he had charges MADE UP against Anne, including incest with her own brother, and had her beheaded, when Elizabeth was only a toddler, he then made Elizabeth illegitimate. He had three more wives, who all loved Elizabeth and Mary, and occasionally invited them to court, especially his 3rd wife, Jane Seymour, who died of a childbirth fever after giving birth to his long-awaited son, Edward. However, his 6th and final wife, Catherine Parr, who invited them to pretty much live at court, and served as a true mother to them all, and truly reconciled Henry with them. Henry died, leaving his throne to Edward, who was 9, and died 6 years later of illness. According to Henry, the throne would next be passed to his eldest daughter, Mary, who's reign was short-lived and turbulent. She and her husband burned many Protestant martyrs, and she became known as "Bloody Mary." She died after 5 years on the throne, and then, according to Henry's will, Elizabeth was to take the throne. She reigned for 45-years. Her reign was called "The Golden Age," and she was considered by most, still today, to be England's greatest, most famous ruler. I imagine that Anne Boleyn, after being unjustly condemned to die, had her justice in the end, in seeing how wonderful a ruler Elizabeth was...and, I am certain that Henry would've been extremely proud of Elizabeth. So, despite his cruelty to most of his wives, and many times, to his children, I do believe that he, yes, loved Elizabeth.

Related questions

Who wrote the book a centry of dishonor?

A Century of Dishonor is a book written by Helen Hunt Jackson. It was first published in 1881. The book chronicled the experiences and injustices of Native Americans in the United States.

Who wrote the book ' a century of dishonor?

A Century of Dishonor is a book written by Helen Hunt Jackson. The book was first published in 1881.It chronicled the experiences and injustices of Native Americans in the United States.

Why is A Century of Dishonor important to American History?

The book A Century of Dishonor by Helen Hunt Jackson chronicled the government of the United State's continual mistreatment of the American Indian. She documented how treaties were made and broken. how the Indian was cheated out of their lands and how bad reservation life was for the Indian. The book was particularly important because up until that point, the government was not held accountable for their actions.

Can Christians marry their aunt?

No. The 'Unlawful Sexual Relations' are outlined in Leviticus 18 with some listed here: Leviticus 18:13-18New International Version (NIV) 13 "'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister, because she is your mother's close relative. 14 "'Do not dishonor your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt. 15 "'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son's wife; do not have relations with her. 16 "'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife; that would dishonor your brother. 17 "'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness. 18 "'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.

Can you give me a sentence with dishonor?

His actions brought dishonor to his family and reputation.

When was A Century of Dishonor created?

A Century of Dishonor was created in 1881.

How many pages does Field of Dishonor have?

Field of Dishonor has 352 pages.

How can you put the word dishonor in a sentence?

since i meet to her she dishonor to me front of people.

When was Field of Dishonor created?

Field of Dishonor was created on 1994-11-24.

What does it mean to bring dishonor to the family?

dishonor mean to bring sham to you or your family.:(

What has the author Helen Maria Fiske Hunt Jackson written?

Helen Maria Fiske Hunt Jackson has written: 'A century of dishonor' -- subject(s): Indians of North America, Government relations

What year was The Century Of Dishonor published?

A Century of Dishonor by: Helen Hunt Jackson, was published in 1881