FREE ESSAY ON THE MORALITY OF US BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA

THE MORALITY OF US BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA

THE ATOMIC BOMBING OF
HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI
WAS IT NECESSARY?
Christopher Philippi
HS-102
May 3, 1999
On August 6 and 9, 1945, the only atomic bombs ever used in
warfare were dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The mass destruction and numerous deaths caused by those bombs 
ultimately put an end to World War II.
Was this the only way to end the war, however? Could this killing
of innocent Japanese citizens had been avoided and the war still ended 
quickly. This paper will go into this controversial topic. First, a summary
of the events leading up to the bombing and the events that followed:
With the end of the European war, the Allies focused their efforts
on Japan. Though they were losing miserably, the Japanese continued to
fight back.
The Potsdam Proclamation was issued to the Japanese. It made no
mention of Japan's central surrender condition, the status of the Emperor.
In Japan, the Emperor was viewed as a god. Therefore, Japan rejected the
Potsdam Proclamation.
The United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and 
Nagasaki. Russia declared war against Japan. Japan, because of its military,
still refused to surrender. The Japanese government voted against surrender.
Japanese believe in "death before dishonor."
Japanese peace advocates feared for the safety of the Emperor. 
They begged him to break with tradition and make government policy by
2
calling for peace now. As a result of the Emperor's call to surrender, the
entire Japanese cabinet, including the military, agreed to surrender. The
cabinet saw that this would allow the Emperor to be retained.
The Japanese would have fought to the death if they did not feel
the Emperor would have been spared. They may have been fighting a 
losing battle, but they saw unconditional surrender as a threat to the
Emperor. 
President Truman had been advised of the importance of the Emperor
to the Japanese. 
Japan was seeking Russia's help to end the war in July 1945. The
U.S. was aware of this at the time through intercepted Japanese cables. But, the
U.S. did not keep up with this change in Japan's position. Instead the U.S.
chose military methods of ending the war rather than diplomatic methods.
The desire for revenge helped make military methods more attractive.
After the creation of the atomic bomb was complete and before it
was dropped there was uncertainty to whether or not it should be used.
Many scientists argued that it should not be used. Truman had a difficult 
decision to make. He had much advice given to him towards making a 
decision.
Leo Szilard's first version of his petition was more strongly worded
than the final version. Regardless, on July 3, 1945, he presented to 
President Truman his reasoning for not using the atomic bomb on Japanese
cities. It was signed by 58 other scientists.
3
Rejecting the pretense that the targets would be military, the petition
called atomic bombs a ruthless annihilation of cities. The bombing of cities
had been condemned by the American public only a few years earlier when
done by the Germans to England.
Previously it had been feared that the U.S. might be attacked by 
atomic bombs. The only defense then would be a counterattack by the same
means. However, with that danger gone such an attack on Japan would be
unjustified (Alperovitz 132.)
A memorandum by Ralph A. Bard, Undersecretary of the Navy, to 
Secretary of War Stimson on June 27, 1945 stated that before the bomb is
ever used Japan should be given a few days notice. This position was based
on the humanitarian feelings of our nation. In addition, Bard sensed Japan
was searching for an opportunity to surrender. Bard proposed a meeting
with the other superpowers, including Japan, before ever using the bomb.
On July 16, 1945, the atomic bomb was tested over the New Mexico
desert. The Trinity Test was a spectacular success. A 6 kilogram sphere 
of plutonium, compressed to supercriticality by explosive lenses, exploded 
with a force equal to approximately 20 thousand tons on TNT.
The report was done by Col. Stafford Warren, Chief of the
Manhattan Project's Medical Section. It showed that the potential for 
radioactive fallout from the test was an important concern. Fallout from
the test exposed a family living 20 miles from Ground Zero to dangerous
4
levels of radiation. The radiation monitors were so concerned they asked
permission to talk to the family "to see how they feel (Schull 70)."
Dead jackrabbits were found more than 800 yards from zero. A 
farm house three miles away had doors torn loose and suffered other 
extensive damage. The light intensity was sufficient at nine miles to have
caused temporary blindness. Several observers at 20 miles were bothered 
by a large blind spot for 15 minutes after the blast. It was determined that
exposure to this light from 5 miles away would cause severe damage to the
eyes. Thus causing damage sufficient to put the enemy out of action for 
several days if not permanently. This is if they survived, of course 
(Schull 77.)
The next day Leo Szilard and 69 co-signers at the Manhattan Project
Metallurgical Laboratory petitioned President Truman to not use the atomic
bomb on Japan. This version of the petition is updated from the first one 
and comes at an appropriate time following the test on the day before. 
It said if Japan still refused surrender after a warning of the power of this 
bomb, then and only then, may it be morally permissible to resort to its use.
However, the development of atomic power will provide the nations with
new means of destruction. The atomic bombs of today are only a step 
towards the destructive and scary future. 
If the U.S. uses this weapon, we will always have to be cautious in
the future of other countries using it on us. In response to: "Wouldn't the
Japanese use it on us?" Possibly. But, Japan has had poison gas at its
5
disposal thoughout the war and has not once used it on American troops.
The U.S. must concern itself with the views of other countries in this
matter. If we were to violate our moral obligation our country would be
weakened in the eyes of others. It would then be more difficult for us to 
live up to our responsibility of bringing the unloosened forces of destruction
under control (Fasching 209.)
Regardless of the warnings and advice President Truman still gave
the official bombing order, July 25, 1945. Truman told his diary that day
that he ordered the bomb used. Emphasis had been added to highlight 
Truman's apparent belief that he had ordered the bomb dropped on a 
"purely military" target, so that "military objectives and soldiers and sailors
are the target and not women and children (Alperovitz 363.)
The written order for the use of the atomic bomb against Japanese
cities was drafted by General Groves. President Truman and Secretary of
War Stimson approved the order at Potsdam.
Regardless of what Truman wrote in his diary that day the order 
made no mention of targeting military objectives or sparing civilians. The
cities themselves were the targets. The order was also open-ended. 
Additional bombs could be dropped as soon as made ready by the project 
Staff (Schull 372.)
Although he never publicly admitted it, President Truman had second
thoughts about using atomic bombs on cities. On August 10, 1945, having
received reports and photographs of the effects of the bombs, Truman 
6
ordered a halt to further atomic bombings (Fasching 202.)
Is this not evidence that Truman made a mistake in his decision?
I do not think this makes Truman a bad guy, though. I believe he truly 
believed dropping atomic bombs on Japan would save American lives by 
ending the war sooner. Truman was rushed into the president job, filling in
for the late Roosevelt. I do not believe he was prepared for this kind of 
decision-making.
These excuses for Truman do not, however, excuse what the United
States did to Japanese civilians. Japan was losing the war miserably anyway.
The only thing stringing the Japanese along was their pride and concern for
their god, the Emperor. The only reason we would not allow them to 
surrender was because it wasn't unconditional. However, in the end it was
the Emperor that led Japan into surrender and was allowed to remain. 
So basically it was all pointless. We could have allowed Japan to surrender
earlier, keep their emperor, and avoid killing those innocent people.
If the U.S. was not successful in making Japan surrender even with
allowing the retention of the Emperor there was always the threat of Russian
invasion. Then if neither of these alternatives worked, then resort to using
the atomic bomb. But at least exhaust all other alternatives first, right?
If feeling sorry for the enemy's civilians is not in your taste, think 
about who else suffered from these bombings. Up to two dozen American
prisoners of war were killed by the Hiroshima bomb. The Nagasaki bomb
killed Dutch POW's and maybe some Americans as well. Over 1,000 
7
Japanese-Americans who were sent to Hiroshima when the war broke out
were killed also. The statistics go on and on. It was not just the Japanese
that were affected by this catastrophe. 
Tell the history books to print this version of the story!
Works Cited
Alperovitz, Gar. The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture
Of an American Myth. Alfred A. Knopf: New York, 1995.
Fasching, Darrel J. The Ethical Challenge of Auschwitz and Hiroshima 
Apocalypse or Utopia?. State University of New York Press:
Albany, 1993.
Schull, William J. Effects of Atomic Radiation A Half-Century of Studies
From Hiroshima and Nagasaki. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: 
New York, 1995.
Bibliography
Alperovitz, Gar. The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture
Of an American Myth. Alfred A. Knopf: New York, 1995.
Fasching, Darrel J. The Ethical Challenge of Auschwitz and Hiroshima 
Apocalypse or Utopia?. State University of New York Press:
Albany, 1993.
Schull, William J. Effects of Atomic Radiation A Half-Century of Studies
From Hiroshima and Nagasaki. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: 
New York, 1995.