DROPPING OF ATOMIC BOMBS
President Truman faced a hugely difficult decision when he had to make the choice of whether or not to drop two atomic bombs over Japan. After much thought and consideration on his part, he came to the conclusion that the bombs would be dropped. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the chosen places, two residential and productive areas of Japan where several innocent civilians lived. Although that may have seemed like the only way to end the war quickly, there could have been another less destructive, rational, and morally right way to do so than dropping the two atomic bombs over those areas. The question shouldn t be Did President Truman make the right decision in having the two atomic bombs dropped? because that is something only he can find the correct answer to. So instead, the question should be: Can the dropping of the two atomic bombs, including the destruction of large productive areas and over a hundred thousand innocent lives of civilians be justified?
Warfare alone is difficult to justify, even when both sides have a fair chance and opportunity to protect them-selves, because of moral issues. However, the atomic bomb doesn t even give the victims a chance for protection or even recovery after its been used. It would be one thing to drop the bombs over life-less land where no people and productivity were to just scare the Japanese as a warning, but that s not what was done. Instead the bombs destroyed an innumerable amount of things in Japan, most of which were innocent civilians who didn t even have anything to do with the war other than being part of the enemy country.
No matter how much of an enemy a country is, it does not give the opposing country the right to do to them the destruction that an atomic bomb can do. Just because American lives were at risk in the war also, does not make it all right for them to kill over a hundred thousand lives of the Japanese. In the long run a human being is a human being, all created equally, and no country has the right to destroy another for any reason.
Dropping the bombs over lifeless areas or even maybe over other war prepared sites may have been acceptable. At least with bombing other warfare sites people may have still died but it would have been those involved in the war, rather than
The war may have seemed like it was never going to end but using atomic bombs were measures taken that were too drastic and taken in too short of a time period. Other options less destructive could have been possibilities to help end the war. The Japanese would have eventually surrendered without the destruction of so many of their people and they should have been given more of a chance to do so.
Overall, the use of atomic bombs on a very populated and full of life area cannot be justified. Being wrong and immoral, other measures to end the war would have been more reasonable and humane. Although the lives of some Americans were, the bombs killed too many other people and things for it to be justified.