55 thoughts on “Blog #101 – Using atomic bombs on Japan”

1. Hanna Lupovitch September 29, 2017 at 8:50 am

   Hanna Lupovitch
   Mr. Wickersham
   APUSH
   29 September 2017
   Blog #101: The Atomic Bomb
   If I was one of President Truman’s advisors in the time of the dropping of the atomic bombs, I would have encouraged him to drop it. The first reason I would have urged him to drop the atomic bomb on Japan is to conserve as many lives as possible. In “The Effects of Okinawa on the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bombs,” it says, “Had the war continued while America invaded Japan, there may have been a Manchurian bloodbath between the 1.6 million Russian veterans and the one million Japanese soldiers” (Wickersham, Geoffrey). This shows that so many more people would have died if the bomb had not been dropped. Another reason I would have counseled Truman to drop the atomic bomb on Japan is because the war really needed to come to an end as quickly as possible at that time. In “The Final act” by Herbert Buchsbaum, it talks about how much killing was going on from fighting. Buchsbaum says, “In February, more than 6,000 U.S. Marines and 20,000 Japanese soldiers died fighting for the tiny island of Iwo Jima. Weeks later, 16,000 Americans and 110,000 Japanese were killed in the battle for the island of Okinawa” (Buchsbaum 20). In the same article, Buchsbaum points out what Truman said to the public. Truman declared, “‘It was my responsibility as President to force the JApanese warlords to come to terms as quickly as possible the the minimum loss of lives’” (Buchsbaum 21). It just so happens that five days after the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, Japan surrendered. This demonstrates that Truman got exactly what if wanted. If Truman’s goal was to end the war fast as possible, then mission accomplished.
2. Ethan B September 29, 2017 at 8:22 pm

   Given the circumstances during the summer of 1945, I would have advised President Truman to drop the atomic bomb. Firstly, the United States could use the atomic bomb to show the Japanese leaders preventing a surrender that we weren’t joking around-it was an unconditional surrender or tragic loss of Japanese lives. Both Truman and Roosevelt had made it clear that the United States would only accept an unconditional surrender from the Empire of Japan. “Roosevelt had announced the unconditional surrender policy in early 1943, and it since had become a slogan of the war” (Maddox 248). Before the atomic bomb was dropped, Japanese military leaders hadn’t even been considering any surrender, let alone an unconditional one.
   Secondly, the atomic bomb presented us with the opportunity to quickly end the war with minimal loss of all lives, especially American lives. An invasion of the main Japanese islands could have caused a Japanese holocaust. “They boasted that they still had 2.3 million men in the army, and the whole population would be ready to defend to the death if necessary” (Okinawa Notes). Additionally, thousands of lives in the Japanese-occupied China would have been saved by an end to Japanese fighting. A Soviet invasion of Manchuria would have pitted 1.6 million experienced Russian soldiers against 1 million Japanese soldiers, resulting in an enormous loss of life. Finally, as the potential invasion of Kyushu neared, the numbers of American casualties continued to increase. “A report, for medical purposes, of July 31 estimated that total battle and non battle casualties might run as high as 394,859 for the Kyushu operation alone” (Maddox 248). The Kyushu invasion would have to be followed by a much larger invasion of the largest Japanese island, Honshu. By dropping the atomic bomb, no American lives were lost in an invasion, and countless lives of other nationalities were saved.
3. AJ Zako September 30, 2017 at 12:37 pm

   What I would have advised President Truman to do would be to drop the bomb. This is what I would advise him to do because there were many soldiers that were captured and were being held hostage there in Japan so if we decided to invade, not only would we have lost more men but once the camps where the soldiers were being held found out that the front lines were under attack they would’ve executed all the hostages. Also if we drop the bomb it would essentially scare away the Soviets back to Russia so we wouldn’t have any more conflicts with them anymore.
4. Henry Berthel September 30, 2017 at 4:57 pm

   Truman had a tough choice to make when deciding to drop the bomb on Japan or not. If I could have advised him to choose one way or the other, I would have told him to drop it. Ending the war as quickly as possible would save many American lives, and dropping atomic bombs would save many more lives than an invasion.
   If the Americans chose to invade the mainland of Japan instead of dropping the bombs, many, many deaths would have occurred for the Americans, just like they did on Okinawa, but on a larger scale. In “The Effect of Okinawa on the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb”, the notes tell us that not dropping the bombs may have caused tons of allies to die: “It’s possible that the 350,000 Allied prisoners of war may have been executed once news had gotten to the P.O.W. camps that the mainland was under attack.” This devastating number is even larger than the 90,000–146,000 people killed in Hiroshima and 39,000–80,000 killed in Nagasaki. Dropping the atomic bombs allowed these prisoners of war to live, which meant the bombs saved more lives than they took. If I did not know the outcome and number of people that would be killed by the atomic bombs, I still would have advised Truman to drop the bomb. I would know that the number of people killed when we invade Japan would probably be more than if we bombed them, and many more Americans would be saved this way.
   With Germany having already surrendered at the time, it appeared that a Japanese surrender was in the near future. Although some military leaders would say that they would “fight until the end”, politicians in Japan would surrender if they had to. Dropping the bombs forced the Japanese to surrender. In “The Final Act” by Herbert Buchsbaum, it is shown that some believe the bombs were not necessary: “‘The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons,’ Admiral William Leahy, one of the war’s top military planners, wrote in 1950.” However, dropping the bombs allowed us to end the war faster than the alternative, saving many American lives, and also making sure the Japanese would surrender.
   If we had not dropped the bombs, many more people would have been killed and tortured. If I could have advised Truman to drop the bomb or not, I would have told him to drop it.
5. Sathvik September 30, 2017 at 6:36 pm

   There are many things Truman probably had on his mind when weighing the decision to drop the bomb. One thing he probably had on his mind is that he probably knew the united states had the Japanese against the wall and could have probably won the war by using troops, but on the other hand, he probably thought that it would take more time, so he was weighing which path is better. Another thing he probably had on his mind is that he probably thought about the Japanese people themselves. Truman probably thought about how some of the people in Japan were against the military action. But maybe Truman thought that dropping the bomb was necessary to win the war.

   I personally would have advised president Truman to send Japan the terms of surrender and give the Japanese 2-3 months to consider the terms of surrender. If Japan declined the terms of surrender, then I would advise Truman to launch
6. Rochelle Durand September 30, 2017 at 9:10 pm

   In times of war, the clock is always ticking, and any unpredictable move is possible (such as Pearl Harbor). When President Truman deiced to drop the bombs, they didn’t know what the outcome on the human body would be. They did not know that thousands would be dead in a split second; burning and quickly being poisoned. This was something that was never seen before, and totally unpredictable.
   “‘I regarded the bomb as a military weapon and never had any doubt that it should be used,” Truman later wrote. “The top military advisers to the president recommended its use…’ On July 25, Truman ordered that atomic bombs be dropped on or about August 3rd, unless Japan surrendered before that date” (Maddox 241). When it came to Japan on determining what to do after the United States gave them a surrender date, was whether you were a politician or in the military. Political leaders were trying to gain peace and wanted the war to end. Meanwhile Military leaders were willing to fight on, even after the threat of an atomic bomb. I would advise Truman to drop the bomb in this case because we gave them a date to surrender by, and they didn’t follow it. This decision is difficult to make though. Japan was unsure if they wanted to continue fighting or surrender for peace, and maybe needed more time to announce peace, but America did warn them.
   Truman was given the decision of invading Japan, which would have caused tens of thousands of casualties. But he was later offered a better option, the Atomic Bomb. From the Article: The Final Act by Herbert Buchsbaum the text explains why Truman wanted to drop the bomb “For Truman, dropping the bomb ‘was never any decision you had to think about’ he said. ‘ it was my responsibility as president to force the Japanese warlords to come to terms as quickly as possible with the minimum loss of lives”. Although peace may have been close, an invasion of Japan may have been closer, resulting in the deaths of all the Japanese prisoners of war. Truman wasn’t just mindlessly planning to kill hundreds of thousands Japanese citizens, he was trying to use the least awful way out. Unfortunately, either way Japanese citizens would’ve died a painful death. Quoting from the essay “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb” by Robert James Maddox, “‘It is a grim fact,’ Marshall said, ‘ that there is not an easy, bloodless way to victory in war’ Leahy estimated a higher casualty rate similar to Okinawa” (Maddox 224). If I was to advise Truman on this matter, I would sadly say it is better to sacrifice the citizens, for there is a larger number at stake for the prisoners of war. Dropping these bombs were meant to prevent an invasion of Japan, and to reduce the casualty rates, not to increase them.
7. Isabelle September 30, 2017 at 9:25 pm

   If I had to advise President Truman, I would tell him to drop the Atomic bomb after closely looking at the situation. Before deciding, I need to have the President look at the potential causalities of the Japanese civilian, army, American soldiers, and people. According to the blog, allied generals estimated that 31,000 soldiers would die if they invaded Japan. Japanese figured out their plans and sent 900,000 reinforcements to the area so the casualties could have been much worse, but the Americans did not know this at the time. Another very dangerous issue to take into account is all the allied prisoners of war would be executed and that would be a huge blow to the army (Hanson). There were 350,00 soldiers being held there. If I was a general, I would make President Truman aware of these facts. It did not seem like they did this when it happened. For example, “the bomb” by Robert James Maddox, says that “neither MacArthur nor Nimmitz ever communicated to Truman any change of mind about the need for invasion or expressed reservation about using the bomb”. Would Truman’s opinion be swayed if there was doubts about the actions? I would let Truman know of the other options like invasion, but there were also downfalls to that. If the United States invaded mainland Japan, would a Japanese holocaust happen, similar to what the article said. Due to the continued fighting in Manchuria with the Japanese and Soviets, how many more deaths would there be? It is vital that as a war cabinet, we as a whole, not just the president weighed the risks and the successes. Would you rather attack civilians with a bomb of amazing magnitude to end it for good or continue the fight killing thousand and maybe millions of personal? If we had pick to drop the bomb, I would advise to choose a spot that would do great damage industrially not in civilian casualties so it was not necessary to drop two bombs. A recommendation that would probably come is to just bomb Tokyo and figure out the consequences. It is really worth killing and poisoning the land, the people, and the future inhabitants and if it is I would say drop the bomb.
8. Luke Lee October 1, 2017 at 12:05 am

   As President Truman’s advisor, I would say drop the bomb had I not known the consequences. As hard as it is to say, it is the safest option to take as an invasion would cost hundreds and thousands of more American lives. But what exactly influenced the factors behind nuking Japan? Well, for one thing, they were still prepared to fight til the very end due to their honorable culture. Willing to sacrifice their own men as Kamikaze pilots to bomb allies during the battle of Okinawa to prevent them from moving in, it showed that Japan wouldn’t hesitate had we gone for an invasion. Besides, not only would we lose men on the front but the prisoners of war captured and kept by Japan would have either been tortured or executed in order to weaken us and create harsher peace terms. As the notes on Okinawa say, “If Okinawa had not been invaded, the chance was more likely that America would have invaded Japan, This could have sparked a Japanese holocaust.”. Why would you want to bother with even more trouble when a much, simpler, albeit, harsher solution is possible? As for the possibility of Japan wanting to surrender, the Final Act article says, “Though Japan had suffered costly defeats, officials predicted a fight to the finish.”. Even though many Japanese civilians wished to surrender, many Japanese officials refused to. However, people argue that Japan already was willing to surrender before the bomb dropped. Reports revealed after the war showed that Japan was seeking for peace terms with the soviets and wanted to “restore peace with all possible speed”. First of all, the peace terms Japan wanted to have weren’t fair, as they wished to keep their diplomatic government policies as well as the land they had taken with little negotiation. Second, Truman was unaware of Japan’s peace talks in different countries at the time, and even if he did he most likely would not accept the terms that Japan wished for. Not only did the Atomic Bomb reduce the size of the army Japan had, it also threatened the country showing that no mercy would be shown. Japan realized this after a second bomb was dropped and surrendered shortly after.
9. Ugo Uchendu October 1, 2017 at 10:51 am

   One issue discussed in the blog that president Truman had on his mind, is probably whether or not to give Japan more time to decide if they wanted to surrender before dropping an atomic bomb.This may have been a problem for Truman because of mixed signals coming from higher ups of Japan making it more difficult to asses the situation. Furthermore, another issue discussed in the blog that Truman probably had on his mind, is what would become of the Allied prisoners of war captured by the Japanese if the Allies had invaded Japan in November 1945. The allied prisoners likely would’ve been killed or tortured. A third issue discussed in the portrait that Truman most definitely had on his mind, as it was written in one of his diary entries, was whether to invade Japan properly or to use the bomb and blockade method (Maddox, 244). Lastly, an issue mentioned in “The Final Act” article, is whether or not Truman would invite Japanese officials to witness a public testing of the atomic bombs. Truman ended up deciding against this, seeing as if the bomb tests failed Japan may have resisted even more.
   Not knowing the outcome of the bombing, I advise president Truman to initially use only one of the two atomic bombs. I say this for three reasons. Reason number one is that I can’t imagine one bomb not being enough to shock Japan into submission. Reason number two is the use of a second atomic bomb would be overkill and just to flex America’s position as the “big brother” to all nations. Lastly, Japan was practically a beaten nation by the summer of 1945 due to conventional bombing, blockade, and heavy loses to it’s navy. Taking all of the things I have just mentioned into consideration, surely America will be able to handle Japan after using one atomic bomb. If for some reason Japan fights on and doesn’t surrender, then and only then should the use of a second atomic bomb be considered. Though right now, the use of two highly destructive bombs just isn’t morally correct.
10. Jackson Gugni October 1, 2017 at 11:35 am

    Mr. President, the fate of the world may rest on your decision; That is why I am here to help to decide as to what you will do in terms of dealing with the Japanese. As you know, the Japanese war tactics are fight to the death. This adds much more pressure to the decision because we are not certain if they will kill our estimated 500,000 allied troops (The Battle for Okinawa Document) that have been captured if we do not drop the bombs. By not dropping the atomic bombs, we could also be at war for many months which would also result in thousands of American/allied and Japanese troops dead. It’s estimated that we could lose 31,00 people alone in our invasion of Kyushu. On the other hand, of we were to drop the bombs we would kill close to about 200,000 Japanese people (The biggest decision: Why we had to drop the atomic bomb). Both options result in mass destruction and thousands of lives lost. But what if I told you there was a third option, one with less destruction and less casualties. I propose that instead of bombing two targets we only bomb one. I believe that dropping one single atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima will result in the Japanese surrendering, and only around 120,000-150,000 people will die as opposed to 200,000 people. By setting off one bomb you will show the Japanese that we are not waiting for you (the Japanese) to keep fighting until all your troops are dead, we want the war over now. This will also show that we are more than capable of creating mass destruction in their homeland whenever necessary. Two bombs would be completely unnecessary in this situation because it would send the same message. Another advantage of dropping one bomb is that if the Japanese don’t surrender, we still have the weaponry to drop another bomb. Overall this decision is very important, I recommend that you pick one that is best for humanity and not just the American people.
11. Dominic Gullo October 1, 2017 at 12:43 pm

    -Dominic

    If I were one of President Truman’s advisors, I would have advised him to drop the bomb for multiple reasons. Especially in these circumstances (and especially if I didn’t know the outcome), dropping the bomb would seem like the best (or the least fatal) option. A key factor in this decision would be Japan, and if they would be willing to surrender. If they weren’t, it could mean a high number of casualties on both sides (especially since the U.S. were expecting there to be over 500,000 casualties). The invasion option would seem like an all-out blood bath, and we could not rely on whether Japan was willing to surrender (the U.S. had also been intercepting mixed signals from Japan on whether they were willing to surrender). Along with risking an extremely high number of casualties, we would also be risking the killing of thousands of U.S. prisoners of war. Therefore, dropping the bomb would be the best way to prevent the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers. It would also possibly ensure a full out Japanese surrender. From a military standpoint, the bomb would be the best option; however, I might have advised Truman differently if I were looking at things from a moral standpoint. It might be a different situation if I was aware of the destruction of a nuclear weapon. Unfortunately, nuclear warfare was a brand-new concept at the time, and even the people who engineered the bomb were not fully aware of the effects it could have. So even if I think I would have advised Truman to not drop the bomb, it is likely that I would have. There is a possibility that I would completely ignore the moral point of view. At that time in the United States, there was a stereotype going around that the Japanese were evil (which is partly the reason why we put them into internment camps). This stereotype might have also influenced my decision. But either way, it is safe to say that I would have advised President Truman to drop the bomb. At the time, there were too many factors that pointed toward the dropping of the bomb. It is also important to know that the effects of the bomb were unknown to many people, including Truman.
12. Nicholas Haddad October 1, 2017 at 2:12 pm

    Throughout the summer of 1945, there was plenty happening across the Pacific. Earlier that year, the Germans surrendered, and victory in Europe was celebrated by the Allied forces. However, Japan was still in this; the war wasn’t over yet. As stated in our notes on Okinawa, “On April 1, 1945, Operation Iceberg began. It was the largest assault on an island in the war…The Japanese knew from the outset that they couldn’t win this battle, so they had hoped to make the conflict so horrific, the body count so high that the soft Americans would negotiate for peace on Japanese terms”. However, did America give in that easily? Not a chance. American exceptionalism continued to encourage US soldiers to keep fighting. According to “The Final Act”, “…16,000 Americans and 100,000 Japanese were killed in the battle for the island of Okinawa…President Harry S. Truman was preparing to invade Japan, which could have cost tens of thousands of casualties. Then he was offered a new option – a bomb described as ‘the most terrible weapon ever known in human history’”.
    Also, the Japanese had many Allied soldiers imprisoned – as many as 350,000 (according to our Okinawa notes) – and once word of an attack on the mainland reached Japanese command, it was extremely likely that many of the prisoners of war would have been executed. From today’s perspective, the 180,000 civilian lives that were lost in both the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are about only half of the possible deaths that may have occurred if the Japanese decided to execute their prisoners of war.
    American casualties, the battle for Okinawa, and the soldiers being held as prisoners of war were all factors that influenced Truman’s decision to use the bomb. If I were an advisor of his, I would definitely push him to end the war as quickly and with as few casualties as possible. At that time, I also wouldn’t have understood the scope of destruction that the atomic bomb had, so I would have suggested to use it. Although many Japanese lives would be sacrificed by using it, I would care more about American lives being saved, so the bomb was a good option, provided that American troops had cleared the area.
    When the Americans asked for the Japanese to “unconditionally surrender”, they also told them that if they didn’t give in, they would have to face something like never before seen. Truman had given the order to his men to drop the bomb if the Japanese hadn’t surrendered by August 3rd, 1945. However, given that the invasion of Japan wasn’t scheduled to begin until November 1st, I feel that Truman should have given the Japanese a longer period to surrender, and then, if no response was heard, the bomb was a feasible method to end the war.
    After seeing the horrific destruction that the first bomb caused in Hiroshima, I would have advised against dropping a second bomb in Nagasaki. Now that the United States knew what their newly-created devices were capable of, I feel that it was morally irresponsible to drop another bomb.
13. Nia Kepes October 1, 2017 at 2:21 pm

    Dear President Truman,
    If we decide to invade Japan in this upcoming November instead of dropping our nuclear bombs then there will be many unfathomable consequences and no foreseeable benefits to the United States. The most important consequence includes the loss of our allied prisoners of war currently captured and held captive by the Japanese. We are told in the article, “The Final Act” by Herbert Buchsbaum that, “Invading Japan could cost tens of thousands of American casualties”. Not only would the casualties include soldiers but it would include our prisoners of war. Therefore we must drop the bomb and avoid the invasion of Japan.
    The Japanese, as you know have become desperate with their war tactics. As stated in an article from the future, “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb” by Robert James Maddox, “Japan fought back desperately, sending out Kamikaze planes to slow American advance with suicidal dives against United States warships”. Kamikazes and suicide missions lead by the Japanese to fight against us have proven that the Japanese are doing all they can to try and stop us from winning the war. If we invade Japan all of our allied prisoners and our own men will be brutally murdered by the Japanese in the hopes that we will not be able to get our men back. We must drop the bomb in order to get unconditional surrender from Japan and save our men, and our prisoners of war scattered around Asia.
    Another reason we must drop the nuclear bomb is to intimidate the Soviet Union. If the Soviets see the scale of destruction in our nuclear bomb’s radiating path, they will not want to get on our bad side. We know about the devastation that we can cause with the powerful weapons in our possession. We need to end the war and we might as well also use them to intimidate and show off our power. Intimidating the Soviet Union with a show of scientific power is important to get them to agree with our demands and withdraw from Eastern Europe.

    Thank you,
    Your most loyal advisor,
    Nia Kepes
14. Jocelyn October 1, 2017 at 3:01 pm

    President Truman should have released the atomic bomb on Japan. While some people think that Japan was going to surrender, there is a lot of evidence to support that they were not going to. “Reports from Tokyo indicated that Japan meant to fight the war to a finish,”(Portrait). It was repeated over and over that when Japan was controlled by military leader, Tojo, he had the country ready and willing to fight anyone that got in the way of Japan winning the war. The Japanese military had guessed that the Allies would invade Kyushu, and so they placed 900,000 troops in the city of Kyushu. (Portrait) Therefore, if the Americans would have invaded Japan instead of dropping a second bomb, there would have been another battle with many American casualties. Dropping the bomb saved numerous American lives. Low estimates were at 31,000, but it was likely to be much higher. Also, before we dropped the first bomb, we offered the Japanese unconditional surrender. “They claimed to welcome an invasion of the home islands, promising to inflict such hideous casualties that the United States would retreat from its announced policy of unconditional surrender,” (Portrait). Japan chose to not accept those terms, leading us to drop the second atomic bomb. President Truman should have waited more than three days to drop the second bomb. Sure, it did not seem like Japan was going to surrender, but he could have waited and seen what happened next. Neither President Truman nor anyone he advised knew the consequences of dropping these bombs. Only the Japanese military leaders wanted to keep going with the war, but the Japanese politicians wanted to end the war with the Soviets and, more importantly,the United States. Japan was not the only place where there was fighting going on. There was also fighting in the Philippines, China, and other places. This is often overlooked. (Portrait). This is an easy decision for us to look at now, but in the moment, it was a very hard decision for the government to make. These bombs may have ended the war months sooner than it would have ended if we had invaded Japan.
15. Megan Zacharias October 1, 2017 at 3:02 pm

    President Truman had numerous points of view to consider before making the choice to use the atomic bombs against the nation of Japan. Did he want to unleash these weapons that would instantly kill innocent lives in Japan, but end the war just as quickly or continue with the war effort risking countless American lives? The conflict between the Americans and Japanese would be prolonged if he didn’t drop the bombs and bring the war to an end. The president believed if the war continued, the result could be hundreds of thousands American casualties. The president did not believe that Japan would surrender willingly. If I had the chance to advise Truman, I would convey that he should delay the decision to utilize atomic weapons for a specific amount of time if at all possible. The fighting with Japan and the eventual invasion of their country would only result in more casualties, as said in The Battle for Okinawa, there would have been a “Manchurian bloodbath”. For this reason the only tactic for the fighting to cease was for Japan to surrender, or for the United States to drop the bombs. Therefore, I would recommend that President Truman postpone the decision for just a short time with the hope that Japan would surrender. The devastation that the bombs would cause on the people of Japan would have been impossible to imagine and because of that, I would want to delay that decision if at all possible. If Japan did not accept defeat, then the United States would have to move forward with the bombs if there was no surrender before the planned Japanese invasion. Truman also had to consider that Japan could be leaning towards peace. As said in the Portrait of America, “Rational calculations could not determine Japan’s position. Although a peace faction within the government wished to end the war…”, Japan could have been persuaded earlier to surrender. Had Truman waited a little longer, the war could have come to an end without the use of atomic bombs. Generally, I believe that I would have told Truman to wait and see if Japan would have surrendered before the invasion in November.
16. Kate Karaskewicz October 1, 2017 at 3:29 pm

    If I had to advise president Truman on weather or not to drop the atomic Bomb, I would tell him to consider a few things which are as follows: Firstly, since the war in Europe is over we need to end it indefinitely as soon as possible for the sake of saving U.S troops and meeting the pleas of citizens. The battle of Okinawa saw heavy losses on both sides and the use of suicide Missions by the Japanese. While considerably weakened from fighting the soviets in Manchuria and the Chinese in china, the Japanese were still inflicting heavy casualties. Invading mainland could take up to a year and cost The U.S 31,000-50,000 men roughly. And while talks of peace and surrender have started within the government of japan, the military, which acts almost independently, is prepared to fight to the death.
    Secondly, Consider the message to the world and especially the soviets. An atomic bomb will kill thousands upon thousands if dropped in a heavily populated area, men, women, children, military or not. It will intimidate many countries and establish the U.S as superpower.
    Ultimately, I say hold line in Japan for now, wait until September to drop the bomb if they have not surrendered. Give them time to surrender will trying to conserve as many troops as possible. Talk peace and compromise with The government if possible. If they have not waved the white flag before September drop the bomb where most of the casualties will be militants. Drop one and then if they do not surrender by November continue with the invasion of the mainland as planned. We have made a weapon the likes of which the world has never seen so must we need to be extra careful on how it is used. The U.S can not use it simply because we have it. We should use the atomic bomb if it is vital to saving American lives and perhaps preventing future conflicts. Japanese are still people despite there military and evil use of suicide bomber and we must not forget that as well.
17. Kyle Varda October 1, 2017 at 3:47 pm

    During times of war it’s best to save as many lives as possible. That’s what President Truman and many Generals were thinking as the U.S. dropped the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I would have done the same thing as Truman. The U.S. had just been through WWII and were almost finished with the pacific war against the Japanese why waste the lives of many Americans when we can end the war with one or two bombs. Like in the portrait it says, “While the bomb would kill thousands of citizens, he said, it would shock Japan into surrendering and save thousands of American lives” (Pg.241). That is exactly what happened, so it’s not like we didn’t know what was going to happen but the human nature hates the killing of thousands of people. The American people were also horrified at the deaths from the past two attacks on Okinawa and Leyte Gulf and when they were told the death totals they were looking for a quick way to end the war. Also to invade Kyushu would have caused huge casualties because the Japanese were sending troops to the island. Not only were the Japanese number’s much larger than the Americans, the Americans under estimated the number on the island. Instead of 500,000 troops the Americans originally thought were on Kyushu, there were actually 900,000. We also may have helped save the Japanese from the Soviets who were planning on invading Manchuria if the Japanese didn’t surrender and the Americans Bomb Nagasaki and Hiroshima, it would have led to a bloodbath between 1.6 million Russian Veterans and one million Japanese soldiers. I would have advised President Truman to drop the Atomic bombs on Japan. It would save thousands life’s and kill thousands of lives but if it didn’t many more lives would have been lost in war. I would want to be the first country to use this technology but it is worth saving thousands of men who served our country and who can come home to their friends and families and not have to worry about going to war ever again.
18. Maya Wolock October 1, 2017 at 5:10 pm

    Dear Mr. President,

    We have an important matter at hand and we must make a decision immediately. We, as Americans, have a duty to consider all possible outcomes of dropping the atomic bomb.

    Is the atomic bomb necessary in our attempts to force the Japanese to surrender? Are there other possible options? There are no other options, Mr. President. We have seen that the Japanese people are willing to sacrifice their lives for their cause at Okinawa. Who is to say that they will not do the same if we invade again? The Japanese have had many more casualties than the Americans and they have not batted an eye. The mere fact that they have not surrendered already is evidence that they are willing to drag this out to the very end unless we do something incredibly drastic.

    Many American citizens are horrified by the large amount of death as a result of the Battle for Okinawa and are desperate for an efficient end of this horrid World War.

    Another reason why we must drop the Atomic Bomb is to protect the lives of American soldiers. If we do not drop this powerful bomb, our next move would be to invade Kyushu and eventually the mainland. The Joint War Plans Committee has estimated that if we were to go through with this, we would have approximately 193,500 casualties. This number is on the low side of the estimates. Some say we may even have up to 500,000 casualties. Why would we risk this many American lives when we have an option that would most likely have zero american casualties?

    Yet another outcome we must consider is what would happen to the prisoners of war if we were to invade Japan. It is very likely that 350,000 allied prisoners of war would be killed.

    We also must discuss what would happen if we do not utilize this new technology before others get the chance. What if another country developed nuclear weapons and they become the first to drop them? What if another country drops an atomic bomb on us? We must demonstrate to the world that we have the most powerful weapons and that they should not dare try and attack us.

    In my professional opinion, it is your duty as the leader of this beautiful country to drop the atomic bomb.
19. Kiran Krishnan October 1, 2017 at 5:28 pm

    I would have advised president Truman to drop the bombs. Though there is a lot of controversy about the topic and the amount of civilian lives it cost, as President of the United States it was Truman’s job to protect the American people, and do what was best for them. Americans at home and on the front lines were ready for the war to be over especially after the Battle for Okinawa. At first soldiers admired the Japanese who were fighting at Okinawa because of their Kamikaze attacks, but “They also developed a disgust and an anger at the continuing attacks” (Hanson). The soldiers were fed up with the fighting and wanted it to be over, so did American people. The notes on Okinawa also state that “when America found out about the death toll at Okinawa in July 1945, many were calling for a quick end to the war”. It was the President’s decision to drop the bombs and no one else’s but the overwhelming call for a quick end to war could not be ignored and it was a part of his job to answer and help the people of his country. Some critics of Truman’s decision to drop the bomb believed that the bomb was not necessary. In the article The Final Act the author mentions Admiral William Leahy who believed that “The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons” (Buchsbaum). But, when President Truman did give the Japanese the ultimatum that to either surrender or face the U.S. and their military power, the Japanese did not stand down and surrender. They were not ready to give up their fight like many people claim. Therefore, Truman needed to follow through and force them to surrender so to show he was being serious, and to stop the loss of more American lives. Truman also had to think about the Soviets, he knew that they were going to get involved in the fight against the Japanese soon, which would have been bad. Once the Soviets joined our fight we would have won, but the Soviets would have wanted something in return. They might have wanted some control over Japan, and if the Soviets had control they could have built a military base in Japan, a base so close to the United States would have been dangerous. The bomb was a way to not only intimidate the Soviets but keep them out of the war with Japan. Truman’s decision to bomb Japan was the best option for the United States, with the information that was known. All these facts would have led me to advise Truman to drop the bomb.
20. Dorian Campillo October 1, 2017 at 6:02 pm

    Many factors decide whether or not Truman should have dropped the bomb. The Japanese were a very hostile and dangerous people to the United States. Therefore, a president’s job is to keep their people safe and happy which Truman did by dropping the bomb. I would have advised Truman to drop the bomb.
    The Japanese were ready to have all of their 30 million citizens armed to win the war against the United States. This would have resulted in an all out war with millions of casualties from both the Japanese and the Americans. By dropping the atomic bomb, Truman killed thousands, but the end result was not millions of dead.
    In addition, dropping the bomb led to a quicker way of ending the war. As said before, the Japanese were ready to fight with even children. This demonstrates that they were very determined to fight for a long time and win this war, which again, results in more casualties. The extended time of the war (if the bomb had not been dropped) would have resulted in many more Japanese and American deaths. Therefore, when Truman dropped the bomb, the Japanese surrendered which resulted in thousands of fewer casualties than if he hadn’t.
    The Japanese were also willing to do anything for their cause, as they had thousands of Kamikaze planes ready to crash on American grounds, causing a lot of damage. The fact that the Japanese went to that extent to try to murder Americans also shows that the Japanese-American war was already a bloodbath and would continue for a long time if no one had intervened and had the guts to do something which would claim the winner.
    Also, the Japanese were given an ultimatum which said that they had a couple days to surrender. After showing absolutely no effort or signs of doing so, the casualty counts were starting to mount. On August 6, 1945 Truman decided to bomb Hiroshima, as the Japanese were not going to surrender.
    If Truman had not dropped the atomic bomb, there would have been thousand of more casualties. Without the bombing, there were expected to be 500 thousand casualties, with a possibility of neither of the two countries surrendering (resulting in more casualties). However, dropping the atomic bomb saved over 200 thousand people from being killed or wounded. With the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the war ended faster, thousands were saved, and Truman did his duty of protecting the American people from the war.
21. Nikki Barnas October 1, 2017 at 7:18 pm

    Harry Truman, Roosevelt’s vice president as he served nostalgically as the American president for the fourth time, found himself thrown into the most prominent spot of the executive branch as he became president after Roosevelt suffered a devastating stroke. As the country mourned for the beloved four-term president, Truman was just learning about the atomic bomb, a weapon unfathomable compared to the rest of the world’s technology. Truman now faced a decision that balanced morals with the protection of our country; should we use it on Japan? It is hard to provide Truman with an answer without knowing the actual effect it would have on Japanese citizens and the world, but it is most authentic to calculate an answer for him while omitting the actual results. Due to this, I would propose to Truman to first acquire more knowledge about nuclear arms, so he could properly answer one of his main requirements, which was if dropping the bomb and shattering human dignity by murdering thousands could be justified. After he properly can assess the atomic bomb, then he should see if getting Japan to surrender is worth the human lives. As the Huffington Post can attest to, no one in the country really knew the real cost of the Atomic bomb; even in today’s age of new contemporary military devices, many Americans have a true comprehension as to what nuclear weapons do to the human body. As a result of this, president Truman really couldn’t have gaged the mass destruction the bomb would have, despite former testing in New Mexico. Perhaps then Truman considered what the Japanese had done to the citizens of Hawaii as the blew up Pearl Harbor, and used their former violence to justify bringing violence on Japanese shores. But if he had really tried to make the devastation of Hiroshima equivalent to Pearl Harbor, he would have stopped attacking the Japanese after the Battle of Okinawa, as it was the largest assault on an island in war. Because of Okinawa, he would have also realized that Japan would do anything to defend their country, as portrayed by the kamikaze suicide pilots. Due to these facts that provided more of an insight on Japan, I would have pursued in pressuring him into dropping the bomb- and I think Truman would have agreed because he would have already put his morals aside during Okinawa and was now purely focused on knocking Japan out of war. His next question regarding the bomb would be if it would save the war prisoners in Asia. If the Allies were to invade Japan, it was most likely that the P.O.W would be tortured and murdered, so the use of nuclear weapons in Japanese-concentrated cities would protect American lives. Of course, it’s hard to compare 350,000 captured American lives to foreign lives in Japan- either way, one group was going to be persecuted. Overall, I would advise Truman to at least recognize the Japanese sacrifice while calculating his decision, but do what is best for America and the war. As it is now proven, 700,000 thousand Japanese citizens faced a nucleic, fiery demise in Hiroshima, and at least 400,000 more experienced the same unfortunate fate. Despite the uncanny amount of people that suffered under nuclear weapons, it did ultimately trigger Japan to surrender which was the overall goal of the United States. We only debate about it now because of the broad range of insight we have into Hiroshima and Nagasaki, provided by films that had been shielded from the public eye to avoid these verbal altercations regarding the morals of America.
22. annie chernow October 1, 2017 at 7:44 pm

    If I were to advise Truman to make a decision about dropping the atomic bombs on Japan, I would’ve told him to drop them. The Japanese were not looking to end the war anytime soon and were constantly trying to kill as many Americans possible during this time. America had to find a solution to put everything to an end in a timely matter. This solution was the atomic bomb. The reason I would’ve encouraged Truman to drop the bomb was because if we were to fight another battle, it would have killed as many as half a million Americans and would take a lot more fighting and could have cost a lot of money. With many pro’s about the atomic bomb, there were many cons which made the Americans hesitant if this was the right way to end the war. One issue Truman had was deciding whether he wanted to drop the bomb and have to face the fact that Americans will be killed from the bomb or not drop it and deal with many more Americans dying in another battle; either way, there would be Americans killed and it was just between which would be a faster and more efficient way to end the war. Another issue Truman came across was the concern of other countries getting the technology for the bomb which could have caused many problems in the country world wide with countries having free range to the technology made for a very deadly weapon. Summarizing the portrait called The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb, America wanted a quick end to war and before dropping the nuclear weapon, they warned them a week earlier saying that if they didn’t surrender in a week, the bomb would be dropped. They didn’t surrender and dropped the first bomb at Hiroshima. It instantly killed 100,000 people, but the Japanese still didn’t surrender until five days after the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki three days after the first bomb went off. It was a quick end to the war which was a relief to all once they surrendered. In the article called The Final Act, it had stated that if the Americans did invade, the battle would have costed tens and thousands of American’s lives which was not what we wanted. In the end, I would have guided Truman to use the bomb to end the war in an efficient and timely matter. (409 words)
23. Philip Bradbury October 1, 2017 at 8:13 pm

    I would have advised Truman to drop the bomb even if I didn’t know the exact outcome of what would’ve happened if the bomb did or didn’t go off. I say this because for one, as an American advisor, my first priority is the people of the United States. Also, if Truman didn’t drop the bomb, it would be obvious that dropping a bomb that would still killed hundreds of thousands people, but if they hadn’t decided to use it, the United States would’ve been forced to invade Japan and kill pretty much all of the 71 million people that lived there at the time. Finally, I would have advised Truman to drop the bomb because it would be a perfect display of how advanced the United States’ military was. I would have advised Truman to drop the bomb because by setting it off it would be keeping many US’s and Japanese soldiers alive (mainly US). When the US was fighting Japan for its islands out in the Pacific, the battle of Okinawa was very bloody. 16,000 American soldiers and 110,000 Japanese soldiers were killed on the battlegrounds of Okinawa (Buchsbaum; Total War line 16). Imagine the American death toll of a battle for an area thousands of times bigger than the island of Okinawa. Millions of Japanese and Americans would have died if it hadn’t been for the atomic bomb. For example, the battle of Manchuria between the Soviets and Japan led to over 80,000 Japanese dead and 500,000 captured. If the US had invaded Japan, Manchuria would have escalated into a bloodbath of over 1.6 million Russians and 1 million Japanese(Hanson; Ripples of battle and How we think). If I was Truman’s advisor, I definitely would have rather used an atomic bomb and killed 200,000 people than take over Japan and killing millions of Americans, Soviets, and Japanese in the process. Finally, the atomic bomb was a great way of displayed the advanced technology of the United States. The atomic bombs that the US used In Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the first nuclear weapons used against another country. The bombs killed hundreds of thousands of people yet prevented the deaths of millions.
24. Carolina Ishikura October 1, 2017 at 8:27 pm

    I would advise President Truman to drop the Atomic Bomb under the circumstances because Japan would have never surrendered if we did not do so. Japan’s motto was to live and die for the Emperor, and dying was considered an honor and showed loyalty to your leader and country. In The Battle of Okinawa Japan already knew that it would not be possible for them to win so they would sacrifice themselves in those battles and make it as gorey as possible so America would negotiate for peace. Kamikazes were also at its prime in The Battle of Okinawa, Kamikazes were suicide pilots that would go to American ships on the coast of Okinawa. This shows that Japan had no plans to surrender anytime soon or at all, America had to stop the violence with Japan to save their country and other fighting countries. It was crucial to drop this bomb because it was either ‘keep fighting and lose generations of men and have the country go into ruins’ or ‘surrender and protect what’s left’ for Japan.
    The effects of dropping the Atomic Bomb are negative towards the future generations of the Japanese but for the long run it would be a good decision. If America were to not drop the Atomic Bomb on Japan there would be more negative outcomes. I would only advise President Truman to drop one Atomic Bomb in Tokyo because it is their capital and it would impact Japan the most and they would surrender. If you were to drop an Atomic Bomb in Kyoto or Hiroshima Japan would most likely continue to fight. I would not advise Truman to more than one Atomic because it is too cruel and damaging. Also if America were to not drop the bombs China and Japan would continue to fight until the very end of World War II which would cause great tensions between them in the future. In addition America would most likely invade Japan and we would end up with a massacre just like Germany. Finally if we were to invade Japan there would be a great loss of Manchurians, Russian veterans, and Japanese soldiers. For the greater good we have to drop an Atomic Bomb so save Japan and warring countries.
    -Carolina Ishikura
25. Katie Lucken October 1, 2017 at 8:35 pm

    I would have advised President Truman to drop the bombs, even if I didn’t know the exact outcome of the assault on Japan. I would have done this for a few reasons, one of them being that, as an American advisor, my first priority would be to save American lives, and then focus on saving other lives. Also, Japan was ruthless in their assaults on American troops, and if the war was to end, something drastic needed to occur. To begin with, many American lives would have been lost if they were forced to invade Japan to get them to surrender. In “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb” by Robert James Maddox, published in the book Portrait of America, Volume 2, it has been stated that Truman and other officials believed that dropping the atomic bombs, and therefore preventing an invasion, saved 500,000 American lives. Critics later estimated that the real casualties amounted to “only” 193,500 American lives. This is not an exact number, only an estimate, but either way, that number is not a small amount of American sacrifice, and many Japanese would have died in the invasion as well. Also, they did not take into account the Americans that would have most likely been killed or tortured in the prisoner of war camps scattered around Asia, in November 1945. The casualties are impossible to truly predict, and the factor of uncertainty definitely weighed into the decision from the Americans to drop the two atomic bombs. Furthermore, Japan was not going to willingly end the war unless something drastic occurred. According to notes taken from Ripples of Battle: How the Wars of the Past Still Determine How We Fight, How We Live, and How We Think, by Victor Hanson, the Japanese had promised that they still had over two million men in their army, and if need be, the entire Japanese population would defend their country. A Japanese holocaust could have occurred if the Americans had invaded, because Japan was so ruthless and willing to do anything to inflict casualties on Americans. An example being the Battle for Okinawa, because the Japanese knew that they wouldn’t be able to win the battle, so they decided that they would inflict as many casualties as possible on American troops, to force negotiations for peace out of them. The Japanese were so intent on doing this that they had several different suicide machines, like the kamikaze, mini-subs, and the “cherry blossom”. In conclusion, as an American advisor, I would have told President Truman to drop the atomic bombs. This is because my first priority would be to save our American troops, and then focus on preserving other lives. Also, the Japanese government and military were cruel, and merciless to their own men even, in their assaults on American troops, and if the war was to end, something drastic, like the two atomic bombs, needed to occur.
26. Will Drake October 1, 2017 at 9:30 pm

    Will Drake
    10/1/17
    Advising President Truman
        If the year was 1945, and I had the important task of advising president Truman on whether or not to drop the atomic bombs on Japan I would have advised the president to do so. In spite of losing some, I believe dropping the atomic bombs saved more lives than would have been lost in a possible invasion.
        In terms of the amount of lives lost in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, estimates put the number ranging from around 100,000 people to 130,000 people killed and around 20,000 of the people killed being Japanese soldiers. Almost 100,000 people were injured in the blasts as well, bringing the total casualty count to approximately 200,000-230,000 people. According to “The Effects of Okinawa on the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb,” there were rumors of over 30 million Japanese people who were ready to defend their homeland against a possible invasion. Also, the Japanese boasted that they still had 2.3 million men in the army (a million in Manchuria), 6,150 planes and 8,000 pilots who were willing to do whatever it took to kill American soldiers (kamikazes). Adding onto the bloodbath that would have ensued if Japan had not surrendered, the Russians had 1.6 million experienced soldiers who would have fought against 1 million less experienced Japanese soldiers in Manchuria. Earlier in the war, in a battle between the Soviet’s and the Japanese, 50,000 Japanese were killed and 500,000 Japanese soldiers were taken to be used as labor workers in the Soviet Union and were never seen again. There were also 350,000 allied POWs (prisoners of war) in Japanese POW camps who might have been executed if word spread of an invasion of the Japanese mainland. Finally, the last reason for the use of the atom bomb is the savagery used by the Japanese throughout the war, especially when defeat was imminent. The Japanese would routinely carry out suicide missions, using kamikazes (flying planes filled with explosive into American ships), mini-subs which were essentially used as torpedoes to attack ships, and banzai charges to try and cause as much chaos and fear into the Americans as possible.
    People opposed to the dropping of the bombs may argue a few points: the Japanese were already close to surrender, the bombs caused “too much destruction,” and the use of the bombs should have waited and the US should have fought longer. The first point made is comparable to the Monday morning quarterback after the Sunday game, at the time the US were unaware of EXACTLY how close the Japanese were to surrendering. With the Japanese military still fully willing to fight and the entirety of the island armed and ready to take up defense, another option was not in sight. Secondly, regarding the claim that the bombs were too destructive, it can go one of a few ways. The claim is usually made as though the bombs dropped were nuclear, not atomic. Nuclear bombs would have devastated almost all of the entire country, and Nukes we have today are almost 20-30 times more powerful than the atomic bombs used in the 40s. Still in regards to the second point, if the atomic bombs were not dropped and a full scale invasion ensued, the Japanese had 900,00 soldiers stationed at Kyuku (the US only believed there to be 500,000). Finally, if the US had prolonged the war, it is possible that the Soviet and Japanese forces would have fought in Manchuria, and also that the allied POWs would have been executed by the thousands.
27. Hadin Sayed October 1, 2017 at 9:38 pm

    Hadin Sayed (first hour)-

    Something important Truman potentially was thinking about when he dropped the bomb was about the motive to intimidate the Soviet Union and to stop the spread of their Communism. Throughout the war, when the Soviet Union freed Eastern European countries they would set up a Communist Government there. That was sort of the start between big tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. The portrait “Why we had to Drop the Atomic Bomb” briefly looks at the Atomic Bomb as a type of diplomacy with the Soviets. This idea can be taken seriously as America knew the Soviet Union was going to enter the war in the Pacific. We know America didn’t like the Communist government so with it growing in Eastern Europe it can be seen as we didn’t want the Soviets Communism to spread to Asia too. This could of possibly lead us to bomb Japan as America potentially wanted to end the war with Japan as soon as possible so the Soviets couldn’t get involved in Japan. This idea can be backed up, because only two days after the Soviets got involved and three days after the war we bombed the Japanese again, which can be seen as unnecessary as the Soviets were already their. Also, one major thing Truman had to be thinking about was how many Americans would die if they didn’t drop the bomb. The “Final Act” document suggests that if America invaded Japan regularly there would be tens of thousands of casualties. If America didn’t bomb Japan, Truman had to have considered how many American soldiers would of died. As the “Final Act” suggests the Japanese were within weeks away from surrendering anyway, they debate whether Truman knew that at the time though. So if Truman didn’t know they were surrendering soon, he could of definitely through the bomb would prevent a lot of soldiers from dying in a War where he thought the Japanese would just never give up.

    I would of advised President Truman to bomb Hiroshima like he did because of how long the Japanese were willing to fight and to save many American soldiers life, but after that I would of advised him to do things differently. After Hiroshima, as a nation we waited only 3 days to bomb Nagasaki. I definitely believed we needed to give more time to Japanese. As talked about in the Socratic Seminar, the first bombing did a lot of damage to the Japanese.It is estimated that more than 80,0000 civilians died from the bombing of Hiroshima. The shocked Japanese were unable to agree on a response immediately after the first bomb. A day after though, the Soviet Union declared war on the Japanese. I would advise to President Truman to give them at least a week to mourn and organize themselves after such a horrible and surprise attack. While I think the first bombing can be justified, we definitely didn’t give enough time to the Japanese to respond to the horrific event of the first bombing. Also with the Soviets also declaring war on Japan after the first bomb there was no need to bomb Nagasaki as I think our combined forces could defeat the Japanese easily without killing more than the 100,000 civilians at Nagasaki.
28. Devin Woodruff (1st Hour) October 1, 2017 at 10:17 pm

    Things that I believe that Truman had on his mind during dropping the bomb is how many people he could kill if he were to do that. I also think that he had a lot of consideration that maybe it was the wrong decision and he shouldn’t have made. It also didn’t help that he wasn’t aware of the citation until FDR died and he needed to take over as president. He didn’t have much time to think if it was the right thing to do. He did what he thought was the best thing for the American people.

    If I were to advise President Truman under the circumstances, if I didn’t know the outcome I would have told him not to bomb Japan and try to find other options to solve the problem without having to kill millions of people that didn’t do anything. Some of the options that I would have given to President Truman is to send in ground troops to attack the Japanese. Truman thought that by having a ground attack it would cause too many American casualties, while I agree with him still believe it’s a better option than killing millions of people lives.

    Another option that I would have given him is to send the atomic bomb to an unpopulated area. By sending the bomb to an area that has little to know population fewer people would die. It could still show a sign of strength from American but just that we aren’t willing to kill millions of lives. Furthermore, I would have given him was to send in the navy and attack on water. We could have surprised Japan. Some evidence I could provide is from the article “the final act”. It talks about how

    President Truman had a hard time deciding if it was a good thing to bomb Japan or not. I quote from the article “Truman did not seek to destroy japan ability to make war.” To me, this is saying that he didn’t even think Japan was war ready like American was. My last piece of evidence in from the portrait of America which was that Truman and his team only estimated that 31,000 thousand people would be killed in the invasion of Kyushu. But in reality, it killed millions of people instead of only thousands.
29. Neve Robinson October 1, 2017 at 10:23 pm

    If I had to advise president Truman on the use of the atomic bombs I would say that we should have not dropped the first or second atomic bombs. I believe this because I think with all the pressure the U.S. forces we were using on the Japans, such as island hooping, bombing from above, and cutting off trade, The Japanese would have had no choice but to surrender. Also at this point in the war, Japan did not have allies, The Italians were no longer fighting and Nazi Germany was defeated. So the japans even though they had a die hard outlook on the war, did not have any other decisions. I think when the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki it made the Japans decide quicker that their fight must come to an end because Japanese civilians were dying. I do understand why Truman made this decision because he thought for sure it would end the war quickly with Japan but I think If we were just more defensive, as we were in the beginning, we would have still won the war with Japan.
30. Andrew Frenkel October 1, 2017 at 10:27 pm

    Truman ultimately made the decision to drop the bombs, although there were some reasons why and why I would have advised the same. Truman was told by his generals that if had invaded the Japanese main land he would’ve lost many allied lives and it would’ve cost a lot of money. The allies would’ve eventually taken over the main land but not without a large cost, that in turn would’ve caused America to be very weak as an army and would’ve maybe let other nations become a superpower. Truman knew that fighting in Japan on the main land would’ve ended in mass death on both allies and Japanese sides of the battle. The Japanese also thought an invasion was coming therefore they would’ve been prepared for the attacks and would’ve given the allies a tough time trying to conquer the main land. It was a good idea to drop the bombs so as many people didn’t die. The Japanese were not going to surrender anytime soon since the people with power were planning on continuing to fight so their emperor didn’t get put on trial for war crimes. The Japanese at this time were a very hardcore society, they felt as if it was not honourable to die normally. Many Japanese men were used as suicide bombers and they would go into tunnels with Americans and then blow themselves up and in theory kill the Americans as well. The bombs forced Japans hand and in-turn they surrendered. It weakened Japans resilience to attacks because their population had been effected now.

    The idea of losing half a million American soldiers could’ve been too much for one man to have on his conscience and would cause even the strongest willed men to insanity. Truman chose to save those lives and drop the atomic bombs on Japan. Truman’s decision changed the world forever, after that bomb dropped from that airplane the world had changed. If I was one of Truman’s advisors I would support his decision to drop the bombs on Japan and not to invade the main land of Japan and lose many American lives.
31. Nicole Bastian October 1, 2017 at 10:33 pm

    If I did not know the outcome of the bomb and I was under these circumstances, I would advise President Truman to drop the bomb. Truman wanted to drop the bomb in order to save more, mainly American, lives. According to The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb by Robert James Maddox, we would’ve lost many more soldiers had we not dropped the bomb than the number of people Japan lost. The portrait states, “After the war, Truman and others maintained that half a million American soldiers would have fallen if the United States had been forced to invade the Japanese home islands” (page 242). The portrait goes on to say, “They point out that a war-plans committee estimated ‘only’ 193,500 casualties” (page 242). I would agree with Truman’s decision because death, at this point, was inevitable. I think that it makes more sense to go with the route that is predicted to cause less death, which in this case would be to drop the bomb. Also, President Truman was the President of America, not Japan, meaning he needed to look out for his citizens. As it says in The Final Act by Herbert Buchsbaum, “For Truman, dropping the bomb ‘was never any decision you had to think about,’ he said. ‘It was my responsibility as President to force the Japanese warlords to come to terms as quick as possible with the minimum loss of lives’” (page 21). Truman was just doing what he needed to in order to protect his citizens.
    On another note, Truman may have been concerned about releasing the technology of this bomb into the world. In The Final Act it explains, “Today, a single hydrogen bomb contains the explosive power of 1,540 Little Boys” (page 21). Although, when Truman released the technology of this bomb, he also showed the world what the effects of the bomb were. I believe that by showing the world the effects of the bomb before the technology was more advanced is a good thing. I believe that by knowing the effects it makes you think harder about whether or not it’s worth it to drop the bomb. If an atomic bomb wasn’t dropped in the past, who’s to say that it won’t happen in the future, especially if we have never really seen what it can do.
32. Sathvik R. October 1, 2017 at 11:28 pm

    Redone

    When dropping the bomb, truman probably thought that more lives would have been lost if the allied powers invaded Japan. After the fall of the germans in April, the allied powers had on axis powers on the ropes. The only axis power that remained was Japan. The Japanese said that “they still had 2.3 million men in the army, and the whole population would be ready to defend if necessary”. This message clearly showed the Japanese weren’t going to surrender. This leads to my point which is that this would have forced the United states to invade Japan to make them surrender. President Truman was probably thinking about that if the Japanese weren’t going to surrender then, they would have to be forced to. Truman probably thought that dropping the bomb could potentially save american soldiers lives. He thought that the dropping the bomb would be easier than invading with troops.

    Another thing Truman probably thought that if he dropped the bomb other nations would want that technology to “level the playing field”. He maybe thought that dropping the bomb could spark an arms race of some sorts. Well, i guess that Truman thought that it was necessary to drop the bomb in order to end the war.

    I personally would have advised president Truman to send Japan the terms of surrender and give the Japanese 2-3 months to consider the terms of surrender
33. Kyla Hurns October 1, 2017 at 11:38 pm

    America and Atomic Bombs: Go or No Go?
    America is said to have bombed Japan for many numerous reasons. The main reason was to prevent the invasion of Japan and the thousands of American casualties that it would have resulted in. But, there are doubts in the true reasoning that President Truman had for dropping the bomb not only once but twice in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Military officers and strategists tried to convince President Truman of other ways to force Japan to surrender and end the war once and for all. But, President Truman rejected the idea that there was another way to end the war. He was completely focused on ending the war with the minimum number of American casualties and he believed that even if the war continued for one more day they were losing too many valuable Americans. According to the article, The Final Act was written by Herbert Buchsbaum it states “In 1945, some officials had argued for dropping the bomb on a military installation instead of a heavily populated city. A group of leading scientists, including the bomb;s inventors, were urging the government to invite Japanese officials to witness a test explosion in an unpopulated area to persuade them to surrender,” (21). The article shows that President Truman was shown other options in forcing Japan to surrender that was safe and it wouldn’t have resulted in as many deaths that the atomic bombs caused. Buchsbaum also says “About 100,000 people died instantly…… Another 100,000 people would die later from burns, radiation, and cancer caused by radiation….. Three days after the bombing of Hiroshima, a second bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, killing another 79,00,” (20-21). The outcome of the two bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in the casualties of around 280,000 Japanese people. While President Truman carefully thought about the American casualties that would result in whether or not he dropped the bomb he never thought of the hundreds of thousands of Japanese people that might suffer from just one tiny decision or push of a button. If I were President Truman’s advisor I would have advised him not to drop the bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima because of the casualties of the Japanese people and because of the other ways the Americans could have forced a surrender from Japan.
34. Emily Parker October 1, 2017 at 11:55 pm

    Two issues that Truman must have been thinking about when he was deciding to drop the bomb was, one, what tactic would they have to use if they don’t drop the bomb, and how many, American casualties would that result in? Another issue that Truman must have been thinking of was how many bombs would it take Japan to surrender? I would have advised President Truman to drop the bombs because I think that, from an American perspective, it was the Japanese governments fault that we did drop the bombs, so I don’t think we should feel very sorry for what we did.

    One other war tactic we could have used was to invade Japan. ” ‘I have yet to decide Japanese strategy- shall we invade Japan proper or shall we bomb and blockade?’ ” (Portraits pg. 244) I personally think that this option is not a very good idea and that to bomb them was the best choice That quote was from, President Truman. He says that was his hardest decision to make. “… Chinese and Japanese until the very end of the war. Thousands of lives here might have been saved by the Japanese surrender than the American invasion.” (The Effects of Okinawa Notes: III) The Japanese committed terrible atrocities against the Chinese. They would torture Chinese men, woman and children by chopping off their private parts and decapitating them. They would toss Chinese babies into the air and catch them on the bayonets of their guns, and do many more awful things. These atrocities may have been a reason we wanted to end the war quickly. This quote shows that many American and Chinese people may have been saved by choosing not to invade, but by bombing Japan. Yes, many inoccent Japanese lives were lost but Truman claimed, that if we invaded, at least half a million American lives would have been lost in the invasion. I believe that no one person is more important that another, but, from my perspective, I would rather have had the Japanese die than Americans. Also, the Japanese really brought it upon them selves, because they were relentless and refused to surrender. If they did surrender, then we would have not had to bomb them and the innocent children and woman would not have had to die, and their cities would not have had to become and radiation filled, waste land. It took us two bombs before Japan surrendered. We had to drop one bomb on Hiroshima and one on Nagasaki three days later. That is when Japan finally surrendered. But what if they didn’t surrender? Truman was thinking about this during after we had dropped the first bomb. We did have a third, more powerful bomb ready to attack Japan with a few days later, along with 12 more for the future incase Japan didn’t surrender.

    I know my previous statement, saying that we shouldn’t feel sorry for what we did seems very heartless, and I’m going to be honest with you, it kind of is, but I truly believe that Japan brought it upon them selves. Those are the reasons why I would advise Truman to go through with dropping the atomic bomb.
35. Rachel Shulkin October 2, 2017 at 12:31 am

    An allied invasion in Japan would have been costly- for both the Japanese and the Americans. Primarily, the Allied soldiers who were already in POW camps in Japan would not have been spared by the Japanese. “It’s possible that the 350,000 Allied prisoners of war may have been executed once news had gotten to the P.O.W. camps that the mainland was under attack” (Hanson). I would ask Truman; “are you prepared to risk the lives of 350,000 Americans, as well as those being brought over for the invasion?” We must not be so quick to allow these Americans to die for an invasion against a nation that is likely to surrender with a bomb. It is well known by now how ruthless the Japanese were and that they would have risked any Japanese life if it meant making moves against the Allied forces.
    Going up against a nation that is as barbarous as Japan is a fight that would undoubtedly leave America with casualties. In his article analyzing the decision to drop atomic bombs in Japan, Robert James Maddox explains the calculations and miscalculations about the possible American casualties with a Japanese invasion and says that “the notion that 193,500 anticipated casualties were too insignificant to have caused Truman to resort to atomic bombs might seem bizarre to anyone other than an academic, but let it pass ”(Maddox). The amount of American soldiers saved was symbolic enough to move many Americans to believe that the bombs should be used. During World War II, the American people had already seen so many deaths among the Allied forces as well as their own families and friends. After experiencing such trauma at the cost of victory against another nation, many Americans were devastated and did not want to have such losses for their country on another account.Although atomic bombs surely will not be a soft hit to Japan, they are a surefire way to avoid numerous tragedies to both sides.
    Finally, I leave you with this: just because the Japanese military might be ferocious enough to risk any citizen’s’ life to war, does not mean that America should. When given an alternate option which will save many American lives and ultimately bring this great conflict to an end, us American citizens have trust in our leaders that they will take the steps necessary to do so.
36. Nolan Kamoo October 2, 2017 at 12:54 am

    How Far do Japanese Words Take You, Circa WWII?

    The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not only devastating and killed thousands, but were also a mark in history where a country first used atomic warfare on another. Of course, a historic event like this doesn’t just happen without much thought and decision-making. Many factors had to be mulled over before the bombs were dropped in Japan, including the number of lives that would have been lost and whether or not Japan was ready to surrender after the Battle for Okinawa. Indeed, President Truman had a difficult task. From my point of view, I would have advised President Truman not to drop the bombs.
    The number of lives that would have been lost while invading Japan and the number of lives lost if we bombed Japan had to be determined ahead of time. According to “The Final Act”, by Herbert Buchsbaum, approximately 100,000 people died initially because of the bomb blast at Hiroshima. In the following days, “Another 100,000 people would die (…) from burns, radiation, and cancer caused by the radiation”. In addition, “Three days after the bombing of Hiroshima, a second bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, killing another 79,000”. So, in an estimated total, 279,000 people died along with the countless number of people injured and forever damaged by the radiation. In “The Bomb”, by Robert James Maddox, President Truman apparently had written, “In his memoirs (…) using atomic bombs prevented an invasion [of Japan] that would have cost 500,000 American lives”. However, critics have reportedly said multiple times that these were “gross exaggerations”, and that the real numbers would have been approximately 40,000 dead, 150,000 wounded, and 3,500 missing in action. When you compare the numbers you have approximately 279,000 people dead in the bombings and 193,500 casualties, not deaths, if the US would have invaded Japan. Big number difference.
    The Battle for Okinawa proved just how deadly US forces could be in a mainland invasion of Japan. After the US won the Battle for Okinawa against the Japanese in the “Pacific Theater”, they took control of not only that region, but also the naval movements of the Japanese. This battle turned out to be a turning point in the latter half of World War II. In “The Effects for Okinawa on the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb”, subsection I. “The Battle for Okinawa”, the Japanese knew from the beginning that they couldn’t win this battle, “so they hoped to make the conflict so horrific, the body count so high that they soft Americans would negotiate for peace on Japanese terms”. The defeat of the Japanese and their Navy fleet showed just how dominant the Americans were and the power they would have against the main Japan islands in the case of a mainland attack.
    To conclude, I would have advised President Truman that he should order an act of invasion into Japan and to not deploy the bombs. Not only would the invasion cause fewer fatalities and overall casualties, but we would have been deadly against the Japanese in the mainland attacks. In fact, I believe the American forces would have taken the Japanese’s can-do attitude of “defending to the death” all the way.
37. Charlie Hardy October 2, 2017 at 1:09 am

    Under these circumstances, I would have advised President Truman to drop the bomb. There were lots of weighing factors when deciding to drop the bomb, and I think President Truman made the correct decision. Yes, everything would have been easier if the Japanese surrendered, but With the threats to never end the war until they ran out of soldiers to fight with, the chance of waiting for such a thing out was deadly to practically the whole country. As referenced in the Portrait, Truman himself had no doubt the bomb was going to be used. As referenced in the notes on Okinawa, there was a chance that America would have invaded Japan if the bomb was not dropped. This could have in turn created a Japanese Holocaust. I would have advised against dropping the second bomb so soon, though, because the damage to the Japanese because excessive at that point. To anyone looking in from the outside, the United States was the first country to drop nuclear weaponry on another country, and they did it twice in the span of three days, killing over 250 thousand people. These numbers are of epic proportions, and make America seem like a murder house in my eyes. I would have told Truman to wait for the first bombing out, and see what the outcome was. If the Japanese tried to sell it off as a natural disaster, or in any way made the public believe situations were not dire, then drop the second bomb and see what the outcome was. The portrait calls the second bomb dropping “barbaric”, and in some ways, I agree. I would have advised Truman of the possibility of the especially negative press if the second bomb was dropped so early. I would have also advised Truman to not drop the bomb purely to intimidate the Soviets, or for any other reason that ending the war. This reason or any other (such as political gain, or power gain for America) for massacring two Japanese cities is “barbaric”, as stated in the portrait. Some may argue that the United States could have offered conditional surrender, or demonstrated the bomb in other ways, which is wrong under the circumstances. Truman and others were uncertain of the future, especially with the Japanese arsenal and the threats of fighting until there were no men left in the Japanese army. Under these extremes, it is clear that a rash action, such as dropping the bomb on Hiroshima, had to have been taken to end the war. The situation had gotten far too out of control.
38. Adrienne Konopka October 2, 2017 at 3:15 am

    There isn’t one perfect answer, a simple yes or no to whether or not we should have dropped those atomic bombs on Japan. Looking back now with all of the evidence and facts and research, it’s easy to say that we shouldn’t have. Japan was on the brink of surrendering. Countless civilians died, and it is a certain type of horror unlike any other. The people who didn’t die immediately from the bomb died afterwards were killed by the radiation that leached into their bodies. It seemed rushed and against a lot of officials advice; even General Eisenhower didn’t think we should drop the nuke.
    However, we have to remember what the circumstances were like building up to the dropping of the bomb. The Japanese knew they wouldn’t win, so they decided to make it the bloodiest battle ever. We know from our notes on the battle for Okinawa that the Japanese used the kamikaze to great effect and that the US Navy suffered its greatest losses in history. We were being relentlessly attacked by the Japanese and people wanted concrete. There were also Americans that had been captured that were being held in Japan. These men were people’s brothers, sons, husbands, etc. Obviously their families wanted them back, so they put great pressure on the president to end the war in any way, as quickly as possible. The president also wasn’t getting completely accurate information about the number of people that would be impacted. The statistician could only give their best guesses as to how many Japanese were
    The Japanese emperor and many of the politicians wanted peace, but they weren’t able to get that. The military was hugely powerful and in control, and the military leaders wanted to keep fighting.
    At that point in time, we had no idea what the outcome would be. No nation has ever dropped a nuclear weapon. We have no idea what we could be causing by dropping this, but we hope we’re avoiding worse calamities than have already been see. Many people, such as Gar Alperovitz, have hypothesized that dropping this might have been a tactic to intimidate the Soviets. I would have advised General Truman to drop the bomb. We had been fighting for years and had been trying to reach a peace agreement with the Japanese, to no avail. We gave them a deadline of August 3 to reach a peace agreement, and they had not. How long were we supposed to wait? They had been absolutely destroying us, and the American people were pressuring us to do something, anything. We needed to make a statement, and it seemed clear that the Japanese weren’t ever going to bend to our strict requirements for peace. We were not willing to let them keep their emperor, and that was the one thing they wanted. We weren’t sure how many troop the Japanese had, and we knew that the longer we kept fighting the more people would die. Sure, this might kill thousands of civilians, but we have to be concerned with keeping the American people safe. We were banking on the idea that the detonation of this bomb would kill less people than continuing to fight, and since the war effectively ended after we dropped the second bomb, we have no way of knowing how many people would’ve died.
    Morally, I think the dropping of the bombs is reprehensible. When hundreds of thousand people die it’s sad, especially when it’s civilians that didn’t sign up for any of this. In For 64th Anniversary: The Great Hiroshima Cover-Up — And the Nuclear Fallout for All of Us Today, published by the World Post, the article talks about how all of the footage obtained of Japan after the bomb was seized and sealed by the United States government, and I believe it’s because they didn’t want the American people to see the blood and utter desecration of two cities. The footage shot was raw and captured the blood, death, and despair unflinchingly, and I think there were some regrets about dropping the bomb. It weighed heavily on some people’s consciences, The US also wants to appear perfect to other nations and their own people, and if they showed how they forever altered the lives of millions of people, support may start to sway. As bad as one bomb was, the United States dropped a second. Again, as terrible as I find this, I understand. The Japanese government was trying to explain away the first bomb, saying it was a natural disaster, removing the United States’ impact. We dropped another bomb to show we’re here and we’re a threat that needs to be addressed immediately. Knowing what we do now perhaps different decisions would’ve been made, but we can’t go back in time. We didn’t have all this information when we needed it most. We didn’t have accurate statistics or a broader outlook on the impact of our actions. Truman was under tremendous pressure from the people, the military, and politicians and ultimately decided to do what he thought would save the most American lives.
39. Sam G. October 2, 2017 at 7:18 am

    A major issue that President Truman had was how to stop Japan. He had two options, invade the Islands of Japan and lose an estimated loss of 31,000 – 50,000 men. Or save his American people who were willing to die for their great country, and kill potentially thousands of innocents as well as permanently affect their world for years to come. An estimated of 200,000 innocent civilians were killed from the atomic bomb, with a terrifying 74,000 people killed immediately after impact. Which one was should President Truman have chosen? Risk the lives of thousands of patriotic heroes, or kill even more innocents to force a surrender. But before the bombs were even dropped President Truman faced another issue, or for better words a important decision to make, which was to either show the Japanese a demonstration of just how powerful the atomic bomb was, and risk a dud scenario in which nothing happens causing the Japanese moral to rise once again, as well as losing one of two bombs. But ultimately President Truman decided to bomb them.

    If I did not know the devastating outcome of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I would have most definitely advised President Truman to nuke Japan. Because a nuclear attack at this point of time seemed to be the safest way to attack Japan. A nuclear attack was also supported by that knowing the Japanese follow a code of honor, they would never let themselves surrender under any circumstances; meaning they would have fought to when every last one of their soldiers were dead. The nuclear attack was the only way to really show the Japanese that they must surrender or face extinction. But since is do know the outcome of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, i would not of advised President Truman to bomb the Japanese. Even though the atomic bombs were the sole purpose of the Japanese surrender, it was not worth the death of thousands of innocent people. I would have advised President Truman to perhaps barrage the Japanese bases, and show them a sneak peek of what our atomic creation can do, then assign a date in which they (Japan) had to decide to surrender or continue their war, but face our deadly creation.
40. Nick Johns October 2, 2017 at 7:29 am

    If I was an advisor to President Truman during World War II, I would have advised him to drop the nuclear bombs on Japan. I say this because I believe America needs to worry about ourselves first before concerning about other people. No matter the numbers, any amount of American war casualties is too much, and sending more troops into Japanese territories would further thin out our recourses. In the article found in Portraits of America, they state that the Allies would have lost almost 1 million troops if we sent more men into Japan instead of dropping the bombs.I also believed we should have dropped the bombs because it finally established the US as a military superpower throughout the world. This made us feared as a nation, and also gave us a lot of new allies in the future. This made the world realize the full potential America had as a nation. Lastly, I would also advise Truman to drop the bomb because, it would have been extremely costly to send more troops and rescources into Japan. The US as a nation was just experiencing an economic boom and was coming out of the Great Depression. There were many rations being regulated by the government in order to provide adequate resources to troops fighting in the Pacific. Although the bomb was costly itself, it was a quick and easy, risk free way of ending the costly war with Japan.
41. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 7:44 am

    Under these circumstances, even if I did not know what the outcome would be, I would have advised President Truman to drop the bombs. I would advise this for several reasons, first of all, Japan was ruthless with their attack on Pearl Harbor, and for Japan to surrender something drastic would have to happen. There were two choices: Have many American soldiers invade Japan force them to surrender or bomb a major city. I would advise Truman to do the second one because if you did the first one you would sacrifice thousands and thousands of Americans lives. In “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb” (Robert James Madison) published in the book “Portrait of America, Volume 2”, it stated that Truman and other officials believed that dropping the Atomic bomb saved over 500,000 Americans lives. Now, it is estimated that if we didn’t drop the bomb then only 193,500 Americans would have died, which is way too many innocent lives to sacrifice when you can do the same damage by dropping two bombs. Going back to what I was saying, for Japan to surrender something drastic would have to happen. Because the Japanese were so willing to do anything to defeat the Americans, a ton of Japanese could have died, even more then already have. The Japanese would do anything to cause casualties. During the battle of Okinawa, the Japanese knew they couldn’t win, so they decided to make it as hard as possible for the American Soldiers, no matter how much they would suffer. For example, the Kamikaze were literally suicide planes. The Americans need to do something that was effective and that didn’t take innocent Americans lives, that is why I advised Truman to drop the bombs.

    Brody H
42. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 7:46 am

    Under the circumstances, I would have advised President Truman to drop the atomic bomb. While I do not wish to underestimate the number of lives lost, and the amount of pain and grief the bomb caused, Truman was already planning an Invasion, and that would have been worse. The number of American casualties, and almost certainly the number of overall casualties would have been worse had we not dropped the bombs. Additionally, there was no way of knowing that the Japanese were ready to surrender.

    While dropping the atomic bomb on Japan caused an unimaginable amount of devastation and suffering; however, launching an Invasion on Japan would have been worse. In his article, The Final Act, Herbert Buchsbaum writes of the devastation (on both sides) that had already occurred at this point in the war. He states: “In February, more that 6,000 U.S. Marines and 20,000 Japanese soldiers died fighting for the tiny island of Iwo Jima. Weeks later, 16,000 Americans and 110,000 Japanese were killed in the battle for the island of Okinawa.” The sheer amount of death leading up to this point in the war was devastating, and it was the president’s duty to do what was best for the people of America. In this case, he had an option to save American lives; and it was his job as commander in chief to do what was best for his soldiers. In addition to the lives that would have been lost due to an invasion, the soldiers in Prisoners of war camps possibly would have all been killed. According to Victor Hanson, there were 350,000 men in the POW camps. In his portrait, The BIggest Decision, Why we Had to Drop The Bomb, Robert J, Maddox points out; “When the Bombs were dropped, fighting was still going on in the Philippines, China, and elsewhere. Every day that the war continued thousands of prisoners of war had to live and die in abysmal conditions.” For these reasons I would have told President Truman that dropping the bomb was the right decision.

    As well as saving American lives, dropping the Atomic bomb was a sure-fire way to make the Japanese surrender. It was true that Japan was in a tough spot. William Leahy, A high ranking military commander in World War Two, said: “The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.” Unfortunately, Hansen says, the entire Japanese population would have been ready to fight for their country. While Japan was in serious trouble, it was clear they were not ready to give up yet. When they guessed the United States were going to invade Honshu, they sent almost a million men to defend their homeland. Truman had no way to guarantee that the Japanese were about to surrender, and dropping the bomb was an unfortunate, but necessary decision.

    To conclude, President Truman made a tough but correct decision when he decided to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was his duty to do what he could to save the lives of his american soldiers. Dropping the bomb was the best way he had available to get Japan to surrender, and I would have advised him to use it.

    Maddy P.
43. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 7:48 am

    On August 6th, 1945, the atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Another was dropped on Nagasaki just three days later. This move is widely regarded as the end of the war; Japan unconditionally surrendered shortly after these bombings. This move was controversial at the time, and is still a divisive issue to this day.
    President Truman had many different things to consider in his decision to drop the bombs. The Allies had ended the war in Europe, and Japan remained the sole combatant on the Axis side. America had been making gains, most notably in the capture of Iwo Jima and the capture of Okinawa. Japan was strangled by embargoes, as America had been restricting its access to oil since before the war even began. However disadvantaged the Japanese might have been, the Allies were reluctant to simply invade; the Japanese government had stated that they would make a mainland invasion of Japan extremely bloody. They had claimed that every man, woman, and child were willing to die defending their country. The Allies knew this was, at least to an extent, true. “In February, more than 6,000 U.S. Marines and 20,000 Japanese soldiers died fighting for the tiny island of Iwo Jima. […] Though Japan had suffered costly defeats, officials predicted a fight to the finish.” (The Final Act, Herbert Buchsbaum, pg. 20). Having had total aerial and naval supremacy, naval bombardments, and artillery strikes, the island had been captured by American forces and nearly all of the Japanese defenders were killed or captured. The death toll shocked the American public, and people began calling for peace.
    The policy of fighting to the last man was quite intimidating. The Japanese thought that, if they could persuade the Americans to not demand unconditional surrender, they could keep their emperor and even perhaps their Pacific empire. After the invasions of Iwo Jima and Okinawa, a mainland invasion of Japan was slated to happen in November. Truman, like any leader, would have sought to minimize casualties on his side. The mainland invasion would have been disastrous. “A report, for medical purposes, of July 31 estimated that total battle and non-battle casualties might run as high as 394,859 for the Kyushu operation alone. This figure did not include those men expected to be killed outright, for obviously they would require no medical attention.” (The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb, Robert J. Maddox, pg. 248). The projected losses that would occur if Japan was to be invaded would be astronomical. The figure shown in the report was regarding the invasion of Kyushu, one of the large islands surrounding the main Japanese island Honshu. The death toll for invading Honshu, and the other two main islands (Shikoku and Hokkaido) would have been inconceivable.
    Truman’s objective was to spare as many lives as possible. Using the bomb would be, he hoped, the quickest way to end the war. A long-drawn, protracted war would have been a bloodbath. A mainland invasion of Japan his might have precipitated a “Japanese genocide” of sorts. Japanese soldiers would have massacred all the POWs held in camps so they couldn’t help invading forces. The situation in China was also looking more dire. “The fighting in China continued between the Chinese and Japanese until the very end of the war. Thousands of lives here might have been saved by the Japanese surrender instead of an American invasion.” (The Effects of Okinawa on the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb, Geoff Wickersham, section III). The war would have had a higher death toll for every day it kept being fought. There could be even more deaths, as the 1 million Japanese soldiers stationed in Manchuria would soon have to face the 1.6 million Soviet soldiers who would invade, as the USSR had recently declared war.
    Truman’s decision to drop the bombs was done out of a wanting to end the war and reduce casualties. The death of thousands of civilians due to the bombs would not even compare to the deaths caused by an extended war. The dropping of the bombs caused Japan as a whole to surrender, since the moderate and diplomatic sections of the Japanese government wanted peace while the militaristic sections refused to surrender. Truman was also most likely thinking about the post-war scenario. If the USSR managed to occupy territory, what could stop them from setting up puppet countries in Manchuria, China, or even the Japanese archipelago? It was already clear that two great powers would emerge from the war: the Soviet Union and the United States. It is quite good that the world understood the power of the bomb after it was dropped. After the war, thousands more nuclear warheads were produced. If the destructive power of the bombs had not been recognized, nuclear powers might have been less apprehensive about using them. These are the reasons why Truman dropped the bomb. Unleashing such destruction on a target that would significantly damage civilians is lamentable, but it was certainly necessary to end a war and, unbeknownst at the time, possibly avert the end of civilization itself via nuclear destruction.

    Diego R.
44. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 7:50 am

    During early planning, estimated casualties of an invasion of the Japanese homeland were relatively low, “Army and naval leaders thought initial casualties would run from 31,000 to 50,000” (Portrait of America 240). Then, the Joint War Plans Committee estimated 193,500 casualties during the invasion of two of the Japanese islands, although this estimation was later made irrelevant by buildup of Japanese troops in Kyushu. Later, in July, a report estimated almost 395,000 casualties just from invading Kyushu. However, none of these estimates included the possible executions of 350,000 american prisoners of war (Effects of Okinawa 1). Overall, the highest death estimate including POWs would be about 745,000 americans, almost four times the death count of the atomic bombs.
    The Japanese did not like the idea of surrender, especially an unconditional one. Militants even claimed that they would “…inflict such hideous casualties that the United States would retreat from its announced policy of unconditional surrender” (Portrait of America 243). They were primarily worried about the deposing of their emperor, Hirohito. However, America did not let up in its demands for unconditional surrender, with the United States telling Japan shortly before the bombs were dropped that, “There is no alternative but immediate unconditional surrender” (Portrait of America 247).

    I would have advised Truman to drop the bombs, because there would have been many more casualties on both sides if America had invaded than there were because of the bombs being dropped. Even if I did not know the outcome, I still would have done it because of the estimation of 350,000 american casualties during the invasion of Kyushu alone. Also, the Japanese probably would not have surrendered without the use of the bombs. They claimed to have 2.3 million soldiers in their homeland, and most citizens were also willing to defend their homes during an invasion.

    Jon G.
45. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 7:52 am

    The controversial topic of using atomic bombs on Japan was prevalent to the United States during the midst of the war. The use of atomic bombs were thought to have been a solution to end the war, yet there were thousands of casualties, more than expected. But in the end, the damage and devastation of the bomb lead to Japan’s surrender and was the ending of World War 2. There are many questions as to what made Truman decide to use the atomic bomb. The main consensus of why the US dropped the bomb, is because Truman believed it would spare more lives, and in addition, a costly invasion. If the United States did not drop the nuclear bomb, there would have been a full invasion of Japan’s home islands, which would have tripled the death toll. Counter to that, it is said that Truman may have dropped the bomb to intimidate the Soviets. “The war in Europe was over, and critics have claimed that the U.S. was trying to get the Soviets to either withdraw from Eastern Europe or at least be more open to agreeing with U.S. demands” (Blog #101). In this case, Truman’s intentions were to scare the Soviets into ending World War 2, if they saw what had happened in Hiroshima, they would be scared of what could possibly happen to Europe. “Those against the bomb argue that the monstrous weapon was not the only alternative open to Truman and his advisers in July and August…He could have sought a Russian declaration of war against Japan, or he could have ignored the advisory committee of scientists and dropped a demonstration bomb to show Japan what an apocalyptic weapon it was” (Maddox – 40). Therefore, if I had to advise President Truman to do under these circumstances, I would suggest not using the bomb. Truman was aware of the potential damage that the bomb could do if ever used. In fact, there were other alternatives that wouldn’t have costed as many lives as the bombing of Hiroshima. So, he could have looked deeper into possible solutions that would somewhat safely take an end to World War 2.

    Nina
46. Joseph DeMarco October 2, 2017 at 8:51 am

    Why We Should Drop The Bombs
    Even if I did not know what the outcomes would be of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I still would’ve advised President Truman to use the brand new super weapon on Japan for a few reasons. I would’ve advised him to use the bombs because firstly, the invasion of Japan that would’ve taken place if the bombs weren’t dropped would be too costly for the United States because of the amount of time it would take and the amount of troops lost would be high, and because the casualties on Japan’s side would be so much higher if we didn’t drop the bombs and it was felt as though a quick end would be morally right.
    The cost of Operation Downfall wouldn’t have just been money in the millions, but the casualties lost by us, possibly in the millions too. Operation Downfall would’ve been split into two invasions, one of the lower island, and one of the main island, Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet. It would’ve required millions of US troops to invade both islands and millions of US dollars for weapons, ships, landing craft, supplies etc. The time to invade both islands would also most likely take the war into the next year or two, costing more supplies and more troops. Two drops of the atomic bomb would take less troops lives, money, and shorten the time to surrender down to about 3 days. I believe although the atomic bomb had horrific effects on the human body in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I believe it would’ve cost less lives to us and them.
    The droppings of the bombs would’ve cost less to us, and it would’ve cost less to Japan too. The Japanese were on a plan to arm 30 million civilians to defend the mainland and also use it boasted 1 million troops left. The invasion of Japan couldve left a mark on Japan of up to maybe 5 million civilian casualties and a couple hundred thousand military casualties. I believe a couple thousand civilian casualties compared to the 5 million casualties of the civilians defending their homeland was more moral and the right thing to do no matter how horrible the deaths were.
47. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 8:56 am

    In August of 1945, the United States was locked in a heavy conflict with rivaling Japan. The fighting lasted a moderate time after another rivaling power, Germany, had surrendered. The United States has many allies that fought beside them as they were fighting Japan, the most notable of these allies was the Soviet Union. In the middle of August in 1945, the United States decided to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, the first nuclear weapon used in combat.

    President Truman did not want he United States to be the first country to use nuclear weapons, yet under the circumstances I believe him to be right as to why he did decide to drop the atomic bomb. According to the article, Truman was aware that had he not dropped the atomic bomb, it would have resulted in more American casualties and a longer time at war. It also would have caused a “Japanese holocaust” and further proved deeper into the uneasy conflict between the United States and Japan.

    Another reason I feel that Truman made the right decision was that Japan showed no signs of surrender. Japan was trying to protect Emperor Hirohito, who the Japanese were trying to protect because he would be prosecuted for war crime. The Japanese stated that they had multiple military aid from their people and said that they had 30 million people willing to fight for the Japanese government. Because Truman was intimidated by this, he decided to drop the atomic bomb

    Abby N
48. geoffwickersham (Post author) October 2, 2017 at 9:08 am

    If I was the advisor the President Harry Truman, I would have advised the drop of the Atomic Bomb on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Of course, the Trinity test in New Mexico did not have human test subjects but, the effects of the bomb such as the immense heat fusing the sounds into a new mineral called Trinitite, just showing the immense power of the splitting atomic atom. Another driving force to push the two droppings on the Atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima would be the risk of american lives on Japanese soil to further and eventually end the war. If we dropped these bombs, the hope would be that the casualties of the Japanese would be drastic enough for the surrender and show the militaristic advantages of the American people. Right after the death of president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman was sworn into office. Truman, unknowing, learned about the Manhattan project on April 24, 1945. This gave Truman around four months to accept or decline the dropping of the US weapon of mass destruction on the Japanese and hopefully, end the war. According to the APUSH portrait, In the battle for Okinawa, the Japanese main goal was to make the American death toll as large as possible and the conflict so terrible that the Americans would negotiate peace on Japan’s terms. Of course, the Americans did not know this at the time, but this would be another reason to drop these atomic bombs. These Japanese were ruthless and would stop at nothing for honor. The lives of the American people are the most important aspect of my job as the president’s defense secretary. Also, the war secretary stimson, advised president Truman in dropping bombs to intimidate Joseph Stalin into not expanding post-war communism into the european nations, showing our force of militaristic on the red grip of the communist agenda. I would completely advise president Truman to drop the bombs to lower the risk of american lives against the Japanese regime and intimidate the red spread of communistic agenda in the east.
    Works cited:
    Works cited- Hiroshima
    https://www.hscott.net/analyzing-trinitite-a-radioactive-piece-of-nuclear-history/ (Trinitite)

    Graham H.
49. Gabriel Gamlin October 2, 2017 at 10:20 am

    Gabriel Gamlin
    Mr. Wickersham
    4th Hour
    10/1
    What would you have advised President Truman do under these circumstances especially if you didn’t know what the outcome would be? Why?

    If I were advising the President, I would suggest a more covert and sophisticated operation than the straightaway genocide ball drop. I would have suggested to utilize more trained, potentially Japanese American professional soldiers or captured Japanese on the promise of freedom to infiltrate Eastern Japan and assassinate Hirohito, then announce the responsibility of the act shortly before actually dropping a nuke on the Fuji mountain as a demonstration of the power held by the Nation. Only then if the Japanese don’t relent do we proceed to drop Little Boy and Fatman on their respective cities.
    I would design and recommend this elaborate plan because it detracts a sense of focus from Soviets, and directs any scare tactics toward Japan, the prime enemy. My notes about Okinawa state that about 100,000 Japanese soldiers died during Okinawa as opposed to the 50,000 American Soldiers, and the Japanese were willing to fight to the bitter end for their ideals upheld by their Emperor Hirohito. This tells us that their devotion to their government can be broken if their leader, who was believed to be a deity, is killed, and dominance above him is shown. It wouldn’t be 100% known if this would be a surefire way to cause their nation’s surrender, but it stands that eliminating their leader like destroying gollum’s ring could cause them to default into a non-opposible surrender/loss.
    I think it would be best to choose this course of action because it minimizes the amount of lives lost on both sides while still instilling the psychological horror of the futility of the Japanese Imperials with an attack on their organization. The plan would also, though I am not proud of this, potentially desecrate and marr a cultural icon of the Japanese people forever, Mt Fuji, and thus have another blow to the fiery morale and spirit of the Japanese. As the Japanese are people like Americans and can put 2 and 2 together, they could infer that their efforts, no matter how valiant, no longer honor much of anything as their leader, ideology, and culture have crumbled under the might of the opposition, and that the best option is to cease battle. But just like every plan, this is under the belief that the plan will work.

    Would the emperor be retained as part of the Allies sticking to unconditional surrender terms? Or, as Truman had mentioned, would they soften on this one sticking point in order to end the war earlier to save hundreds of thousands of lives?

    I believe it is a no brainer that the same standards of the unconditional terms, which in concept there are none, would be held toward the actions of Hirohito and the Imperial Japanese Regime. There would not be much non negative regard toward them using the policy in America in the first place, as giving the Japanese any extra benefit or disadvantage when compared to their Axis kin would most definitely become a future area of conflict politically and economically later between all war parties in the future. I seems completely sensible that Japan be held to the same standard of ruling that Germany or Italy would be in regards to the unconditional ruling, right? Well yes, but for reasons probably unique to the Japanese when compared other nations: They’re Japanese. America had made it clear in their own actions and rulings that the Japanese people were not trusted within their own nation. There were various reasons why many did not trust them in the time of war. Many believed that among them would be many anti-American spies or Imperial sympathizers, or that they can be influenced by their old country to internally sabotage the country. Others could have been just run of the mill racists, but one thing is for certain: much like the Jews pre Holocaust, the Japanese had become a question. I mean, it is foolish to believe that those who you have restricted the right to properly live and operate sabotage attempts and contraptions could actually ruin your country in the first place, but that is beside the point. The point is that the American government would definitely not soften the penalties of Japan’s actions any more or less than any other Axis country because they have the fact of being a key player of potential future conflict regarding the outcome of this issue, making it unfavorable to let them off easy, and that racial bias prevents them from being valued at an entirely equal playing field. 50 equals 50 here. Then again, according to the Portrait, about 110, 000 Japanese citizens were put in light concentration camps on the east coast, and American’s didn’t do that for the Germans or Italians. Hmm..

    Work Cited
    Notes, Portrait

    Gabe Gamlin
50. Jana Dinkeloo October 2, 2017 at 10:51 am

    Despite the horrifying outcome of dropping the bomb on Hiroshima, I would have advised President Truman to drop the bomb only if there were no other options, or if it seemed like the Japanese would only surrender if such drastic methods had to be taken.
    According to the notes about The Battle for Okinawa, the Japanese knew that they wouldn’t be able to win, and they had plans to make the fighting so terrible that either they would fight to the last man or the US would have to surrender. This caused to Japanese to fight extremely dirty, sending in countless numbers of suicide missions, with planes dive bombing ships, and using boats and submarines as missles to crash into the American ships. They even attempted to crash an actual ship into another American one, but even though this was thwarted, the casualties could have been devastating if they had succeeded. The Japanese military was prepared and equipped with what they needed to fight to death and showed no hesitation to quickly destroy ranks of their own to get to the Americans. In the Okinawa notes, it says “350,000 Allied prisoners of war may have been executed once news had gotten to the P.O.W camps that the mainland was under attack.” Truman had to keep the interests of the country in mind, and I’m sure he’d rather be remembered as the man who ended the fight with Japan than the man who drew out the fighting by invading Japan and caused more lives than needed to be lost. Dropping the bomb just shortened the time in which Japan surrendered in.
    In the article the Final Act, there’s a quote from Truman himself, stating “It was my responsibility as President to force the Japanese warlords to come to terms as quickly as possible with the minimum loss of lives” (21). Truman knew that invading Japan would cause a large death toll on both the American and Japanese sides. He figured that dropping the bomb would serve as an effective message to the Japanese that said if they didn’t surrender, there’d be more where this came from. What Truman did was gruesome but affective, and he did give a warning. The decision was tough, but dropping by dropping the bomb, Truman was able to end the conflict without the excessive loss of American soldiers.