“We thought we would be able to defeat the Americans
on their first landing attack. But if the Americans launched a
second or third attack, first our food supply would run out,
then our weapons. The Americans could have won without
using atomic bombs.”
This source, from an interview with the secretary to the Japanese War Minister in 1963 confirms that the Atomic bomb was in fact unnecessary.
The interview took place nearly twenty years after the bomb was dropped so the overall knowledge and understanding of why the nuclear weapon was used would have been a great deal more developed and complex than when the event originally took place.
“My god, what have we done?”
This was the initial reaction of Captain R. Lewis, a pilot of the Enola Gay after dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. This source is extremely unreliable because of the aftershock of seeing the effect of the first Atom bomb on an occupied city. The realisation of what he had just done would have left the pilot feeling dreadful guilt, shame and remorse. This source is therefore very biased and unreliable.
“Today people who were not even born in
August 1945 die and suffer from the poison
Let loose that day.”
This source is entirely reliable as evidence of the effect of the atomic bomb, however it shows no understanding whatsoever to why the weapon was used against Japan and so this source, like many others is of no use.
Despite the unpleasant after effects of the Atomic bomb, I believe it was necessary to end an appalling war.
It is clear from the many legitimate sources that if not for the Atomic bomb Japan would not have surrendered, whatever the price.
“ I expect the 100 million people of the glorious Empire (Japan)
to join themselves in a shield to protect the Emperor and the
Imperial land from the invader.”
This source, selected from a speech made by the Japanese Prime Minister Suzuki in 1945 verifies that Japan would not admit defeat, and they would protect their beloved Emperor until the end. The Atomic bomb was the ultimate solution and the only answer.
“A demonstration of the bomb might best be made
on the desert or on a barren island. Japan could then
be asked to surrender.”
This document from American nuclear scientists to the government in June 1945 is an extremely acceptable source. One of the main arguments against the use of the Atomic bomb was the accusation that its purpose was for scientific research. Ultimately confirmed incorrect, the justification for using the Nuclear weapon to assertively end the war seems effortlessly tolerable.
The Japanese were warned adequately but would not surrender. They knew America had no choice.
“The burning of Tokyo probably killed more people
and in a more frightening way, than the two atom bombs.”
The Atomic Bomb was not as devastatingly appalling as it is presently made out to be. As the above source indicates, there have been much worse events than this particular Nuclear weapon caused in history.
The Atomic bomb was effective and ended the war.
It almost certainly saved millions of American and Japanese lives and it prevented the brewing conflict between America and Russia.
It is astonishingly difficult to make a clear judgement on whether the bomb was essential to ending the war. There are many convincing documents that could divert fixed opinions and challenge many historians on what they believe.
I judge that opinion will always be divided on this subject as there is never enough evidence for a clear image to be formed. There are too many unreliable sources for anyone to make a final decision on the matter, but the Atomic bomb was successful in what it was aimed to do, ending World War two.
