Was America justified in dropping the atom bomb on Hiroshima in August 1945?
Was America justified in dropping the atom bomb on Hiroshima in August 1945? The Atomic bomb was dropped on 6th August 1945 on Hiroshima and on 9th August on Nagasaki, Japan by the order president of America, Harry S. Truman. These two events are the only use of nuclear weapons in history up to date. In most of Europe war had ended, but in Asia, Japan were still resisting. With the recent surprise attack on Pearl Harbor (December 7, 1941), America was thinking on launching a full scale invasion. However it was said that there would be too many casualties on both sides Was America justified in using the atomic bomb? In my opinion America was justified because America had only attempted to end the war and they gave Japan a chance to surrender before they dropped the Atom bombs known as The Potsdam Declaration. The Potsdam Declaration, issued in July, demanded that Japan surrender by August third or face "prompt and utter destruction." The Japanese did not surrender, and destruction came in the form of the atom bomb. Much of Hiroshima was destroyed by the "Little Boy," with perhaps as many as 90,000 deaths almost instantaneously and estimates of additional deaths by the end of the year from injury, burns, and radiation poison 100,000. The Japanese still did not surrender, even after the Soviet Union entered the war against Japan on August 8 and on August 9 the A-bomb was
What were the major problems facing US forces when fighting the war in Vietnam?
What were the major problems facing US forces when fighting the war in Vietnam? There were a number of problems facing US forces when fighting the war in Vietnam. Perhaps one of the biggest problems that they faced was the fact that the Vietcong were fighting using guerrilla tactics: fighting on a small scale, taking independent, irregular actions. The Vietcong depended on stealth, concealment, and surprise attacks and ambushes. Guerrilla warfare spread as Vietminh soldiers who were trained and armed in the North - the Vietcong, returned to their homes in the south to assassinate, ambush and sabotage. Unlike conventional wars in which the Americans may have fought, the war in Vietnam had no defined front lines. Much of the fighting consisted have hit and run attacks, with the guerrillas striking at government outposts and then retreating into the jungles. Most of the US soldiers were also caught out by booby traps set up by the Vietcong. These ranged from simple holes in the ground to metal spikes covered in poison or human excrement. Booby traps were thought to have accounted for 11 per cent of US deaths in Vietnam and 17 per cent of wounds. After 1965, US involvement in the war escalated rapidly in response to the growing strength of the Vietcong. By 1967, US troop strength in South Vietnam had risen to 389,000 men, but despite their sophisticated weapons, the Americans
Was any one of these reasons more important than the others in Hitler's rise to power?
Was any one of these reasons more important than the others in Hitler's rise to power? All of the reasons on the list were important for Hitler to rise to power in the way that he did. However, even then some reasons are more important than others. Therefore, it is necessary to see which factors were important not only in the way in which he did rise to dictatorship, but also whether Hitler could have risen to power in any other way either with or without some of the factors on the list. Therefore, the Treaty of Versailles was the most important reason on the list to explain why Hitler rose to absolute power in Germany, when he did, how he did, and above all that without it he would have gone into politics but remained a fringe party. The desire in Hitler and others around him was one of the most important reasons why Hitler joined politics. He felt that his country had been betrayed by the 'November Criminals' and that the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh and unfair considering many believed that the German army was still unbeaten. Despite all of this, the Treaty of Versailles was also the most important reason on the list because it was so unfair and because of some of the terms for peace which it stipulated. The main problem was the great loss of German land to other countries and the loss of Germany's industrial heartlands in addition to the great level of reparations.
Why did the Germans hate the treaty of Versailles?
Why did the Germans hate the treaty of Versailles? Germans hated the Treaty of Versailles because they did not understand they were responsible for starting the war neither they felt as they had lost. Another reason that the German hated the treaty was the terms of the treaty, which created political and economic problems. This includes territorial restriction on Germany, military Restrictions on Germany, territorial losses, reparations, League of Nations etc. As a result, a piece of land was split in centre of Germany for Poland to have a coastline, which weaken Germany from East Prussia (East Prussia had been a source of great revenue and the political elite for Germany). Another territorial restriction on Germany that the Germans did not expect was that the Saar coal fields were to be given to France for fifteen years. This was a great source of coal for the Germans and losing it meant that the Germans didn't have a supply of coal and raw materials for its industries. There are many more reasons that the Germans hated the treaty of Versailles. When the treaty was announced on the 7th May 1919, Germans were horrified. One of the reasons why they were horrified was Germany had been blamed unfairly for starting the war. However, the allies could blame Bosnia for killing Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, in Sarajevo. Germany was not allowed to
What problem did Russia face after the1905 Revolution? How effective was Nicholas II in dealing with these problems?
What problem did Russia face after the1905 Revolution? How effective was Nicholas II in dealing with these problems? In January 1905, there was a revolutionary tide in Russia. We called this revolution as 1905 Revolution mainly caused by the defeat of Russo-Japanese War in September and the Bloody Sunday Incident in January. In the country, workers, peasants and merchants were holding demonstrations in order to express their discontent to the Czarist government. Although Nicholas II issued the October Manifesto to pacify the discontent of people temporarily, he still had to face some problems after the 1905 Revolution. To regain the support from people, he needed to carry out the reforms in the October Manifesto. His reform included different aspect, such as political aspect, social aspect and economic aspect. He also appointed Peter Stolypin as the prime minister to stabilize the country. Nicholas II had tried his best to regain people's support and stop the revolution tide through the reforms after the 905 Revolution. Poor livelihood, no franchise of general Russians and the insult of Russo-Japanese War all these were reasons to cause the 1905 Revolution. The Bloody Sunday Incident was an immediately cause to lead the outbreak of 1905 Revo lution. After the 1905 Revolution, the Czar still had to face the above problems. IN order to prolong his rule, he was
To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles fair to Germany?
To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles fair to Germany? The Treaty of Versailles was created to cripple Germany so that they could not start another war. One side of the argument is that the Treaty was extremely unfair to Germany, as it took away some of her most valuable assets and fuelled nationalism. However, the other side of the argument is that as Germany caused a lot of damage, she deserved to be punished and prevented from stirring up more trouble. The military clause was the harshest and most damaging clause, and was greatly disapproved of by Germany. The size and power of the German army was one of her greatest assets. By restricting her to an army of only 100,000 volunteers, the Treaty left her defenceless and vulnerable. For such a large country, an army of 100,000 men was just big enough to keep order within Germany, but was not large enough to defend Germany from other invading powers. The army was a symbol of German pride and an important political source of nationalism. Having almost half of it taken away ruined Germany's Great Power status, and made her an easy target for other countries. In addition, the Rhineland became a demilitarised zone, meaning that Germany was open to attack by France. On the other hand, some groups believe that the military clause was fair, as it punished Germany as well as giving the smaller countries of Europe a chance to
What were the consequences of the 1916 Easter rising?
What were the consequences of the 1916 Easter rising? In this essay I will outline the consequences of the 1916 Easter rising all short term long term and immediate. The rising was a symptom of the failure of Home Rule. This led to increased support for militant nationalism. Sinn Fein gained a rise in support. The Dail Eireann was set up and the war of independence was an indirect consequence to the rising. The British government proposed the 26 county free state and it was accepted. There became a nationalist minority in Ulster. The Easter rising left a legacy of anti British feeling. This encouraged generations to continue the fight against British occupation. The big immediate consequence of the Easter rising was the execution of the leaders. This had a huge impact in Ireland. Within four days of the rising Thomas Clarke, Padraig Pearse and Thomas Mc Donagh were executed by firing squad on May the third. Then up to May the twelfth a further twelve leaders were shot including James Connolly. The last rebel to be executed was Roger Casement by hanging on August the third. Overall seventy-five were sentenced to death, and two thousand to imprisonment. This turned public opinion in Ireland against the British government. This created a new wave of anti-British feeling. Nationalist opinion in Ireland was radically changing. Militant Nationalists began to attract sympathy.
Was The Ending of White Minority Rule Achieved Only by Nelson Mandela?
Was The Ending of White Minority Rule Achieved Only by Nelson Mandela? In this essay, I will be seeing if I agree or not with the statement 'the ending of white minority rule was achieved only because of Nelson Mandela', by looking at lots of different factors. Mandela was a strong activist against apartheid and was imprisoned for 27 years because of this, in spite of becoming the first black South African President in 1994 until 1999. Even though he is a crucial part to the ending of apartheid, other people are also important, so I will be looking at them too. Apartheid was a law, introduced by Doctor Malan and the National party, which he was the head of, which legally segregated whites and non-whites almost completely from 1948 to 1994. His idea started when he was deeply affected at the sight of Afrikaan children playing with black children, and thought they should be separated. One example of the separations he put in place was the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949), which banned couples of different races marrying. This would have also split up many couples and families who were already together just based on their ethnicity. Nelson Mandela, born 1918, was a South African black man who studied law and fought against apartheid. Earlier in his life, Mandela protested against segregation using peaceful methods. For example, he became a 'volunteer in chief' for
Does General Haig deserve the title Butcher of the Somme?
Does General Haig deserve the title 'Butcher of the Somme'? In this essay I will discus whether General Haig deserves to be remembered as 'the butcher of the Somme'. General Haig's title of 'the butcher of the Somme' originated after the First World War, when, due to large number of casualties Britain suffered from the war and mostly the Somme. The people of Britain wanted someone to blame. This was a coping mechanism in which people could deal with the loss of the 'lost generation'. Arguably Haig does deserve his nickname. This is because Haig sent thousands of men to their deaths continuously after his war efforts seemed not to be working. For instance 60,000 soldiers died in the first day alone in the battle of the Somme. The reason that so many people died was that Haig ordered his men to walk across no-mans land. They were easy targets for the German machine guns. However Haig assisted Britain in winning the war and although he did so with tremendous loss of life, these men did not die pointlessly. They died to protect their families and everyone else on the home front, and they died to prevent Britain from becoming a German Nation. Haig was also faced with an almost impossible task of winning the war in the quickest means possible. Haig was under constant pressure from the government to have a large victory to boost morale. This factor as well as the fact that
WHICH ALLIANCE SYSTEM WAS THE STRONGEST IN 1914
WHICH ALLIANCE SYSTEM WAS THE STRONGEST IN 1914? In 1914, the six most powerful countries in Europe became two opposing alliances. The Central Powers (Triple alliance) consisted of a contracted pact between Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy in 1882, of which was followed, 25 years later, by the Triple Entente pact between Britain, France and Russia. Each country was notorious for their advanced and mass military, and the initial Central Powers alliance had installed sufficient fear and suspicion to form an Entente. Many argue there is certain evidence that The Central Powers alliance was stronger than the Triple Entente. In 1870, Germany gain hold of the flourishing Alsace-Lorraine industrial area in France, so that in 1914 German industry was the 2nd most successful in the world to U.S.A: we can therefore assume that Germany found this economically gratifying as well as having access to advanced technological machinery. As a whole, The Central Power's soldiers in army count of 3.76 million (approx. 60% from Germany) exceeded that of the T.E's (Triple Entente) 3.25 million- securing victory for The Central Powers on that front. Furthermore, Germany, itself, had an impressive amount of warships (85 and 23 submarines) in naval rivalry to Britain (122 warships and 64 submarines) proving a harsh contender with a vast and dynamic military. From a defence view, the geographical
