See the article Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on Wikipedia for a background on this assigned posting.
The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been the subject for extensive academic discourse since August of 1945. Both sides of the debate hold have compelling arguments and it seems as if the view of the event will always remain in a moral and logical gray area.
Arguments approving of the Bombing
The arguments for the bombing are primarily based on the idea that the bombings were the primary cause for Japan’s surrender.
Preferable to Invasion
The first argument presented in the article is that the bombings were preferable to an invasion. An invasion force would have been met with a particularly defensive Japan. On the Japanese side, millions of casualties (both military and civilian) were expected. Japan had made preparations to resist a major invasion by extending draft requirements to allow for an additional 28 million troops. If an invasion took place, Japan also planned to execute all Allied PoWs.
Saved lives
The second argument is not specific to the bombing, but rather the swift end to the war that they provided. Without a prompt Japanese surrender, it had been determined that there would be a continuous loss of life in China and throughout the Pacific. The total numbers were calculated at around 250,000 dead each month that the war continued.
“Total War”
Members of the US Military argued that Japan was engaging in “total war” – forcing its citizens, including women and children, to work and fight its enemies (the National Mobilization Law, 国家総動員法). Attacking a major port city was a “key offensive decision” by the US under these circumstances. Additionally, it was argued that, at the time, there were no laws or treaties declaring any protections for civilians during wartime.
Refusal to Surrender
To my knowledge, this is the primary argument for the bombing in retrospect. It has long been argued that the Japanese government – primarily, its military leaders – refused to surrender to the United States. The concept of “bushido” is often considered the source for this view of surrender as dishonorable. Even after the bombings, many of the conservative leaders in Japan still refused to accept the terms of their surrender.
Arguments against the Bombing
War Crimes
Many argue that the bombings were war crimes because they targeted cities with civilian populations rather than military installations. Even Albert Einstein is noted for having this view, and a quote by Leo Szilard explicitly states his view on the matter. Most of the scientists responsible for creating the atomic bombs were against their use.
State Terrorism
Others go further to argue that the bombings were state terrorism. This argument links the forced surrender of the Japanese to the mass murder of their civilians and claims that the use of civilian casualties to force a surrender is an act of terrorism. A number of historians and scholars are quoted.
Militarily Unnecessary
Another argument in the article is that the bombings were “militarily unnecessary”. Many in the US Military considered the Japanese army to already have been defeated. Japan was considering surrender, though with much higher conditions than those that the United States wanted. Admiral Nimitz is quoted as saying, after the fact, that the atomic bombs “played no decisive part” in the defeat of Japan.
Some of the arguments aren’t well developed in the article. There is limited support for the bombings being out-right immoral, but it is more a matter of the article being a collection of quotes rather than an analysis of either side. The belief that the Japanese were dehumanized by the American government is also presented with quotations but limited analysis. There is an extensive debate on whether the bombings were significant in forcing the Japanese surrender, especially with Russia’s entry into the Pacific war. Many researchers and scholars believe that it may have been Russia’s entry that brought the Japanese to surrender, rather than the aftermath of the atomic bombings.
0 Comments.