The Atomic Bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Essay Example

?(Word count 022 – excluding bibliography) Atomic Bombing Introduction Atomic bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II is a controversial issue. There are some critics who are not in favor of and even condemn such act. For them, it was not the appropriate move to end the war between the United States and Japan in 1945. There were at most 200,000 number of Japanese civilians who were reported to die from that nuclear bombing in two particular places in Japan, Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, respectively. According to these critics, the death of civilians in the Second World War could remarkably point out the inhumane approach involved with that bombing together with other disadvantages.1 It played an elemental role in even inspiring more the Soviet-American Cold War right after World War II.2 Furthermore, critics also pointed out that the said bombing was barbaric3. This is in lieu of other known brutal activities such as terrorism in contemporary time which most often led to mass annihilation. Simply, such undertaking only called attention to the need to emphasize the value of human life. In this case, it was the lives of civilians who were at risk and not supposed to be treated in a way that everything should be simply enacted at their expense. On the contrary, others believe that such bombing was actually able to save more than 200,000 lives as it was the necessary move to put an end to the US-Japan war and bring World War II to its closure.4 In other words, if not only because of that bombing, the casualties of war in Japan and from the US, most particularly civilians were noted to increase as prolong exposure to war would eventually lead to series of attacks that would threaten their lives at some certain level. On these two arguments, it is important to deliberate whether atomic bombings that consecutively occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were indeed atypical ways to put an end to US-Japan war and World War II. In line with this, it is important to find out whether the US’s decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the best course of action after all. Atomic bombing The consequences of nuclear warfare were already foreseen, and as a matter of fact, at the top of its official voice that was publicly aired, in the midst of the heated issue of race for nuclear armaments the US abhorred potential destructions that may be brought by nuclear bombing to people, country and the entire world.5 Despite of this, the US still remained to secretly initiate scientific researches that would potentially pave the way for better understanding of the atomic bombs. Its actual bombing using this nuclear weapon in Japan had eventually proven to help it win its war with this country. However, it is evident that it simply orchestrated a move that was a bit contradictory to its personal public statement in line with its stand on nuclear warfare and even on the rudimentary issue on the race for nuclear armaments with Soviet Union and other parts of the world. At this point, it is important to assess such secrecy involved associated with the creation of atomic bombs prior to the actual consecutive bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Secrets laboratory studies pertaining to atomic bombs in one way or another could be a form of betrayal of public trust on the part of the US. However, such secrecy could be potentially viewed as a significant stepping stone in order to achieve political advantage. Thus, it could be remarkably observed that the desire of the US to reach its competitive edge over the other seems bred in the bone. The point of keeping the whole thing about atomic bomb exploration secret from the world connotes there must be something the US devised to achieve in the future. In fact, this plan was eventually disclosed when Japan was taken by surprise and shuddered at the possibility that the US eventually created nuclear armaments, enough to destroy the entire world. The whole point is now clear, and there were two possible things that the US simply wanted to share with the world. The first point was to simply show that it has at its hand the most powerful weapon that the world could ever have, at least at that moment in history. With such weapon, there was a surge on the US’s influence, which eventually had deliberate impacts on its political power in the world. Then due to such power, it effectively seized the US-Japan war and even World War II. Although it only strengthened the Soviet-American cold war and the race for nuclear armaments, the point of instigating atomic bombs in the midst of chaotic times in history had eventually called the world’s attention and placed everyone in a stand still. It was such a great opportunity to effectively call everyone’s attention because man by nature is afraid to loss his life. The threats posed by atomic bombs in the world were just enough to convey this basic point. After understanding the potential risks associated with atomic bombing subsequent to its implementation in Japan, countries having nuclear weapons understood that these armaments should not be primary means to solve conflict. In fact, although many Americans agreed regarding the atomic bombing in Japan, this did not mean it was a unanimous decision after all based on the conducted poll regarding this matter.6 As stated earlier, this was due to some important issues associated with such move emphasized by its critics, which primarily have their basic point on the preservation of life. As Niccolo Machiavelli points out at the top of his political know-how, the end could justify the means, his political principle was proven exact in the case of US-Japan war. Furthermore, from the point of view of utilitarian principle, what the US did was in fact for the greatest good of the majority. Conclusion The atomic bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was so far the best course of action by the US as it eventually justified it points and remarkably explicated the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Bibliography Stoler, Mark A., and Melanie S. Gustafson. Major problems in the history of World War II: documents and essays. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2003. Read More