0
What is often cited as a reson for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan?
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
To bring the war to an end more quickly and to avoid the loss of life and destruction of infrastructure that would be incurred in an invasion of the Japanese home islands. That's a good answer but maybe there were less obvious reasons- perhaps having developed a new, major weapon there was a temptation to try it out. Dropping one might be justified by military hardliners but the second bomb needs another set of reasons.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is cited by many as the real reason for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan?
What we have all learned in US Schools:Japan's Samurai code meant you died before surrender. There was a bloodbath defeating the Japanese on Iwo Jima and Okinawa. If the Allies had to invade Japan, countless people would have died, civilians and military alike. The USA dropped two atomic bombs and Japan surrendered. It was the dropping of atomic bombs or invasion of Japan. Dropping the atomic bombs killed far less people and brought the war to a quick end and saved many lives: Allied and Japanese.The bombs served to intimidate the Soviet Union.The usual reason given for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is to save lives.The Japanese armed forces had fought hard to oppose American forces retaking the Pacific islands. If the Allied armies had invaded Japan this would have resulted in a long campaign with huge casualties.Operation Downfall would have led to the deaths of millions of Japanese civilians and hundreds of thousands of allied casualties. Who could say when they would ever stop fighting? Even with the 2 bombings, the Japanese civilians were not fearful or impressed by it at all. The firebombings of Tokyo had killed more, and it didnt negatively impact Japanese moral, and neither did the atomic bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. We were lucky that Hirohito decided that he would use the excuse of the A bomb to surrender to the US's power without losing face. If not for that, what could have prevented the army from dissapearing into the mountains and fighting for against us for decadeso come? Also, we had a superweapon, and we could use this opportunity to demonstrate our power, in particular to what we knew would be the next enemy, the USSR.The idea was that a demonstration of the destructive power of nuclear bombs would force the Japanese emperor to sue for peace, thus ending the war quickly.They brought the quickest possible end to the war.They prevented massive U.S. casualties. They brought the quickest possible end to the war.But historians say the REAL reason was:It was a show of force to the Soviet Union. The bombs served to intimidate the Soviet Union.
Was the second bombing on Nagasaki justified?
It's up to personal opinion. Yes if you believe that ending the war then and there was a wise decision. The atomic bombs meant allied troops didn't need to invade mainland Japan and engage in a possibly prolonged struggle on the ground. No if you believe that the radiation and deaths were worth ending the war. You can do some rational calculations: take the number of lives lost to the atomic bombs, and then stack that up against the possible lives lost on a ground campaign. But you also have to take into account radiation, and the cities demolished. flip a coin. One of the points you need to consider is that Japan in fact had it's own atomic bomb project and Allied intelligence from several sources indicated by 1945 that Japan was close to developing it's own nuclear weapons. These sources include a Japanese serviceman captured in the philippines cited in a USN Intelligence report dated June 15,1945 and a British Intelligence report of march 1944 citing interrogation of the Chief Engineer from Vermork heavy water plant who had intimate knowledge of Japan's equivalent plant at Konan in Korea. Added to this were several frank exchanges in MAGIC decrypts between General Kawashima and the Japanese embassy in Berlin during 1943.
What were two reasons cited by Knowles to explain industrialization in England?
what are two reasons knowles cited to explain industrialization in england
Which are rights mentioned early in the Declaration of Independence?
One of the rights cited in the Declaration of Independence was the right to have the colonies represented in government. They also cited life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
What were the founding fathers most cited works?
According to The Online Library of Liberty's website, the following 10 were cited the most, from most cited to least. St. Paul, Montesquieu, Sir William Blackstone, John Locke, David Home, Plutarch, Cesare Beccaria, John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, Delolme, and Samuel Pufendorf. The full list of 36 can be found at their article "Founder Fathers' Library".
What is cited by many as the real reason for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan?
What we have all learned in US Schools:Japan's Samurai code meant you died before surrender. There was a bloodbath defeating the Japanese on Iwo Jima and Okinawa. If the Allies had to invade Japan, countless people would have died, civilians and military alike. The USA dropped two atomic bombs and Japan surrendered. It was the dropping of atomic bombs or invasion of Japan. Dropping the atomic bombs killed far less people and brought the war to a quick end and saved many lives: Allied and Japanese.The bombs served to intimidate the Soviet Union.The usual reason given for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is to save lives.The Japanese armed forces had fought hard to oppose American forces retaking the Pacific islands. If the Allied armies had invaded Japan this would have resulted in a long campaign with huge casualties.Operation Downfall would have led to the deaths of millions of Japanese civilians and hundreds of thousands of allied casualties. Who could say when they would ever stop fighting? Even with the 2 bombings, the Japanese civilians were not fearful or impressed by it at all. The firebombings of Tokyo had killed more, and it didnt negatively impact Japanese moral, and neither did the atomic bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. We were lucky that Hirohito decided that he would use the excuse of the A bomb to surrender to the US's power without losing face. If not for that, what could have prevented the army from dissapearing into the mountains and fighting for against us for decadeso come? Also, we had a superweapon, and we could use this opportunity to demonstrate our power, in particular to what we knew would be the next enemy, the USSR.The idea was that a demonstration of the destructive power of nuclear bombs would force the Japanese emperor to sue for peace, thus ending the war quickly.They brought the quickest possible end to the war.They prevented massive U.S. casualties. They brought the quickest possible end to the war.But historians say the REAL reason was:It was a show of force to the Soviet Union. The bombs served to intimidate the Soviet Union.
Did Truman regret dropping the bomb?
Actually FDR made the decision to drop the atomic bomb prior to his death, Truman did not even know of the atomic bomb at the time this decision was made. When he was informed of the atomic bomb after FDR's death he only decided to continue all of FDR's decisions and policies without change. The Army Air Forces implemented FDR's decision in an order to drop the bombs "as soon as they became available".Truman's only actual decision on the use of the atomic bomb was to stop dropping them after the Japanese indicated their willingness to surrender on August 14.Truman continued his policy against the further use of atomic bombs by firing General MacArthur as soon as he proposed their use during the Korean War and replacing him with General Ridgway.
Did John Dalton discover the Atomic Theory?
Dalton is credited for his expanding and formulating the modern atomic theory, but it was Jouseph Louis Proust and Antoine Lavoisier who are cited as initially discovering it.
Was the second bombing on Nagasaki justified?
It's up to personal opinion. Yes if you believe that ending the war then and there was a wise decision. The atomic bombs meant allied troops didn't need to invade mainland Japan and engage in a possibly prolonged struggle on the ground. No if you believe that the radiation and deaths were worth ending the war. You can do some rational calculations: take the number of lives lost to the atomic bombs, and then stack that up against the possible lives lost on a ground campaign. But you also have to take into account radiation, and the cities demolished. flip a coin. One of the points you need to consider is that Japan in fact had it's own atomic bomb project and Allied intelligence from several sources indicated by 1945 that Japan was close to developing it's own nuclear weapons. These sources include a Japanese serviceman captured in the philippines cited in a USN Intelligence report dated June 15,1945 and a British Intelligence report of march 1944 citing interrogation of the Chief Engineer from Vermork heavy water plant who had intimate knowledge of Japan's equivalent plant at Konan in Korea. Added to this were several frank exchanges in MAGIC decrypts between General Kawashima and the Japanese embassy in Berlin during 1943.
Do you use works sited or cited?
works cited
What is a sentence for cited?
You didn't say which meaning you wanted to use. If you mean cited as in quoted a source for a report, you could say "I cited the magazine article." If you mean cited as in to summon before a court, you might say "He was cited for drunk driving. If you mean cited as in recognized for superior military service, you could say "The soldier was cited for bravery."
What is the purpose of the term as cited in?
As cited in means as stated in the referenced source.
What is the definition of the word cited?
The definition of the word cited is quote as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement. Another definition for the word cited is mention as an example.
Why do papers need both parenthetical citations and a 'works cited' page?
Parenthetical citations tell the readers where the information was found. They give the readers an entry into the works cited page. The works cited page includes all the referenced sources that were cited.
What are cited?
ChinA
Does Common Knowledge in a public domain need to be cited?
Common knowledge information does not need to be cited.
When was The Egg-Cited Rooster created?
The Egg-Cited Rooster was created on 1952-10-04.
