Cassidy 1

Noa Cassidy
Nathan Jones
HIST-1700
5 April. 2015
The debate I chose to analyze is the debate concerning wether or not it was necessary to
drop the atomic bomb on Japan. The debate discussed the view points of two individuals,
Professor of American History, Robert James Maddox; and Professor of American History,
Tsuyoshi Hasegawa. First I would like to address Robert James Maddox's argument on why he
feels that the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan was necessary.
Marshall brings to the table that the dropping of the atomic bomb was not the initial
desired action and that they had considered other alternatives. According to Marshall, Truman
and other officials claimed that the bombs caused japan to surrender, and that by doing so they
avoided a bloody invasion. (Maddox, p. 236) Looking at previous invasions like Okinawa, it
showed what an invasion of the homeland would look like, and that did not look good. According
to Maddox the battle of Okinawa proved that the Japanese were prepared to fight to the bitter end.
They had inflicted 50,000 casualties on the invaders, many resulting from the first large scale
Kamikazes. (Maddox, p. 237) There was even intelligence from Tokyo that Japan was in no way
ready to surrender.
Maddox goes on to say that the president was aware of the bloody outcome of Okinawa
and and even makes the point that Truman states in his personal Journal that I have to decide
Japanese strategy-shall we invade Japan proper or shall we bomb and blockade? That is my
hardest decision to date. But I'll make it when I have all the facts. (Maddox, p. 237) Towards the
end of his argument Maddox brings up the point that Japan gave us no choice, but to drop the

Cassidy 2
atomic bomb once they tried to make peace treaties with Russia and Switzerland behind the
Untied States back, which was only discovered by intercepting correspondence. Towards the end
of his argument Maddox makes the point of arguing that Available evidence points to the
conclusion that he acted for the reason he said he did: to end a bloody war that would have
become far bloodier had invasion proved necessary. ( Maddox, p. 244)
In contrast to Maddox's Argument, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa view is much different.
Hasegawa argues that the entire thing was to nothing more then a race between Truman and
Stalin to see who could get Japan to surrender first. He also makes a point in implying that
Truman should have accepted a procession regarding the Ultimatum and that he was the only one
opposed to the idea. He also makes a point in saying that one of the reasons that Truman most
likely was opposed to the treaty was to do nothing more then to save face. And that he was
concerned with how the public would react to a policy of appeasement. (Hasegawa, p. 246)
Hasegawa goes on to argue that Truman's decision to drop the atomic bomb was nothing
more then his own deep conviction that America should avenge the humiliation of Pearl Harbor.
(Hasegawa, p. 246) He also clams that Truman knew the Japanese would refuse to surrender and
that he needed them to refuse for the justification of dropping the atomic bomb and argues that
Truman was blinded by this. Despite their destructive power, the atomic bombs were not sufficient
to change the direction of Japanese diplomacy. The Soviet invasion was. (Hasegawa, p. 251) he
also argues that if it were not for the soviets the Japanese would have continued to fight until more
and more atomic bombs would have been dropped by the United Stats. In the end Hasegawa's
main argument is that Truman did not exhaust all possibilities to end the war, and that he in a way
was blinded by alternative motives, which lead to him making the unnecessary decision to drop
the atomic bombs on Japan.

Cassidy 3
After reading both Maddox and Hasegawa arguments, I feel that both of them make really
good points and had evidence to back up their clams. With that said I feel that Maddox's argument
that dropping the bomb was necessary to be the most persuasive. In other words I like the way
Maddox used factual evidence and actual occurrence to defend his argument, for example when he
Mentioned an entry from Truman's personal journal where he wrote the following I have to
decide Japanese strategy-shall we invade Japan proper or shall we bomb and blockade? That is my
Hardest decision to date. But I'll make it when I have all the facts. (Maddox, p. 237) I feel that by
using evidence like this gives Maddox a sense of credibility, in which Hasegawa does not. another
example of this is his use of statistics and dates and times of events. For example In his memoirs
Truman claimed that using atomic bombs prevented an invasion that would have cost 500,000
American lives. (Maddox, p.238) With the use of evidence like this, I feel Maddox makes a more
persuasive argument.
Looking at Hasegawa's argument that the dropping the atomic bomb was unnecessary, I
feel that all though he uses great evidence, a lot of his arguments use speculation to support it
rather then facts. For example, when Hasegawa posed questions like What if truman had invited
Stalin to sign the Potsdam proclamation and included the promise to allow the Japanese to
maintain a constitutional monarchy? (Hasegawa, p. 247) by posing questions like this, although
affective, I feel that Hasegawa relied on statements like these too much to support his argument.
Another example is when Hasegawa asks the question, Would japan have surrendered before
November 1 on the basis of soviet entry alone, without the atomic bomb? (Hasegawa, p.249)
The one thing that I do find persuasive out of all the points that Hasegawa makes is when
he makes the point that Until his death , Truman continually came back to this question and
repeatedly justified his decision, inventing a fiction that he himself later came to believe

Cassidy 4
( Hasegawa, p. 252) He goes on to say that fact that Truman spoke so often about his justification
of dropping the Bomb proves that his decision haunted him. (Hasegawa, p. 252) I feel that
Hasegawa makes a great point here, but I dont feel that it is a strong enough point to convince
prove his argument. Another great point Hasegawa makes is that the myth that Droping the
bomb's on Japan saved American and Japanese solders can not be supported by historical facts. He
goes on to say that Evidence makes clear that there were alternatives to the use of the use of the
bomb, alternatives that the Truman administration for reasons of its own declined to pursue.
Hasegawa, p. 251) Although Hasegawa makes some great points here theres not enough to
convince me that America was in the wrong. I feel strongly that Hasegawa is quick to place all the
blame on the Truman administration and easy to dismiss the possibility that Japan brought the
bombs on themselves, by not giving the united states a choice to pursue other plans of action and
in many ways forcing the Truman administration to eventually making the decsion to drop the
atomic bomb on Japan.
In conclusion I feel that although both Maddox and Hasegawa make great arguments,
Maddox argument is more persuasive. I feel the way Maddox uses facts and real events as
evidence to back his argument, which gives him a greater since of credibility then Hasegawa.
Maddox simply presents his argument in away that speaks more truths then assumptions. I also
agree with Maddox that the Truman did what he had to do and that quote That there is not an
easy, bloodless way to victory in war. (Maddox, p. 238) and that Truman did what he needed to
do to end the war and prevent more bloodshed on both sides.

Cassidy 5

Cassidy 6

Cassidy 7

Potts, Richard, and Angela Belden. "Parental Guidance: A Content Analysis Of

MPAA Motion Picture Rating Justifications 19932005." Current Psychology 28.4
(2009): 266-283. Academic Search Premier. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.