Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
AP U.S History
January 3, 2011
B. During World War II more than 40 million people were killed, less than 200,000 of them by
the two atomic bombs. Yet, the use of the bomb has become one of the most controversial
issues of all time. Do you believe the method of killing people matters and is the atomic
bomb a type of weapon that should never be used? Explain your reasoning .
The Second World War was, as its name indicates, a global, armed conflict that lasted
from 1939 to 1945. The two sides of the war included the Axis Powers, and the Allies. The Axis
powers mainly included Germany, Italy, and Japan . These countries became allies after signing
the Tripartite Pact. The Allies consisted mainly of the U.S, Britain, and the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (these three countries were known as “The Big Three”) . World War II was
very deadly, resulting in more than 40 million deaths. This war caused great controversy in
issues that dealt with specific method of killing people. One great controversy includes
I believe the method of killing matters to some extent, but if things get out of hand, a
point has to be made, by whatever means necessary. I think the method of killing does matter if
the cause for the killing is unnecessary. Why should people be tortured for something they
don’t even deserve? One great example of this deals with the holocaust . Millions of innocent
people died during the holocaust. Not only was this genocide completely wrong, but the
methods used in killing these people was cruel. When presented with situations like these, the
Sometimes, we are presented with situations, where the method of killing people does
not matter. These situations usually appear when the enemy is so desperate to win, and has so
much pride, that they’d rather not surrender. These situations call for unfortunate, but in my
opinion, needed means of warfare. Japan obviously wouldn’t surrender and tried to hold up as
much as they could; they probably thought they would get better negotiations if they didn’t
give up. To do this, Japan literally lost any regard for the citizens of their country, and tried to
make them “a part of the war”. They were prepared to do anything they would have to do in
order to turn their island into some kind of fortress. They were prepared to send very young
people into the military and National Guard. This philosophy of warfare strikes most of us
westerners as obscene; however to the Japanese it was honor . The Japanese didn’t believe in
surrender, they followed a code that made each soldier fight to the death, and fight while
expecting death. This attitude can be traced back into Japan’s old culture. During that time,
there was a warrior class called the Samurai, they lived by a code called “Bushido” which
basically means to honor the emperor at all costs, and to fight to the death . This attitude,
combined with the hopes of better negotiations motivated the Japanese to continue to fight .
However, when new technologies produced the atomic bomb, the Japanese’s old traditions
After witnessing the devastating effect of the bomb, they were forced to give in . This
episode called for the using of the bomb, and this cruel, but needed method of killing . This
method was needed since it exemplified to the Japanese that they would have to surrender .
That is important because it helps end the war. Also, the numbers indicate, in the Pacific
Theater, that about 106,000 American soldiers were killed, and about 248,000 were wounded
and missing, and about 1.5 million Japanese were killed out of the 9 million they had. So if we
were to invade Japan, many more American and Japanese soldiers would die . The bomb only
had to kill about 200,000 for the war to stop. Also it was inevitable for Hiroshima and Nagasaki
to not be attacked since they were very industrial, contained the Armies Headquarters .
Nagasaki was also important due to its role in being Southern Japan’s largest sea port . One
arguing against the using of the bomb, in my opinion, would be very foolish. If the bomb was
not used, and many American soldiers died fighting to get Japan to surrender, the American
people would surely be mad. Would not you be mad if your relative died fighting for the war,
when there was a new weapon that could have done the task and saved many lives? Also if the
invasions on these cities were going to happen unconditionally, we might as well, for the sake
of convenience, and for the sake of saving lives, use the bombs. This reason, in my opinion,
justifies the using of the bombs. There were also other reasons that one, especially one living
by the Pacific Coast, can argue. One of these reasons includes the uncalled for attack on Pearl
As you can clearly see, President Truman’s decision was a controversial one,
nonetheless, a wise one. He was forced to use these methods of killing since they definitely
prove to be more “right” on the greater scale. Everything supports the using of the bombs; we
save lives, save time, and end the war. The Atomic bomb should definitely be considered an
option during war especially if the situation calls for it. And for such reasons, I would rather be
presented with the case of moaning "moralists" after the job has been done, rather than hear
the cries of the unborn American babies mourning hopelessly for their fallen fathers .