When I was first exposed to the atomic bomb debate, my immediate response was that it should not have been dropped and that it was completely unnecessary and awful. However, after reading the three articles on edmodo, my opinion has changed somewhat.
It is easy for us, 72 years later, to say that it was unnecessary and too much. But I think it is understandable that they wanted to end the war as soon as possible with the fewest American casualties. While of course that is selfish, when is war not selfish? After enduring the war for several years and having constant fear and hard work, I can see why they were very desperate. Another interesting point one of the articles made is that it helped prevent the Cold War from becoming a real war because it showed the true damage of the bomb. While it is impossible to know if that is true or not, it is a rational prediction.
I think rationally, and for the amount that they had gone through, the bomb was (somewhat) justified. They did not have to drop two bombs, they could have waited for the Russian attack on August 9, only three days after, or done a naval blockade. However, I still stand that the bomb was not morally justified. But morals don't come first in war.
No comments:
Post a Comment