Why did the US use the Atom Bomb on Japan during WWII?

Question

I'm doing this project on the bombing on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I need a basic explanation on why we bombed those towns.

Answer 1

To end the war. There is some conjecture as to whether or not the dropping of the two bombs actually saved lives in the long run,, because if the war had continued at its pace, then many more innocent civilians and Military personnel would have perished

M

Answer 2

Germany surrendered in May of 1945 and the atom bomb was not ready for testing until July of that year. So the simple answer is that the bomb was not available in time to be used against Germany. Also, by the time the bomb might have been used, Germany was pretty much defeated already. Its cities had been reduced to rubble. The Soviet Army was advancing from the east and the Americans and British were coming in from the west and there was no question of Germany being able to turn these back. Had the bomb been used it is very likely it would have killed many non-Germans, possibly even those in the Soviet or other allied forces. I think had the European campaign not gone as well as it did from June 1944 on the use of the bomb might well have been considered. By contrast, Japan was relatively intact. Its navy was pretty much destroyed, but it still had military aircraft and ground forces capable of defending its home lands. The allies faced the prospect of an invasion and land campaign which would have begun in late 1945 and continued in 1946 and beyond as necessary. Bombing of the home islands had begun but had not brought Japan to defeat yet, although there were signs of weakening. Even after the two bombs were dropped on Japan there were militarist forces in the government that actively resisted the surrender. The bombs killed many Japanese, but they probably saved far more than they killed. An invasion would have been bloody beyond belief and it is reasonable to conclude that three to four times as many Japanese as allied soldiers would have been killed. These would have included women and children. There may well have been some racist considerations at the time. I think we can safely conclude that 65 years later the attitudes have changed and the world is a bit different. Racism has been around a long time. We didn't invent it. I doubt if we will ever see its end. When allied forces entered Germany and other occupied countries (notably Poland) they were shocked at conditions in the concentration and extermination camps. I grew up in the post World War II years, and twenty years later we were still learning how bad it was. Still, had we used atomic bombs in Germany, how likely is it that those bombs might have killed inmates in the camps as well as Germans? We will probably never really know the answer to that question.

Answer 3

The Japanese showed no signs that they were going to surrender. In fact they were training every man, woman and child to fight the invaders. An invasion of Japan would have resulted in millions of casualties on both sides.

By using the Atomic bombs the US demonstrated that they didn't need to invade, they could just blast the country into dust and force the Japanese to accept defeat. This was the idea anyway. There is some speculation that even this demonstration didn't quite convince the Japanese to surrender. But the Russians declared war on Japan and began to assault the territory they still held on the mainland. At this point the Japanese realized that refusing to surrender could mean the end of Japan's existence. Also, the Emperor himself pleaded for a surrender publicly.

Answer 4

Well the president had two choices:

1. Pull a D-Day on Japan known as "Operation Downfall."
2. Drop the Atomic Bomb.

Pro's and Con's

Yes the Atomic Bomb caused much disaster and many deaths, but if you know any thing about Japanese fighters during WWII they were crazy, foreigners stepping on their homeland, they would go beserk and it would have been 10 times worse than "Operation Overlord" in France. As you can see it took 2 bombs for them to surrender they were very stubborn. He chose to quell this empire with the Atomic Bomb.

P.S. What people don't know is that we dropped many flyers over these cities telling the japanese to evacuate and leave the city. We warned them...

Answer 5

It was actually quite simple for Truman, there were a few reasons:

The battles for Okinawa and Iwo Jima showed that the invasion of Japan would be a blood bath and the U.S. could expect as much as 350,000 casualties in the first few months alone.

The Soviet Union had designs on some of the Japanese islands as well and were supposed to declare war on Japan in August of 1945, dropping the bomb and ending the war quickly would pre-empt the Soviets from getting too much of Japan.

The towns themselves were secondary targets, weather had alot to do with why they were chosen. Also, they weren't terribly damaged by the firebombings by the U.S. that had been going on for several months, so the bombs would do the most damage (sort of science experiment in a ghastly way).

Answer 6

The Truman Administration’s decision to drop two atomic bombs on Japan at the end of 1945 was a controversial decision that is still debated today. Proponents and opponents of the President’s decision cited various ethical and political concerns regarding the desirability and necessity of using the atomic bomb in relation to conventional alternatives, but the ethical issue of prime importance revolved around the question: what method of defeating Japan would cost the fewest number of lives? I believe that the Truman administration made the right decision in deciding to actively use the atomic bombs on Japan as the end result was certainly the saving of potentially millions of human lives.
When coming to the decision to use the bomb, the policy makers faced the decision of whether dropping the atomic bombs on Japan would save lives or if less costly military alternatives were available. Some Military alternatives to dropping the atomic bomb included: a conventional military invasion of the Japanese home islands, a continued conventional air saturation bombing of the home islands, or a naval and air blockade of Japan. All of these alternatives were discussed in terms of saving lives, both American and Japanese, and were found to be wanting in terms of the relative human costs of each.
The conventional alternatives, while seeming less severe than the dropping of the atomic bomb, would have in the long run been even more costly to the Japanese people. Japanese culture revolved around the samurai mentality, namely that surrender was a disgrace and death for the Emperor an honor. This mentality was translated into military reality with the fanatical resistance shown by the Japanese soldiers. Any direct American assault of Japan would have faced millions of poorly armed soldiers who would have thrown themselves at the invaders. While the outcome would not have been in doubt, the costs to the American and Japanese forces would have been severe.
A conventional bombing campaign or blockade policy would have done little to bring about Japans surrender. Experience in firebombing Tokyo had shown that conventional bombing was both detrimental mainly to civilian populations and capable of brining mass death to the targeted area. Likewise, a blockade of Japan, while it probably would have eventually brought about Japans collapse, would have cost the Japanese millions of lives. Starvation itself is a proficient killer, but combined with the accompanying bedfellows of disease and infant mortality, starvation becomes the most indiscriminate killer. In war, the first to suffer the effects of deprivations are not the military but the civilian population.
In the long run, dropping the atomic bomb saved millions of lives. So long as the Japanese held the belief that stalemate was a possibility, they were prepared to fight to the death. However, it was the absolute power of the weapon that convinced the Japanese that further resistance was useless. While being an indiscriminate killer, the atomic bomb was the ultimate terror weapon. What most people fail to understand is that using the weapon deprived the Japanese of any hope of victory or stalemate, they realized that they faced either surrender or total annihilation. Such an absolute weapon drained the Japanese will to continue and in the end saved countless lives.

Answer 7

President Truman felt sacrificing a few thousand lives to save millions of lives was a necessary move. It was generally thought that if we had the Atom bomb, so did Japan, so he also felt like he was beating them to the punch. Plus he knew it would restore world order and end the war before humans destroyed the planet. I'm sure it was no easy decision.

Answer 8

to end the war, it was estimated that a land attack on Japan would have cost at least one million lives, probably more. Japanese, Allied and Civilian. The A Bomb was the lessor evil

Answer 9

It was feared that we would have lost tens of thousands of men storming the beaches, as we had done in Europe.

The Japanese had proven to be tenacious in defending their outposts, it was feared that their defence of the home island would have been even greater.

The decision to use the bomb was accepted as a way to reduce Allied deaths.

Answer 10

Because the Eve bomb took too long to get ready!!