The Pros And Cons Of The Bombing Of Hiroshima

Words: 646
Pages: 3

In my lifetime, how many sons and daughters of innocent people have I murdered? Thankfully the answer is none but if you asked President Truman, he would be able to say at least 140,000 people. Due to his need of vengeance, the infamous bombing of Hiroshima occurred in August of 1945. The bombing is known to have been the worst weapon to ever be placed in the hands of humans. President Truman had many perspectives to regard from but did not find anything solid enough to avoid dropping this bomb. In my opinion, due to the destruction of culture and people, the long term environmental effects, and more available ethical options, President Truman should not have dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. After the “Little Boy” dropped on the city, Hiroshima was erased from the land. The small features of the place many called home was now gone. That includes their culture. The small dishes with homemade meals, toys, clothes, and everyday things. The people …show more content…
The outcome could have been different and it just happened to be that way. This option also had the purpose of intimidating other countries, “ The purpose of the bombings was to intimidate other countries, above all the Soviet Union.” (Source B, Pg.4) President Truman could have gone a different direction. Japan was already on the verge of surrendering according to Dwight Eisenhower, “...the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them..” (Pg.5) At this point, President Truman could have taken a different risk and follow a plan of choosing a less populated area and sending an alarming bomb threat warning to the people. Forced evacuations could occur and the publicity would show how intimidating the atomic bombs can be. It can be done again if Japan chooses not to end the war. Though the land and city will not be saved, the innocent people would be able to see another