Was the Second Bombing on Nagasaki Necessary? List three reasons why or why not. I Said it wasn't and then listed three reasons

The use of the nuclear run out, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul, President Herbert Hoover. On August 6th and 9th of 1945 U.S. bombers dropped nuclear bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, causation utter destruction and many deaths. The dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 was meant to show the omnipotent new weapon to the entire world. The fall in States wanted to be recognized as the most powerful nation, and winning the atomic race was a big step in that direction. In Hiroshima it killed 100,000 people, most non-military civilians. Three days later in Nagasaki it killed somewhat 50,000. These bombs were dropped as the Pacific battles of World War II were advent to an end. Soon after, Japan surrendered, closing curtain the war. But, was the use of the second atomic bomb necessary? Was it too harsh and cruel to the Japanese? The first question was whether or not to drop a bomb. The effects of atomic warfare had not been known and studied, only when it was apparent that it would be a good tool in ending the war. The first bomb did appear necessary to ending the war.



It would put Japan in check to bring a quick finish to the fighting, saving many lives, as easy as prevent the Russians from joining the Pacific War. The second on Nagasaki, however, was obviously not. It was handled foolishly, in that the Japanese were not allowed enough eon to surrender and it seemed like a big sick experiment. The United States of America was justified in dropping the atomic bomb on the island of Hiroshima, but not justified in doing the identical to Nagasaki.

Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and back up by...

If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com



If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper