[SOLVED] Dropping the Bomb

Unit Assignment #6: Dropping the Bomb

Introduction: Historians have long debated the decision to drop the atomic bomb upon Japan. This decision has been scrutinized since 1945, but it has attracted particularly intense debate upon its fiftieth and sixtieth year anniversaries. Both historical and public opinion on the question of whether dropping the bomb was effective, legitimate, or moral remains divided. Since 1995, very little new evidence has been brought to the table, suggesting that the event that launched the world into the nuclear age will continue to be debated for decades to follow.
⦁ Read: Goldberg, Stanley. “Racing to the Finish: The Decision to Bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” ⦁ The Journal of American-East Asian Relations 4, no. 2 (1995): 117–28.
⦁ Watch: ⦁ BBC dropping the ⦁ Bomb
⦁ Consult: ⦁ Hiroshima Testimonials
⦁ Additional Resource: ⦁ Ward Wilson on Historians and Hiroshima
Assignment: Review the Goldberg article and reflect upon the historiographic debate about Hiroshima. In 550-600 words, write a short essay about whether the Hiroshima bombing accomplished its objective of ending the war early and saving lives?
Necessary Tasks:
⦁ You must develop a nuanced thesis statement that answers the question above;
⦁ There is no right or wrong answer to this question, so your thesis must stake out a clear position relative to the argument about the outcome of the Hiroshima attack;
⦁ Your subordinate arguments need to invoke the history the US decision to drop the bomb and its immediate consequences;
⦁ Your subordinate arguments must be substantiated with concrete evidence;
⦁ You must convey your argument in an essay form, your arguments need to be logically coherent and your prose effective at conveying your ideas.
Optional Questions for Reflection:
⦁ How did the battle for Iwo Jima and Japanese efforts to mobilize their civilian population to resist the US invasion contribute to the US decision to drop the bomb?
⦁ Describe the mayhem from the preceding Tokyo raid. Was bombing Tokyo with Incendiary bombs a worse atrocity than Hiroshima?
⦁ Throughout World War II there was much discussion about whether strategic bombing could be used to terrorize civilians and sap enemy morale. Had strategic bombing proven effective as a strategic deterrent and instrument of war?
⦁ How had Japanese civilians been impacted by unrestricted submarine warfare and incendiary bombing by the summer of 1945?
⦁ Why did the Japanese military elites not surrender despite the fact that they had no prospect of victory? What did they hope to accomplish by resisting Allied invasion of their home islands?
⦁ What forewarning had the US given before the Hiroshima bombing? Was this sufficient?
⦁ Describe the impact of the Hiroshima bomb upon the city and its residents over the short, intermediate, and long term.
⦁ What did the intelligence intercepts reveal about the Japanese reaction to the Hiroshima bombing?
⦁ Why did the Japanese finally agree to surrender in August 1945? How did Hirohito and his family play a vital role in this drama?
⦁ Did the Hiroshima bomb save American and Japanese lives? Was it immoral to use a weapon of mass destruction on a civilian center? Is it ever legitimate to use a nuclear weapon?
⦁ What do you think of the argument that the USA used Hiroshima to send Stalin a message?

Additional Resources
AV Sources
⦁ ABC News ⦁ Hiroshima Decision
⦁ 24⦁ Hours After Hiroshima

Primary Sources
Truman’s Reflections (1953)
Document list regarding the Decision (Truman Library)

Secondary Sources
⦁ Barton Berstein, ‘⦁ The Atomic Bombings Reconsidered’
Foreign Affairs, 1 January 1995, Vol.74(1), pp.135-152.
⦁ Stanley Goldberg, ‘⦁ Racing to the Finish: The⦁  ⦁ Decision⦁  ⦁ to Bomb⦁  ⦁ Hiroshima⦁  ⦁ and ⦁ Nagasaki,’Journal of American-East Asian Relations, 1995, Vol.4(2), pp.117-128.

⦁ Dennis Wainstock, ⦁ The ⦁ decision⦁  to drop the atomic bomb, New York: Enigma, 2011.

⦁ Jeremya Yellen, ‘⦁ The Specter of Revolution: Reconsidering Japan’s⦁  ⦁ Decision⦁  ⦁ to ⦁ Surrender,’The International History Review, 2013, Vol.35(1), p.205-226.