| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "BOMBING HIROSHIMA NAGASAKI": |
|
|
The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 2008.
A analysis of the political, sociological and physical implications of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
1,579 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the events prior to the explosion of the atomic bombs over Japan at the end of World War II. The paper discusses these events in political, sociological and physical terms and then describes the actual bombing of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Lastly, the paper discusses the American public's thoughts about the bombing and briefly looks at today's world of nuclear warfare.
From the Paper
"In terms of peace, the United States forced Japan into more negotiations as we saw in the Potsdam Conference and brought about the end of the war. Had we not used the atomic bomb, the cost of the war, the numbers of deaths on both sides, and destruction could have been considerably worse if we tried to invade Japan. Therefore, this was the best possible solution once the U.S. warned Japan over and over again, through different means of communication what they would bring about if they did not end the war on our respectable terms. The atomic bomb was not essential to ending the war and keeping U.S. causalities to a minimum but was justifiable in terms of world peace. Many weapons of killing were brought into action during this time and few soldiers would deny that they would have to justify it. It was the mere fact that the U.S. physicists learned how to split the atom, and store the energy into a bomb. The Nazi's in Germany would use a bomb like this on us and more than likely so would the Japanese if they discovered these scientific advancements. We did not have a major motive to enter World War II until after Pearl Harbor. This heightened production in the economy, unity as a nation, mobilization and developments in science. Dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justifiable if they were strictly military targets. Japan declared war on the U.S. after the attack on Pearl Harbor which was not a formal declaration. If we were at war with Japan, we would have been prepared and ready for an attack, that however, was not their intent as they surprised our nation."
| |
|
The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1991.
This paper examines decisions to drop nuclear bombs on two Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 14 sources, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"One of the most significant events of the modern world has been the use of nuclear weapons in warfare. Since the dropping of two small atomic devices on Japan in August, 1945, global society, international relations, warfare, science, and philosophy have been impacted. Additionally, human culture has never been quite the same. Although there are numerous perspectives from which one could address the issues surrounding the Allied bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this paper will concentrate on the decision.making process and alternatives available prior to August 1945. It will begin with an overview of the background to the bombing and the Manhattan Project itself. Alternatives will then be examined, including invasion, inducement, and the shock value of atomic weapons. The paper will then analyze the policy constraints of the decision based on ... "
| |
|
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 2002.
An historical look at the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 9 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Indeed, the historical evidence provides a harsh yet undeniable fact: the use of the atomic was truly the only alternative left to the U.S. government. If the U.S. had not used the bomb, there would have been a larger loss of life on both sides.
| |
|
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 2002.
An analysis of the decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to end the war.
2,525 words (approx. 10.1 pages), 10 sources, $ 93.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the bombing by the Americans on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as an inevitable decision to avoid a long drawn out war with Japan. Essentially, the decision to bomb was the lesser of two evils.
| |
|
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 2006.
An assessment of the validity of consequentialist justifications for the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 6 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how in August of 1945, Japan was locked in bloody warfare with the USA. While Japan's defeat seemed inevitable, its refusal to surrender meant that thousands of lives were being lost on both sides. The paper further discusses how this situation was abruptly terminated in August, after the USA dropped the most destructive weapon of all time on two Japanese cities. On August 6th, 1945, the USA dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and 3 days later it dropped another on Nagasaki. In Hiroshima 75,000 people, primarily civilians, died instantly and many thousands more would die lingering deaths from radiation in the years that followed.
| |
|
Hiroshima and Nagasaki: An Analysis of Perspectives, 2005.
A discussion of the morality of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 4 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines perspectives of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In contrast to current perceptions about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, reactions of regret, shame, or revulsion were rare in 1945. The paper describes how the nightmarish death toll of World War II and the atrocities perpetrated by the Germans and Japanese imposed a different perspective in 1945 than we have today about these bombings. The writer proposes that neither perspective is wholly justified or accurate, because both of them are based upon sociopolitical perceptions imposed by contemporary cultures, values, and accepted realities.
From the Paper
"The atomic bombings of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 ended the bloodiest war in human history and precluded the necessity of an Allied invasion of Japan. Six years of global war had taken the lives of more than fifty million people and had devastated most of Europe, the Soviet Union, and Japan. Subsequently, contemporary American reactions to the death and destruction inflicted upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki by atomic weaponry ranged from relief to exultation. In contrast to current perceptions about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, reactions of regret, shame, or revulsion were rare in 1945."
| |
|
The Bombing of Hiroshima, 2000.
A look at President Harry S. Truman's landmark decision in history.
1,344 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 9 sources, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at President Truman's decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan at the end of World War II, and explains why it was the right decision. The paper includes background information on World War II and the war between Japan and the United States.
From the Paper
"Though the innocent lives of the Japanese civilians in Hiroshima are not be in anyway forgotten or looked over, President Truman?s decision to release the Atomic bomb on Hiroshima was the right decision because immediately ending the war and bringing peace around the world was more important. If the war had continued, there is no telling how many more lives would have been lost on both sides. "
| |
|
The A-bomb on Hiroshima, 1990.
This paper examines the dropping of the Atomic bomb on Hiroshima: Whether it was an intelligent decision and reviews political and military aspects of this question.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 4 sources, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"No single military event in history had long-term consequences so profound as the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. It was not simply that a city full of people died horribly--that had happened before, and even on a slightly larger scale, in several conventional "fire raids" during World War II. But those previous raids had required on the order of a thousand planes; Hiroshima was destroyed by a single plane dropping a single bomb. By simple extension, a thousand nuclear-armed planes could destroy a thousand cities in a single raid. Civilization could be incinerated in a day.
It is usually in the broad, long-term and moral context that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima (and of Nagasaki three days later) has been considered. But it was also a military operation of war--and seemingly a decisive one, since Japan surrendered .... "
| |
|
Oklahoma City Federal Building Bombing: How Many Bombs?, 1995.
An in depth examination of the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Analyzes the evidence and expert claims concerning both the One Bomb Theory and the Multiple Bomb Theory.
2,475 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 7 sources, $ 87.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Purpose Statement
The purpose of this analysis is to present an alternative interpretation of what actually happened in Oklahoma City. This discussion draws together the evidence that two or more explosions took place in the Alfred P. Murrah federal building. If such evidence proves to be credible then the federal government's one-bomb theory is thrown into serious question, and this terrorist act would have to be completely re-examined.
On April, 19, 1995, powerful explosions destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. One hundred sixty-eight people died as a result of this terrorist attack (Quayle, 1995). Within hours the FBI had captured a suspect named Timothy McVeigh and within days they arrested an army friend of his, named Terry Nichols, as an alleged accomplice. The FBI and ..."
| |
|
Dropping the Atomic Bomb, 2004.
A look at the debate as to whether it was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that brought an end to the war in the Pacific or whether other events ended the war.
1,170 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at both sides of the debate regarding the justification of the U.S. nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The paper attempts to answer the question of whether of not the U.S. had to drop the bombs, or if there was another way in which they could have defeated Japan. The paper looks at the options that faced President Harry Truman when he decided to use newly developed atomic energy and why he continued to use them even when he had such strong opposition from General Dwight Eisenhower, General Douglas MacArthur, and Chief of Staff Admiral Leahy.
From the Paper
"On July 16, 1945, the United States of America ushered the world into a new era with the successful detonation of an atomic bomb in New Mexico. That era was the nuclear age. Less than a month later, on August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan; the first use of a nuclear weapon against an enemy nation. There is debate as to whether the bombing of Hiroshima, and the subsequent bombing of Nagasaki on August 9th, brought an end to the war in the Pacific for Imperial Japan. Or, were the events leading up to August 6th enough to deter them from fighting any longer?"
| |
|
The Aftermath of the Atomic Bomb, 2003.
This paper discuses the social and political aftermath of the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
2,210 words (approx. 8.8 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 68.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had no way to prepare themselves for either the immediate or the lasting effects of the dropping of the atomic bombs. The author points out that the release of energy from this bomb caused massive, unprecedented destruction from the extreme heat, the overpowering blast and dangerous radiation. The paper relates that many people, who feared the complete destruction of mankind as a result of nuclear weaponry, concluded that the only way to avoid this unimaginable catastrophe would be to avoid all wars, even small conflicts that could escalate into an atomic fight. The author relates that the American approach to diplomatic relations with Russia during the Cold War was highly influenced by the existence of the atomic bomb.
From the Paper
"One Japanese Physician, Michihiko Hachiya, recalled in gruesome detail the moment the bomb destroyed his home. He and his wife suffered many injuries, and at several times he lost hope of surviving. He made it through the first day of chaotic post-bombing life. On the morning after the explosion, Hachiya wrote, "Everything was in a turmoil." Hachiya recovered and dedicated the next few months to helping other surviving victims of the explosion. Through the confusion of everything that was going on, he recalled, "One thing was for certain--Hiroshima was destroyed; and with it the army that had been quartered in Hiroshima.""
| |
|
The Bombing of Japan.
This paper discusses the atomic bombing of Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki on August 8, 1945, which led to the surrender of Japan and the end of WWII.
1,290 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although more than half a century has passed since the atomic bombing of Japan, it is still arguable whether such actions by the Allied forces were justified. The author points out that the atomic bomb was used just like any other weapon war and that the United States military did not see the atomic bomb as anything other than an instrument of war; there is little difference between the conventional destruction of Tokyo by conventional American saturation bombing, which killed some 100,000 people, and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, which also killed 100,000 people. The paper relates that former President Herbert Hoover had expressed that use of the bomb had besmirched America's reputation and that its potential disastrous effects should have been described in graphic terms before the United States decided to bomb Japan.
From the Paper
"President Harry S. Truman stated on August 9, 1945, "We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans. We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan's power to make war." The Allied forces believed that the use of the atomic bomb was justified due to Japan's relentless denial to surrender. Japan had demonstrated fanatical resistance by fighting to almost the last man on Pacific islands and committing mass suicide on Saipan. Moreover, by the summer of 1944, the Japanese had resorted to one major asset they still possessed, the willingness of their pilots to meet certain death, hence they developed the Kamikaze technique whereby a pilot would fly his plane directly into a ship or target."
| |
|
To Bomb or Not to Bomb, 2004.
Questions the necessity of dropping the atomic bomb on Japan at the end of the Second World War.
3,125 words (approx. 12.5 pages), 12 sources, MLA, $ 90.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The question of whether or not it was necessary to drop the atomic bomb on Japan and the reasons for doing so is one of the most hotly contested historical issues today. This paper focuses on one of the many arguments against the necessity of the bomb, which deals with the policy of unconditional surrender. Many scholars argue that if Truman would have assured the Japanese leadership that Emperor Hirohito would not be dethroned after Japan's defeat, the atomic bomb would not have been necessary to end the war. The paper provides evidence to support this claim, but in the end, concludes that even the most ardent Japanese peace advocates harbored suicidal sentiments with regard to unconditional surrender and would still refuse to accept Truman's terms after both bombs were dropped.
From the Paper
"There were many advocates pushing for a change since the beginning of the war, but no real progress was made in this endeavor even after 1944 when high ranking military officials pushed for a policy change. They complained that losses would be increasingly heavy as fighting neared the Japanese homeland. Realizing that changing the terms would make the Japanese more willing to surrender, commanders began pushing Roosevelt to consider clarifying them. Early in 1945, Winston Churchill proposed at the Yalta Conference that clarifying the terms ?would be worthwhile if it led to the saving of a year and a half of a war in which so much blood and treasure would be poured out.? He proposed that after Germany was defeated the Allies ?issue an ultimatum to Japan, retaining the unconditional surrender wording, but defining it to allow retention of the emperor (Newman, 65).? Many others began coming to the realization that Japan was not going to surrender without assurances to its Emperor, and that this issue was a major obstacle to peace."
| |
|
The Japanese and The Atomic Bomb, 2006.
An analysis of the Japanese attitude towards the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
3,987 words (approx. 15.9 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 108.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper investigates the initial reaction of the Japanese government and press to the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagaskai. According to the paper, the average Japanese who survived the attacks, suffered with survivor's guilt. The paper also contains a review of the Japanese literature, art and films on the atomic bombings, as well as the peace movement started in the aftermath of the war.
Outline:
Perspective of the Japanese Government and the Local Press
Perspective from the Ground
Suppressed Feelings During the American Occupation
Divine Providence
Feelings of Guilt
Focus of Anger
The Hibakusha Literature and Pacifist Movement
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Nevertheless, a minority of the hibakusha did express feelings of hostility towards the people who were responsible for their suffering. There was a certain amount of resentment toward the pilots who dropped the bomb or toward "the Americans" in general. It has also been reported that there was a good deal of general antagonism among the Japanese public towards "foreigners" or Westerners right after the bombs fell. (Lifton 52) Such feelings, however, did not last for long or were not as intense as would have been expected. Some of the anger of the survivors was also directed toward Japanese military and civilian authorities for having deceived the public about the real state of the war and having ultimately brought them to ruin; for not having prevented the bombing or adequately preparing the population for a nuclear attack, and most of all--for failing to provide adequate help to the victims of the bombing. Some of the people even reserved their ire for the Japanese scientists and physicians for not having developed adequate techniques for fighting the effects of the bomb. There was even resentment on the part of those severely injured toward those who were not (Ibid.)."
| |
|
Atomic Bombings, 2003.
Presents three different views of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper shows the sense of awe felt by a flight member witnessing the dropping of the second A-bomb. It also looks at views that question the morality of using the A-bomb and a sympathetic portrayal of the life of an atomic bomb victim.
From the Paper
"A Thing of Legend
Awe, beauty, and heroism are the feelings conveyed by William L. Lawrence, in his article "Atomic Bombing of Nagasake Told by Flight Member" as he witnesses that final flight and the dropping of the second A-bomb. He says that he is on..."
|
|
|
