I learned that in general, there were many different factors impacting the decision to drop the bomb. The US had to consider how much the cost of human lives were truly worth, as well as how quickly they wanted the fight with Japan to end once and for all. The cohesive purpose of the bomb was to end the war, thus people were not concerned with the fact that it could start another war or it could absolutely devastate the targeted cities and their populations. I do understand why the dropping of the atomic bombs is such a debated topic, however I find it necessary to ultimately take a side. Although it can be debated as to whether or not the dropping of the bombs was truly the right decision, the US was right to drop the atomic bombs because it would have the least loss of American lives, and it was the quickest manner by which to end the war between the US and Japan.

The decision President Truman made is unfair to be judged, because there was great pressure on him to make a decision that would change everyone’s lives.  He was very aware of the trauma the bombs would cause, at least on a destruction basis. He had no idea how many Japanese and other lives it would cost. In order to carry out his duty to protect the people of the US as a whole, he had to drop the bomb, therefore causing damage. Truman had to be a strong leader, which means he had a responsibility to make difficult decisions in difficult times. For a person today to be able to judge the decision Truman made, they would have to have been in his shoes. They would have to understand the true pressure that Truman was dealing with. Someone would have to understand where he held governmental power and had what was best for the US without knowing the full extent of the outcome. He dropped the bomb for what he believed would be the best for the majority of people both in general and within his own country. The repercussions were not something he had time to completely consider, because he had very little time to make such a poignant decision.

All is fair in love and war, at least that’s what the saying states. In any case, although all is fair in love and war, a decision is not necessarily morally fair. It was indeed a fair decision to make, the decision of dropping the atomic bombs. It did however paint a very poor picture of the US by their treatment of others in wartime. It showed that the US was willing to make difficult decisions, even if they had to go against what is morally correct to do so. It doesn’t matter who the bomb is targeted at for the decision to be fair or unfair. If a were to drop on an American city, the only true difference is then the location. A similar damage would have occurred. I would react just the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had. In a word, panic. In the event of a parallel situation, where instead Japan dropped bombs on America, it would not change the fact that we were a part of a war, and it would not change the fact that the decision was fair.

Debate Ballot:

Topic: The Atomic Bomb

Winner: Pro

My Team: Pro

Comments: We won because our points were strong and well backed up with facts rather than opinions and what ifs. Our arguments against the con teams’s points were valid and well thought-out. We argued against their weak moral stance with facts, quotes, and military reasons that cannot be argued against with mere morals. Morals are purely subjective, whereas facts are objective. Morals may differ, but facts are always facts. An example would be that the bombing had prevented more overall lives being lost than other options, like invading Japan as a whole. If the US had invaded Japan as a whole, the entire country would have suffered, rather than two cities. In the end, our pro team had much stronger arguments.