Taylore Saldarriaga

History

Debate Analysis
Part one: Robert James Maddox believes that the atomic bomb dropping
was necessary. Maddox argues that the government wanted to end the war
and had conditions that the military had to meet so they can fight no matter
what the consequences would be. They knew the Japanese would protect
their home and their land in a much more intense manor. The Chief and
Marshal of the U.S army air forces agreed it to be necessary and the most
effective to bomb Japan. The Marshal stated that there is not an easy,
bloodless way to victory in war. Eisenhower disagreed with dropping the
atomic bomb but when the bomb was tested to be successful he didnt
protest against it.
On the other hand Japan wanted to take serious efforts to end the war.
Tokyo was sending out peace feelers to try and weaken the United Nations.
The people of Japan were willing to take huge demands to end the war and
stave of defeat. Although the peace feelers seemed more promising to
America. Japanese forces were going to fight no matter what the government
of Tokyo was doing. Truman offers Japan an ultimatum that states
occupational forces would be removed after a peaceful and responsible
government had been established according to the freely expressed will of
the Japanese people. The Japanese reject this ultimatum therefore Truman

sets forth the plan to use the bomb. Officials in American believed that more
than one bomb would be necessary because the Japanese would minimize
the first bomb explosion. The beliefs were that the atomic bomb was the only
way to end the war.
Part two: Tsuyoshi Hasegawa believes that the atomic bomb wasnt
necessary. Hasegawa argues that if Truman accepted a provision in the
ultimatum which was supported by many people it couldve retained the
Japanese monarchy and strengthened their peace parties. This would have
changed the balance in Japans favor to make options more considerable and
helped diminish the war. Although Truman didnt accept it because he was
worried about how the public would react and he wanted to avenge the Pearl
Harbor event. Truman needed the refusal of the Japanese to be able to use
the atomic bomb. If Truman allowed them to continue as a monarchy
surrender would have come earlier and it would have shortened the war.
Japan would have surrendered before November 1st without the atomic
bombs and without Soviet entry into the war. Many historians believe the
atomic bombs werent necessary for Japans surrender. If Truman accepted
the provision it could have prevented the Soviets from invading and taking
more land but the expansion continued. When Japan surrendered it was a
political decision not a military one. If there was a provision Japan could have
surrendered much earlier with a political decision verses a military one.

The Japanese government sent Truman a letter of protest saying that

the atomic bombs went against articles 22 and 23 of the Hague convention
and that the atomic bombs were cruelty and it was a crime against
humanity. Truman never responded to this letter. Therefore Hasegawa is
saying that Trumans acts were disregarding to Japan and seeming for him to
find a way for America to drop the atomic bombs on the Japanese which
pushed back the surrender of Japan and lengthened the war.

Part three:

I believe that Maddoxs argument was somewhat more

persuasive verses Hasegawa. Maddox adds points to make his argument but
also adds in points that other people may see from the counterargument. He
made the point that Japan was wanting to end the war and that they would
fight and protect themselves very intensely. As a high school student as well
as a college student I have been in many history classes. In those I have
learned that Joseph Stalin was a dictator and the Japanese military was
trained to win and that surrendering was a shame. Therefore I found that
statement very interesting. I also found Maddoxs statement that Tokyo
would also put out intermittent peace feelers to weaken the determination of
the United Nations to fight until the bitter end, or to create inter-allied
dissension to be interesting. This statement shows that the Japanese arent
going to give up and that they are manipulating and vindictive towards the
war with America.

Hasegawa made a very persuasive argument with one fact but not a
persuasive other all argument. The argument that if Truman accepted the
provisions to the ultimatum couldve made Japan surrender earlier, ended
the war in a quicker manner, and prevented using the atomic bombs was
promising. Although I found Hasegawa to be very repetitive throughout his
entire argument. I felt as if I was reading the same statements over and over
again. I found myself looking back and forward because I thought I had
already read that same paragraph before. It also seemed to be close minded
because he only argued one thing throughout the argument. Also in one
paragraph Hasegawa says that without the twin shocks of the atomic bombs
and Soviet entry into the war, the Japanese would never had accepted
surrender in August. To me this is somewhat contradicting because part of
his whole argument is that without the atomic bombs dropping and the
different provision it could have shortened the war and made the Japanese
surrender sooner than they did.
I personally do not completely agree with Maddox or Hasegawa. Yes
they do make some good points but they also have some flaws to their
arguments. I do believe that Truman could have considered a provision to the
ultimatum which could have been beneficial for both Japan and America. If
he was more open minded rather than automatically deciding that since his
Chief and Marshal of the army air forces believed the bombs were the most
effective it could have prevented so many casualties and such a brutal war.

Although looking back to my history classes and spending a lot of time

in this particular event in my U.S History class I have gathered a lot of
information. Joseph Stalin is considered one of the most famous dictators
throughout our history. Stalin and his military have performed many cruel
acts of torture. Such as beheadings, slicing pregnant woman open and
ripping out the fetus, throwing babies over cliffs or into the water, etc. They
have done horrible things and how do we know when they are going to stop?
Were they going to do that to us? Why did they commit the act that now
leads everyone to know it as Pearl Harbor? This makes me wonder if
dropping the atomic bomb was the only way to show them that we are
serious and we will protect our country. I know that many Japanese people
were innocent, and didnt deserve to die. Bodies were deformed and
mutilated. I wouldve preferred America to take action in a different way but
to still have done something about it.
I dont believe all Japanese people deserved it because all of them
didnt know what was going on. It wasnt their fault it was the authorities
fault. It reminds me of terrorist acts going on today. These people are
threatening America and trying to take us and our civilians down. They dont
like us for past reasons but I personally, along with many other people have
no idea why they want to hurt us because we didnt commit that act on them
from a hundred or so years ago. We are living in the present not the past.
This connection makes me feel sorrow for those innocent Japanese people
who were lost because of this war. There should have been another way

America could have done something about this situation. This could have
prevented casualties for both America and Japan.