Trumans Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb Essay Example

Trumans Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb Essay Why did Truman use the atomic bomb against Japan? What did his decision say about priorities of American foreign policy? | Truman decision and reasons behind deployment of the atomic bomb| | Min Yong Jung| 11/2/2010| | Harry S. Truman, the 33rd President of the United States, deployed the atomic bomb on Japan to ensure the end of the Pacific War with minimal US casualties. Upon rejection of the Potsdam Declaration and calls for unconditional surrender by the Japanese, the US in direct retaliation deployed the atomic weapon ‘Little Boy’ on the city of Hiroshima in August 6, 1945 and continued by bombing Nagasaki with ‘Fat Man’ on August 9th. The Allies had concluded the European front by capturing Berlin and defeating the remainder of Axis forces in May 1945. The Pacific front however remained and was different from combat in Europe; the ferocity of the Japanese to defend their homeland resulted in a higher level of casualties suffered by the US. Truman â€Å"never had any doubts†¦ had felt no qualms, about the atomic bombings because they forced an end to the war and saved American lives. †Thus in an effort to conclude the Pacific War, Truman deployed the Atomic Bomb in order to end the war that entrenched US resources and manpower for over 5 years and as a simple bonus to increase the bargaining capability of the US against the Soviet Union. The decision to deploy the atomic weapon was largely due to the fact that it would save the lives of American troops. We will write a custom essay sample on Trumans Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Trumans Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Trumans Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Woodrow Wilson had been hailed as the man who kept the US out of a bloody First World War. US foreign policy of limiting casualties from war by whatever means necessary still exists in US foreign policy today, as it had back when Truman decided to deploy the atomic bomb. It is hard to measure the number of casualties for a war or an invasion that never occurred and the Pacific War in particular because of the fact that the Japanese were so fervent to fight until the last man, woman and child. The Joint War Plans Committee concluded that â€Å"the two phases of the invasion of Japan would cost about 46,000 American deaths and another 174,000 wounded and missing. † It is important to keep in mind that the battle of Okinawa resulted in â€Å"American casualties of 12,000 killed and missing and another 60,000 wounded† and the battle for Iwo Jima, â€Å"6,821 killed and nearly 20,000 wounded. † Truman and his advisors strenuously argued that the direct consequence of the atomic bomb was the ultimate surrender of the Japanese government and this achieved both US primary goals to both shorten the war and save American lives. Truman and his advisors decided on a course of action to limit American casualties whilst the Japanese, despite all claims that they were ready to surrender, were showing a level of intensity and ferocity in battle that the US troops had not encountered before. Thus it was impossible, whatever the pre-estimated figures of US casualties, to invade the mainland of Japan when military leaders of Japan decided that the â€Å"only course left is for Japan’s one hundred million people to sacrifice their lives by charging the enemy to make them lose the will to fight. The military leaders of Japan argued that â€Å"all man, woman, child and elderly would be drafted to fight the US troops, not to defeat it out right in battle but to ensure that increasing US casualties would bring about a turn in public sentiment† towards the war and thus ensure better terms for the post war Japan. The Japanese were both considered by the American public and fighting men to be racially inferio r but at the same time considered to be super human in battle. It was clear that the Japanese were running out of supplies and the military means to engage in successful battle. Thus they employed measures such as the Kamikaze pilots â€Å"The kamikazes were in many cases not effective†¦ But all too frequently they successfully carried out their missions. † The Kamikaze in direct translations means divine wind and is similar to the banzai charges that the army employed. Both shared similarities in that they were suicidal and not always effective in expelling the enemy but such military strategy emphasized Japan’s unwillingness to surrender. Japan with its long standing history of the Bushido code, emphasized the need for loyalty from its subjects. The Bushido code and determination of the Japanese leadership ensured the fact that an invasion into the mainland of Japan would provide high number of casualties for US troops and additionally â€Å"more exposure to an enemy that did not fear death which would bring about more results like the Indianapolis† on July 29th 1945, where the delivery of a Japanese torpedo resulted in the ship losing â€Å"880 of its crew of 1,196. † Thus the deployment of the two atomic bombs were not only necessary in that they would ensure the safety of US troops but it would also provide a shock factor to both the people and government of Japan. Air raid sirens had been turned off in Hiroshima, due to the fact that there were only several planes in the air. If one bomb and one plane could neutralize a city, there was little for the Japanese to do in defense against such a destructive weapon. Proponents of the argument that Truman was immoral in using the atomic bomb, constantly argue that the Japanese were depleted in their will and ability to wage war and were actively seeking chances to ending the war by means of diplomatic measures through peace feelers in the Soviet Union. The argument is one of those what if’s in history that can never be concluded by concrete measure. What the Truman administration and advisors were aware of was that the Japanese were determined to engage in battle with whatever resources they had available to them and the at the time Japanese peace efforts were not possible for them to comprehend as the Japanese Supreme Council itself was undecided on the matter and because of the need to attain unconditional surrender. Without unconditional surrender, Truman and his advisors felt they may be showing signs of weakness and thus emboldening the Japanese military who would view it as a sign of US weariness of war. If the United States appeared to weaken its demand in the wake of the difficulties its troops endured and the casualties they suffered during the Okinawa campaign, it would enhance the credibility of the argument that the Americans must be confronted with all-out resistance to the invasion of Japan. † The US and the world by this time identified the peace treaty of Versailles to be one of the leading causes of the Se cond World War. The Germans were not conquered and the reparation demands led to economic hardship that resulted in faith and support of an extremist Nazi party. Thus by giving in to the demands of the Japanese government the US felt they would encourage further aggression in the Pacific. The Office of War Information declared that Japan â€Å"will seek a compromise peace that will leave intact her present ruling clique and enough territory and industrial strength to begin again a career of aggressive expansion. † Truman, according to those close to him, was both fearful and nervous about expressing his own notion and thoughts into public policy. Thus he prioritized the need to keep in line with FDR’s policies and advisors. Because FDR championed the unconditional surrender and because the US public was adamant about it, Truman could not alter his course. James F. Byrnes, the secretary of state confided to his colleagues that a change in policy would bring about a domestic crucifixion of the president and this view was re-enforced by a Gallup poll that found â€Å"33 percent of those who responded thought the emperor should be executed and another 17 percent wanted to put him on trial; only 4 percent favored no punishment. If Truman gave into such demands, he would have faced harsh criticism from the US public, which could have resulted in decreasing his chances for re-election. The use of the atomic bomb provided a â€Å"diplomatic bonus† in that Truman would be able to strengthen his bargaining position with the Soviets after the war. Truman’s predecessor Franklin D. Roosevelt concluded the Yalta Conference with Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin in Feb. 1945. At the Yalta Conference Stalin emphasized Soviet interests in rebuilding â€Å"its devastated economy, possessions in Asia, influence over Poland, and a Germany so weakened it could never again march eastward. † With the instability created after the Second World War, Revisionists of the argument on Truman’s use of the atomic bomb believed that US deployed the atomic bomb in a demonstration to ward off Soviet interest in the regions highlighted at the Yalta Conference. After witnessing the course of the war and the successful Island Hopping campaign, where the Japanese were left to â€Å"wither on the vine† Truman believed that the Japanese government would surrender without having to create a second front and the use of the atomic bomb would not only shorten the war but also prevent Soviet interest and influence in Asia and ultimately shock the Soviet Union in the post war international arena, where the US could influence matters of interest through newly created international agencies that it dominated. Churchill noted the difference of Truman after the testing of the plutonium bomb in Almogordo. â€Å"He was a changed man who told the Russians just where they got on and off and generally bossed the whole meeting. † The atomic bomb provided Truman, who had unexpectedly assumed presidency, with a confidence boost in dealing with foreign policy issues. The deployment of the bomb ultimately resulted in what the US had aimed for it to achieve. It ended the war with Japan and saved numerous US troops from Japan’s suicidal Banzai attacks and Kamikaze pilots. The bomb had shocked Joseph Stalin who remarked â€Å"Hiroshima has shaken the whole world†¦ The balance has been destroyed. † The Soviets were startled by the deployment of the atomic bomb and expedited their own process of building a similar weapon of mass destruction. When one considers the fact that the US were aware of other nation’s capabilities of producing an atomic weapon, the argument that the deployment of the bomb was to deter Soviet interests in future situations is not entirely persuasive due to the fact that the Soviets would soon have such capabilities. The US considered the Soviet issue a â€Å"diplomatic bonus† as they would only have this advantage for a short period of time. Ultimately the deployment of the atomic bomb under Truman’s guidance was influenced by the fact that it would bring an immediate end to the war with minimal casualties and provide a short term diplomatic advantage over the Soviet Union. The fact that unlike the First World War where the death of civilians on board the Maine and other civilians caught in the line of fire were considered unacceptable, the consensus shifted into considering that non-military deaths were considered acceptable. General Curtis E. LeMay, upon taking charge of the fire bombings in Japan, commanded that â€Å"there are no innocent civilians† and looked for ways to improve the effect of fire bombing on wooden Japanese cities. With the morality of the atomic bomb being deployed on Japan taken out of the equation, there was no incentive for Truman to not bomb Japan, which could ultimately raise the question of him being an incompetent commander at a later date when US casualty tolls increased and public sentiment against him. Work Cited Page * Hershberg, James G. Harvard to Hiroshima and the making of the nuclear age. New York: Alfred A. Knope. 1993. Pg. 290 * Walker, J. Samuel. Prompt Utter Destruction, The University of North Carolina Press. 1997,2004. * Paterson, Thomas G. American Foreign Relations. Boston: Wadsworth, 1895. Print. * Leapfrogging(strategy). Wikipedia. org. http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Leapfrogging_(strategy)  #cite_note-2 * Hershberg. Lecture [ 1 ]. Hershberg, James G. Harvard to Hiroshima and the making of the nuclear age. New York: Alfred A. Knope. 1993. Pg. 290. [ 2 ]. Walker, J. Samuel. Prompt Utter Destruction, The University of North Carolina Press. 997,2004. Pg. 38 [ 3 ]. Walker. Pg. 32 [ 4 ]. Walker Pg. 24 [ 5 ]. Walker Pg 30 [ 6 ]. Hershberg. Lecture [ 7 ]. Walker Pg 32 [ 8 ]. Hershberg. Lecture [ 9 ]. Walker Pg. 73 [ 10 ]. Walker Pg. 45 [ 11 ]. Walker Pg. 46 [ 12 ]. Walker Pg. 85 [ 13 ]. Walker Pg. 46 [ 14 ]. Paterson, Thomas G. American Foreign Relations. Boston: Wads worth, 1895. Print. 230 [ 15 ]. Paterson. Pg. 206 [ 16 ]. Leapfrogging(strategy). Wikipedia. org. http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Leapfrogging_(strategy)#cite_note-2 [ 17 ]. Walker Pg. 63 [ 18 ]. Walker. Pg. 81. [ 19 ]. Walker Pg. 27

The Sociology of Religion Aspects

The Sociology of Religion Aspects Discussing the aspects of sociology of religion, it is necessary to refer to the religion as the social phenomenon when the religious groups can be determined and analyzed as any other social groups according to their specifics and goals. The sociology of religion as the sphere of knowledge is developed by sociologists in relation to their discussion of the issues of religion in its connection with the society.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Sociology of Religion Aspects specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More There are a lot of problematic questions studied by sociologists in this field of knowledge which are associated with the nature of the people’s religious beliefs and realization of their religious practices in the social life. It is important to pay attention to the fact that religion as the concept within the sociology of religion is discussed and examined with the help of the scientific methods used in the field of sociology. However, the subject matter of such an examination is the people’s religious beliefs and practices. Thus, following Johnstone’s discussion, it is possible to state that sociology of religion can be defined as the study which focuses on determining and analyzing the people’s attitudes to the sacred notions, their beliefs and practices, and their visions of the definite sacred beings and events. There are questions about the relevance of discussing religion not as the individual choice or practice but as the social phenomenon studied by sociology of religion. Nevertheless, sociologists provide many arguments to support the idea that religion should be also examined in the context of sociology and that this subject is really important (Furseth). To support the vision, Johnstone analyzes Simmel’s considerations in relation to the issue and states that â€Å"society precedes religion. Before religion can develop, there must first exist general patterns of social interaction – that is, a society – that can serve as a model† (Johnstone 30). Thus, it is possible to conclude that any religion cannot exist without society because it emerges within it. From this perspective, the subject is important because it refers to both the society as studied by sociology and people’s religious visions. It is important to concentrate on studying sociology of religion because religion develops according to the definite patterns of interactions used within the definite social group (Furseth). Furthermore, in his statement, Turner provides the answers to the questions about the nature of the sociology of religion and its importance. According to Turner, â€Å"religion refers to those processes and institutions that render the social world intelligible, and which bind individuals authoritatively into the social order.Advertising Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Religion is therefore a matter of central importance to sociology† (Turner 284). Religion is important for the sociological studies because it is one of the major spheres of the people’s life, and it can influence the development of the social group in relation to determining the definite religious practices and rituals along with following the certain moral presumptions. The religious visions of different groups are also different. That is why, the study of the religious practices can provide researchers with the important information about this or that group of people as a kind of the social community. According to Turner, the examination of the religious phenomena among which it is possible to determine magic and myth can be effective for developing the sociological knowledge (Turner 284). In his turn, Johnstone states that religion is closely connected with studying the group dynamics as well the social impac t that is why religion can be discussed as the subject matter of sociology (Johnstone 2). Moreover, the study of the members of the group and their interactions is significant to explain their religious beliefs, practices, and rituals. To understand the particular features of the social development, it is necessary to pay attention to the ideas and beliefs which are interesting for the representatives of the social groups at the spiritual level of their perception of the world. Sociologists are inclined to determine a lot of theories according to which the religious visions were developed and perceived by the public. It is necessary to accentuate the rational choice theory as the most appropriate one to explain the origins of religion from the sociological perspective. According to Johnstone, the rational choice theory is a theory that tries â€Å"to deal seriously with not only the persistence of religion but also the observation that some form of religion appears to be ubiquitous among societies, even if some individuals deny the validity of the religions that surround them† (Johnstone 36). In spite of the fact there are many opinions that the rational choice theory cannot be discussed as relevant to explain the origins of religion because of its rationality and appropriateness to refer to the economic processes rather than to the moral and spiritual choices, this theory is effective to discuss the people’s choice of religion as the conscious act to receive some benefits from this choice (Bruce).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Sociology of Religion Aspects specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The rational choice theory can be used to explain how people make the necessary choice in relation to their religious vision. People are inclined to act rationally in almost all the spheres of their life, basing on the definite personal or public’s experience (Corcoran). To make th e choice, it is important to examine the situation and its implications with references to the positive and negative perspectives. Johnstone accentuates the fact that people make the similar rational choices also in relation to choosing the religion (Johnstone 36). This choice is based on the experience and on the proper examination of the information about different religions, their rituals, practices, and moral presumptions. Johnstone stresses that â€Å"people have a set of mental images stored in their brains with which they make decisions as rationally and sensibly as they know how† (Johnstone 36). From this point, it is necessary to concentrate on making the right choice because of the variety of the possible religious visions which exist in the contemporary world. Sociology of religion began to develop in the 19th century, and a lot of its aspects require their further discussion by researchers because of the significant controversy in vision of the main theories used in sociology of religion to explain its main ideas or the nature of the religion as a phenomenon. The characteristic feature of sociology of religion as the study discussing the people’s religious beliefs and attitudes to the sacred points is the dependence on the empirical information used to examine the main aspects of this sphere of knowledge. Thus, the religious concepts and the people’s beliefs and practices are examined with the help of the sociological methods which are rather scientific, and they allow speaking about religion as the social phenomenon which can be observed and studied with references to the definite social group. Bruce, Steve. â€Å"Religion and Rational Choice: A Critique of Economic Explanations of Religious Behavior†. Sociology of Religion 54.2 (1993): 193-205. Print. Corcoran, Katie. â€Å"Religious Human Capital Revisited: Testing the Effect of Religious Human Capital on Religious Participation†. Rationality and Society 24.3 (2012): 343-379. Print. Furseth, Inger. An Introduction to the Sociology of Religion: Classical and Contemporary Perspectives. USA: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2006. Print.Advertising Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Johnstone, Ronald. Religion in Society: A Sociology of Religion. USA: Pearson, Prentice-Hall, 2007. Print. Turner, Bryan. â€Å"The Sociology of Religion†. The SAGE Handbook of Sociology. Ed. Craig Calhoun. USA: SAGE, 2006. 284-300. Print.

Incest and Exogamy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Incest and Exogamy - Essay Example The ambiguity of the incest taboo that has for so long confused anthropologists is still not reveled whilst it is seen as establishing a structure of exchanges among separate groups. As it is practically universal---some constraints on marriage are found in each and every society---the incest taboo has the impulsiveness of a natural desire. However since it is not a biological need (and Lvi-Strauss demonstrates this extremely convincingly via the case of cross-cousin marriage, which is a desire and not a need, while parallel-cousin marriage is better choice as that could be done to fulfill need and just a desire ) it partakes of a law, of a cultural obligation. The incest taboo is not so much a harmful restriction on the pool of marriage partners as a assurance that one group will gives its daughters to another group to fulfill the needs , as long as that the other group does the same. For Lvi-Strauss---and this is for the most part vital for family theory --the incest taboo prevents the marital family from dying in on itself as well as gives assurance to the fact that the wider society will definitely take preference over the family by means of marrying out side the family this group could be called non-family groups. Philosophically, incest asks a essential question of our changing mores: not just what is normal as well as what is deviant, it also asks if such a thing as deviance really exists at all in the r