What do historians think about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

More than seventy years after the end of World War II, the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains controversial. Some historians, often called “traditionalists,” tend to argue that the bombs were necessary in order to save American lives and prevent an invasion of Japan.

Why was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki unnecessary?

Dropping Atomic Bombs On Hiroshima And Nagasaki Was Unnecessary. U.S. leaders knew we didn’t have to drop atomic bombs on Japan to win the war. The allied demand for unconditional surrender led the Japanese to fear that the emperor, who many considered a deity, would be tried as a war criminal and executed.

Were the bombs dropped on Japan necessary?

More than 55,000 Americans had already died fighting the Japanese in the Pacific. An invasion was certain to be very costly in American lives. The bomb was necessary to accomplish Truman’s primary objectives of forcing a prompt Japanese surrender and saving American lives, perhaps thousands of them.

What is Bix’s main argument about the atomic bomb?

Bix argues that the emperor and the Cabinet saved face by declaring that they were surrendering in order to prevent further atomic bombings.

Why Hiroshima bombing is ethical?

The bombing was justifiable as it applied to the ethical school of utilitarianism – the greatest good for the greatest number of people. If there had been a Japanese/American war the effects would have been more severe. It was unethical as civilians were killed and injured and there was no direct need for the attack.

Why is it important for historians to study historiography?

Historiography is important for a wide range of reasons. First, it helps us understand why historical events have been interpreted so differently over time. Just as critically, historiography lets us study history with a critical eye. It helps us understand what biases may have shaped the historical period.

Why historiography is not history?

When you study “historiography” you do not study the events of the past directly, but the changing interpretations of those events in the works of individual historians. Furthermore, every historian’s work is to some extent unique, reflecting individual values, assumptions, interests, and abilities.