another history critical thinking thing, its about the nuclear bombs, help?

i totally agree with you, it would have sucked to be in that position and be president Truman, but the role of the president is to make the hard decisions and take the heat

that being said, he really had no choice, he had to drop it. for three main reasons...
1. even though the Japanese had an emperor (Hirohito) he was not the man in charge, that was Tojo, who was like the General of the army. even if Hirohito had wanted to surrender that was not in Tojo's plans and there were still at least 1 million suicide bombers left to do damage
2. Truman had to do every thing in his power to stop the soviets from entering japan. at the Potsdam conference Stalin said he would help with the war in the pacific as long as he got control of japan and the US left eastern Europe alone. obviously Truman could not let this happen not only for humility sake but for the safety of the nation
3. the estimated casualties for a land invasion of japan (for the US alone) was upwards of a million, add that to the couple hundred thousand British and soviet casualties and it was something he had to do. he had to sacrifice the few to save the many of his own soldiers. and take that into the war in Iraq today, what would the American public do if Bush sacrificed a million US soldiers because he didn't want to bomb Iraq?

the point is Truman had to do what was necessary to save as many lives as possible.

This one is incredibly not that puzzling. One sturdy possibility merits yet another. i could tell Israel to make it completely sparkling that in the event that they are attacked via Iran, they're going to respond in form and actually destroy any and all of Iran's armed forces and commercial applications - and with united states of america of america's finished backing and help. and then i could verify this place via diplomatic channels to Iran in the form of trend as to do away with any fake impact as to what the outcomes to their u . s . could be in the event that they decide for to pursue this process action. i'm completely constructive that they could immediately re-examine their demands.

Without employment of the "A-Bomb," estimates reflect as many as 3 million more American soldiers would have died in a prolonged WWII. I would have dropped it. Years later, one of the pilots involved in the bombing mission stated that he had "never lost a wink a sleep over it."

(Unprovoked, Japan initiated a "hellish attack" against the United States on December 7, 1941)

If you look in a regular high school history book or visit a war museum, you'll be told that although Truman hated the thought of killing so many people, he did it because it was the only way to save American soldiers' lives.

That's spin. Truman had a lot of other reasons to drop the bomb, and none of them were very noble. Yes, the evidence suggests Truman was sincerely concerned about using the device. He was worried about the example America would be setting. If one country used the a weapon, others would surely follow. And he was worried about American families who had loved ones serving in the Pacific. He did care about American soldiers.

But there are other reasons. For one, Truman was also a politician. He knew that if word got out that he America had a weapon that could have ended the war sooner and he didn't use it, it would surely ruin his career.

Second, America and the Soviet Union were meeting at the Potsdam Conference. They were negotiating what would happen at the end of the war. This was the beginning of the Cold War. Truman felt that using nuclear weapons would impress and intimidate the Russians, and would therefore improve America's strategic situation in the post-war world. This reasoning has been called "Nuclear Diplomacy."

Third, American racism allowed them to view the Japanese as less-than-human. Propaganda showed the Japanese as buck-toothed, sneaky, cruel vermin who needed to be exterminated. Japanese Americans had been locked up Americans in concentration camps. Since they were viewed as inferior beings, it was easier to justify the massacre.

So if you're Truman, you do it because you want to save your own political skin and put the fear of god in your rivals. And since you don't think the Japanese are racially inferior, it's easy to justify it because American life is worth more than Japanese life.

Personally, I wouldn't do it, but at that time, it was the only rational thing to do to end the war immediately. AND it DID end the war in the Pacific immediately. Without the atomic bomb, it would have taken the war longer to end. More Americans, Filipinos (who at that time were under American colonial rule), Chinese etc. would have died and more money would be wasted.

Well history being the way it was the Japanese were cruel to people in the lands they captured. The Death March in the Philippines is one example of cruelty. And the Kamikaze pilots that killed themselves by diving their planes against the ships in the sea. (Sound familiar to what's happening in Iraq now. That's why you don't give up now) And they had Korean prostitutes.
Remember most of all Pearl Harbor.

Thank God that's all past now and the Japanese are not like that now.

Harry S. Truman did the only thing he could. And also there were rumors that the Germans were working on a similar type bomb. Fortunately the Americans discovered it first. Imagine what Hitler would have done if he had been the first one to detonate the bomb?

Still having problems choosing sides if Harry did the right thing or not?