Was it Wrong to Drop the Atom Bomb on Japan? | 5 Minute Video
In recent years, many academics and others have condemned President Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as unnecessary and immoral. Yet this interpretation relies on a poor understanding of history that both lacks perspective and ignores context. Dropping the bomb shortened the war and saved countless lives — both American and Japanese. In five minutes, Professor of History at Notre Dame, Father Wilson Miscamble, explains.
🚨 PragerU is experiencing severe censorship on Big Tech platforms. Go to https://www.prageru.com/ to watch our videos free from censorship!
SUBSCRIBE 👉 https://www.prageru.com/join/
📲 Take PragerU videos with you everywhere you go. Download our free mobile app!
Download for Apple iOS ➡ https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/prage…
Download for Android ➡ https://play.google.com/store/apps/de…
📳 Join PragerU’s text list! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
SHOP! 🛒 Love PragerU? Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/
Script:
President Harry S. Truman’s decision to use atomic weapons against the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved to be one of the most controversial decisions in American history.
As the years have passed, the controversy has only intensified. More and more people — both in America and abroad — have condemned both President Truman and America for that decision.
But this criticism is based on limited historical knowledge of both the situation Truman confronted and the basis for his decision. Such flawed analysis has been aided by the unfortunate influence of some very bad history, such as that written by members of the so-called “atomic diplomacy” school. These historians disgracefully alleged that Truman proceeded to drop two atomic bombs on a Japan, which he knew was on the verge of surrender, so as to intimidate the Soviet Union in the already developing Cold War. That specious interpretation must be refuted fully.
Truman sought to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, two major military/industrial targets, to avoid an invasion of Japan, which Truman knew would mean, in his words, quote, “an Okinawa from one end of Japan to the other,” end quote. His assumptions were entirely legitimate.
By July of 1945 the Japanese had been subjected to months of devastating attacks by American B-29s, their capital and other major cities had suffered extensive damage, and the home islands were subjected to a naval blockade that made food and fuel increasingly scarce. Japanese military and civilian losses had reached approximately three million and there seemed no end in sight. Despite all this, however, Japan’s leaders and especially its military clung fiercely to notions of Ketsu-Go (“decisive battle”). In fact, the Japanese government had mobilized a large part of the population into a national militia which would be deployed to defend the home islands.
Confirming the Japanese determination to fight on is the fact that even after the use of atomic bombs against both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese military still wanted to pursue that desperate option. The atomic bombs forced Emperor Hirohito to understand clearly, and in a way his military leaders refused to comprehend, that the defense of the homeland was hopeless. It took the unprecedented intervention of a Japanese emperor to break the impasse in the Japanese government and finally order surrender. It was only the dropping of the atom bombs that allowed the emperor and the so-called peace faction in the Japanese government to negotiate an end to the war.
All the viable alternate scenarios to secure American victory — all would have meant significantly greater American and allied casualties and much higher Japanese civilian and military casualties. According to American military estimates at the time, those numbers would have been well above one million.
Hard as it may be to accept, Japanese losses would have been far greater without the bombs. And the overall casualties would also have included thousands of Allied prisoners of war whom the Japanese planned to execute in case of invasion.
For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/was-it-wrong-drop-atom-bomb-japan
source
The droppings of Uranium and Plutonium atomic bombs were a Narcissistic show.
Stalin had already informed Roosevelt about Japanese requested to intervene in order to end the war.
Japan had lost the resource sites when retreated back.
A car with an empty fuel tank, cannot go places.
The Western world is solely responsible for the destruction of the East Asia. The Narcissists are the Masters in mental manipulation, gaslighting and waging smear campaigns.
So, this channel can justify the mass genocide of innocent people, but it can't respect a person's preferred pronouns? Got it.
Not inaccurate, but missing a few details. Ending the war quicker with the bombs deprived to soviets of an excuse to get a foothold in Japan. It prevented what happened in post war east Europe from happening in Japan.
No. It stopped the killing of millions of people started by Japan in 1931. 14 years of death ended by just 2 bombs. How many would have died otherwise?
Sir, your saying this was necessary as a strategy to save U.S. lives. I understand your argument, however, that doesn't provide an exoneration for what happened! It was a war crime.
Churchill being voted out was another factor. The British would of probably backed out of helping us invade Japan. France was on the verge of communism after the fall of Germany.
People forget that it was not Truman's job to minimize Japanese casualties — it was his job to minimize Allied casualties. The A-Bomb did that. It also kept the Soviets from being able to split Japan into a North/South like they did with Germany. Furthermore, it gave the world a chance to set back an evaluate the atomic bombs after the war — and decide never to use them again. Can you imagine if the bomb had been invented a week after the war was over? We'd have hit Korea with 1,000 of them on the first day of that war.
I was asking this question for a longtime ,but I think it was not a good thing.
Because you are legitimating the usage of radioactive bombs which have very long effect on both the people and the environment
On a purely materialistic point of view, there is no answer to the question, whether the bomb should have been used or not. So that settles it : everybody can make his own opinion.
But from a historical point of view, this video is flawed : the narrator puts forward arguments that are not certain, as if they were certain. About the two main reasons that are given (here and everywhere else) in favour of the use of the bomb a) that it avoided far worse casualties on all sides than if a landing had taken place and b) that the Japanese government was not ready to surrender; well, I have read a study by a French historian (a serious one, and one who has not got any predilection in the matter) explaining that those two assertions are at best unsettled, and at worse, false. Nobody can know for sure what would have happened. But those ideas are only taken seriously because proponents of the use of the bomb repetitively hammered them in people consciousness during decades. When historians bypass those "certainties" and delve a little bit more, there are as as much historical reasons to believe that anyhow, the Japanese surrender was very near and that the bombs didn't change anything to that! And about the capacity of the army and of the population to put a long fight of resistance, well, that's a joke. Father Miscamble himself says that the Japanese had almost no fuel nor food. This idea of a stubborn and prolonged fight may have been credible in 1945, for sure. Informations were scarce and people where afraid on the Japanese. But now there is no reason to indulge nowadays the fancy.
To go on with historical flaws : Father Miscamble does not mention (I don't know if he forgot it or is simply not aware of it) that a) Pdt Truman was far more aware of the real, dire situation which the Japanese army was in, than the man-in-the-street and b) that Pdt Truman grossly lied to the American people, in order to soften the news and to mollify the moral reservations that some people might have had. I listened to his 6th of August 1945 speech, when he announced the dropping, and his 9th of August speech when he talks about the Potsdam conference, the San Francisco conference, and finally the Hiroshima bombing. It is on YT and anyone can do as I did. Pdt Truman said such enormous fallacies as "the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base, that was because we wished in the first attack to avoid in so far as possible the killing of civilians" (do I need to emphasise the horrible irony here?), " I urge Japanese civilians to leave industrial cities immediately and save themselves from destruction" (as if such a thing was possible, and as if anyhow the Japanese population would be aware of his speech!), "(with the Atomic bomb) we are now prepared to destroy more rapidly and completely every productive enterprise the Japanese have in any city, we shall destroy their docks their factories and their communications…" (as if a bomb could select what it destroyed!!). This is so ludicrous that it stinks.
And last but not least, the religious side of the question. That is the only really serious one, if we aim at having a really sound opinion, and not only a relativistic one. I am a Catholic, and not a liberal one. I take my religion seriously and does not like moral compromises. I hate leftism as much as I hate taking the "easy option" in matters of faith. So we have here a Catholic priest, speaking in his formal capacity of priest and history professor. Well, he should be ashamed of himself and I am ashamed of him. This man, who should know better, far better, is making the point, the obviously totally anti-Catholic point (obvious to any person with a basic knowledge of Catholicism theology) that Pdt Truman's decision should be excused on the ground that it was the least of two evils. But first, as I said above, there is no way to know for sure that this was the least of two evils. And what is even worse, there is another golden rule, that for a son of God, ends do not justify means. That is not easy to understand for atheists, but this is a rule that knows no exceptions. This alone invalidates all what this priest (who should take again a course in basics of theology) said.
To summarise, on a non religious point of view, the question is still opened and always will be. Sincerely, I would not have liked it to be in Pdt Truman's shoes and have this decision to make. I do not say it is an easy one. But as a Christian (and more precisely a Catholic), there is no hesitation possible. And I find it very sad that a priest of my own faith should use a bad argument to sustain the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children.
I say "hundreds of thousands" on purpose : because the moral impossibility of mass bombing of large cities is as relevant for the atomic bombs as for the German cites mass bombings, and the Tokyo bombings.
It is all the system that the allied used that is evil. I may understand, partly, that during the war, people were blind, for different reasons, to the moral implications of what they were doing. But it is not possible now, that we can think coolly to that, to maintain that mass bombings of civilians populations is a military asset. By the way, all historical studies that I have read on the question point out the complete failure of the mass killings in, at least, Germany. It mostly killed innocents and put the survivors on the roads. The military effect was close to null.
To those who would still maintain that "the Japanese deserved it" or "it was the best option": do you really know what bombings are? If you knew, you would not so easily support wars such as the Gulf wars or the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. Do you know what is a baby in his cradle, when a 500kgs bomb destroys his house? Do you know what it is to be burnt by napalm in a Vietnam village? But most people have no idea about that and see it only as a video game, or something they are not concerned with. As a Christian, ask yourself if you would you like that to happen to you (Matthew, 7-12) ? As a non-believer, do you think it is really rational to always go back to Pearl Harbour and all the various misdeeds of the Japanese military, to justify a retribution that was in fact manifold worse? Is that a sign of civilisation? Where is the superiority over Japanese militarism, over nazism, or over bolshevist barbarity?
The main effect of the use of the atomic bomb, on the long run (and of mass bombings in general) is comparable to the Nazi concentration camps : that is to drive the Western world in an era of hardness and violence. It made (as WWI already did, but on a far worse scale) mass killings and violence acceptable; it accustomed the population with the killing of innocents, as long as it is far away, and that some general ordered it. As if Communism was not sufficient for that. And the moral toll of those evils (something nobody wanted to look at during the joy of "the victory of the democracies, and something that most people do not want to accept now) is still heavy on us.
Father, it's nice to hear someone say what they did was right. I am a casual student of World War II, and it was not hard to see why the bombs were dropped. Of course, people today judge history and historical reasoning through the lens of today. Way too many people are not able to see the past through lenses of that time and not today.
I was born in 1960 and had the opportunity talk to World War II vets only twenty some years after the war. Infact, my next-door neighbor had been on the USS Tennesse on December 7, 1941, and told me that a lot of what I thought I knew was wrong and told me his story. I wish I could remember it today, but it has been close to 60 years since then.
I think it's ridiculous to say that this was the war that needed to be ended with atomic bombs right when atomic bombs became conveniently available for the US to use. Truman knew about Japan trying to negotiate peace through the USSR, but Stalin stalled the peace negotiations with them so that he could prepare for his own invasion, which he ended up doing shortly after the Hiroshima bomb. The USSR invasion alone would have been enough to force a Japanese surrender, and you even noted that the Japanese military was in an utterly dismal state by that point. Ambassador Naoteke Sato knew their situation and told his superiors that they would have to do an unconditional surrender rather than negotiate, but they chose to ignore his proposals. However, all of this does not explain why the bombs were dropped on civilian population centers when Truman stated in his diary that they would be purely military targets
I read some of the comments below, the ignorance is beyond shameful
It is a big mistake to invoke God and morality of us Christians into this, let alone bringing a Catholic priest to twist this and again, include our Lord and savor Jesus Christ. Prager U is one of those cunning entities with only one aim, We all know hat aim.
Ends, fellow Catholics and Christians does not justify the means (this is Machiavelli's text book NOT Christianity AT ALL) It is not licit to do evil that good may come of it Roman: 3:8
Bringing another failed Catholic Priest who did not truly study the Bible is an insult to us all, Christians. Bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki is evil as per our Holy Book. This History teacher, and priest is not spreading Christian values at all. It is more a way to twist Christian Values. A disgrace to be honest. In Romans 3:8, "It is not licit to do evil that good may come of it" Paul is addressing an accusation that was apparently being made against him and his teachings. Some were misinterpreting his message of salvation by faith and grace, suggesting that he was promoting a form of moral relativism or antinomianism—the idea that moral laws are not binding. They claimed that Paul was saying it was acceptable to do evil so that good might come from it, as a way to emphasize God's grace.
Paul rejects this idea strongly. His statement, "And why not say, 'Let us do evil that good may come'?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just," is a condemnation of the notion that the ends justify the means. Paul is making it clear that it is never permissible to commit evil acts even if one believes that good may result from them. He emphasizes that moral integrity and adherence to God's commandments are paramount, and doing evil to achieve a perceived good contradicts the principles of Christian faith and morality. Prager U, we get it you are all powerful but your power and cunning is absolutely nothing as you have, for so long, lost your soul.
I'm not even surprised that "conservative" "christian" PragerU somehow forgot to mention, that Nagasaki had a big catholic population, that was pretty much eliminated by the A-bomb.
It is said that the pilot of Bocks Car, Major Charles Sweeney, an Irish-American, brought up Roman Catholic, had not had a clear view of the initial target, Kokura (now Kitakyushu), and, running out of fuel, headed back over Nagasaki when he spotted the turret of the Cathedral. Concluding that must mean there were people nearby it, he decided to drop the bomb more or less on top of it.
This is bs for 9 reasons.
1. This is literally abortion for all ages. It was killing people in an instant.
2. Japan didn’t expect to win the war. Thus, they knew America had the resources to conquer. However, the Americans chose the nukes because it was convient. No work necessary, just command the nuclear strike.
3. The Japanese were already preparing for peace. The reason why was because the USSR conquered Mancharia, land Hapan was proud to claim. After this, Morale went down. However, the Allies urged unconditional surrender which the Japanese refused to accept.
4. There was lasting radiation.
5. Nukes stand against Just-War Theory, considering nukes are an evil that Japan did not inflict on us.
6. Hiroshima, and, especially Nagasaki, had some of the, if not, the highest concentrations of Catholics in Japan. 150 years of Japanese persecution did not do nearly the same amount of damage to measly days did to the Catholic presence. If all men are created equal, this is an unmentioned crime against a certain group.
7. (Extra): Your precious Western civilization is based on Judeo-Christain values.
8. Prager is subtley using a Catholic Priest to subconsciously justify the crimes of America, because, God forbid America does something wrong. He also is using a Priest to appeal to Catholic listeners and viewers, etc.
9. Even if the nukes were the lesser of two evels, which it obviously wasn't, it was not only a message to Japan but also the USSR.
Was it wrong ? Yes it was.
The japanese army comitted the most horrible of crimes, killing and starving millions of japanese, but it still doesnt make it right. 22% of the 1st day victims of Hiroshima were schoolkids aged 13 to 14 years old working on fire prevention. A single japanese army batallion was in the center of the city of 350000 inhabitants. A civilian target. Of course, this an argument in itself : if my oponents targets civilians, can I too ? I believe not, otherwise, you cant claim to be fighting the just cause.
I wonder if any of the people commenting or this priest would have changed theyre mind if they had been in Hiroshima under the atomic mushroom.
I belive the bomb was highly immoral, but there is no course of action that would have prevented it from being used.
It was so expensive and promising to be left in a shed over other options.
Its only once they dropped it and saw that Japan still wasnt willing to give up that the US gave up on inconditionnal surrender and promised not to procecute the emperor Hirohito that the Japanese ministers finally gave up.
However, the handling of the effects of radiations on the Hibakusha by the US was awfull, treating survivors like guinea pigs.
After reading all I could on the matter, I believe the war could have ended without the bombs, but such was the racial hatred and the urge to end thus war, nothing could have prevented the bombings from happening. It should be noted that the US public opinion did change radically against it once the effect became known.
The various effects on the human body are too horrific and last over generations. Its normal for humanity to reject such a weapon. No matter how people argue for or against it, the bombings will haunt the US foreign diplomacy forever. On this matter, all other country have the moral high ground.
Peace.
If it had been the land invasion the Soviets might have invaded too and could have led to a Japan split north and south like Korea and Vietnam.
As Obama said, we shouldn’t prosecute crimes of the past. Too bad for those people incarcerated by Joe Biden’s crime bill that they all committed their crimes in the future. Imagine being a man of the clothe who supports dropping two nuclear bombs on civilians. I wonder why people are abandoning religion.
What's unmentioned, as a major factor of ending the conflict quickly, is that had the Soviets managed to move their forces across the continent in time to participate in a land invasion it would only have been far worse. Imagine for a moment the prolonged atrocities had Japan spent fifty years split north to south like Germany, or Korea.
Another thing to realize, in order to put the projected casualties into perspective, is that in preparation for the invasion, we minted up an order for purple hearts so large that we are still issuing from that batch eighty years later.
That's why we have anime now 😂
Very cool story, even though I agree with the video, I find regretful that tere's no mention of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, considered by many the main reason Japan surrendered to the USA, since for the Japanese empire it was considered better to negotiate with the americans than with the communists.
Repliers may ask my sources if so desired.
It was not the UK that started the Opium War against China, but Jardine Matheson & Co., a member of the international financial capital Rothschild.At the end of Japan's Edo period, Admiral Matthew Perry, who came to Japan to open up Japan, was related by marriage to the Rothschild family.Japan's Meiji Restoration was a farce of conflict between the British and French Rothschilds for financial control.They instigated the civil war from behind the scenes, lent weapons and funds to both sides, and imposed financial control on the Emperor's side, which they hoped would help them win.For this purpose, Thomas Glover of Matheson & Co. was dispatched to Nagasaki, Japan.Weapons used during the American Civil War were also used in Japan.Japan's invasion of China and annexation of Korea were also part of Rothschild's strategy to dominate Asia using Japan and to counter Russia.They invested huge amounts of capital and know-how in order to expand Japan overseas, leaving Japan mired in debt and forcing it to undergo rapid modernization.That's why the Sino-Japanese War, the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, and the Russo-Japanese War occurred.Japan had no choice but to comply.The Rothschilds gave a huge amount of money to Japan in order to start the Russo-Japanese War.So Japan won the war, but made little profit and prioritized debt repayment.At that time, it was impossible for Japan, which had few resources, to rapidly modernize in a short distance on its own with its financial resources.The essence of World War I was that the British and French Rothschilds attacked Germany and Italy.Since Japan was financially dominated, Japan had to follow suit in Asia as well.Japan defied international financial capital on its way to freedom from being forever deprived of Asia's vast resources and assets.Japan aimed to become an Asian co-prosperity sphere.Therefore, Japan formed an alliance with Germany and Italy.American Jews pressured Japan to go to war.In order to participate in the war, the United States knew about Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor in advance and ignored it, presenting itself as a victim.Neumann and other Jews developed the atomic bomb from the beginning with the intention of dropping it on Japan.They claimed that they had no intention of dropping the atomic bomb on Japan after the war.Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which has long been full of Korean residents in Japan, delayed the declaration of war in order to demonstrate to the rest of the world that Japan was malicious.They made the attack on Pearl Harbor look like a surprise attack.They leaked various information overseas in advance, including the attack on Pearl Harbor.International financial capital also used the Soviet Union, which they would later destroy, to counterattack Japan.They brainwashed China and Korea into thinking that Japan was a vicious invader and perpetrator.China and Korea have been fabricating history and teaching anti-Japan for many years in order to steal money from Japan.In China, the Chinese financial capital is obstructing the liberation of Asia, covering up a number of malicious sabotages, and still fabricating stories of impossible massacres and cruel Japanese troops.The annexation of Korea was also the intention of international financial capital.It was a stepping stone to advance to the continent.Japan, which hesitated to annex Korea because it would increase debt, abolished the corrupt Korean royal palace, democratized the country, improved the environment, and promoted industry.Korea wanted to become a great power like Japan and repeatedly petitioned Japan for annexation.Korea actively changed its name to Japanese so as not to be ridiculed by Chinese people.After Japan lost the Asian Liberation War, Korea claimed that Korea was a victim of Japan and that Korea was the victor.Korea is still trying to steal money from Japan by making all kinds of fabrications, such as that they were forcibly annexed, that their names were taken away, that they were massacred and raped, and that they were forcibly taken away.In Japan, Korean residents in Japan are fabricating history and trying to brainwash them into thinking that Japan is malicious.Japanese traitors and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs handed over huge sums of money to China and Korea in order to steal some of the money and hide it overseas.Japanese leaders who aimed to liberate Asia were judged as war criminals and executed.Emperor Showa Hirohito apologized to General MacArthur in order to protect the Japanese people.America still believes the atomic bomb was in retaliation for the attack on Pearl Harbor.The atomic bomb was a retaliation against Japan, which aimed to liberate Asia.Human experiments with different types.The British Prime Minister, who declared a Cold War on behalf of the Rothschilds, authorized the dropping of an atomic bomb on Japan.The Chinese come to Japan and destroy the Yasukuni Shrine, which is a memorial to the Japanese soldiers who sacrificed their precious lives for the liberation of Asia.
My father was a high school senior that Septemeber. He didn't have the money to proceed to college at that point, so he was happy for the bombs as he would have very likely been drafted to fight in the pacific. And with that, I don't know if I would be here had he been sent to the pacific.
Fizeram isso pra mostrar poder militar…
Interesting, this video by the Father here says that Nagasaki was a military center. But the following video clip that I'll post from the History Channel says Nagasaki had "no military units, and of the 140,000 deaths, only 150 were military." So somebody has their facts wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZSENcK-en4&rco=1
Nope.
An utilitatian Catholic priest? Wtf???
So we're embracing Machiavellianism now?
No. It was not wrong. Our nation is precious, and it deserves respect.