After The Drop: A Test for Moral Thinking

I believe it is no coincidence that this piece was created half a century after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To commemorate the bombing of Hiroshima -- a delicate subject in itself -- is to call upon emotions of pride, but also sorrow. When watching this documentary and thinking about the thought process leading up to the drop, my moral values could not help but be tested. Call me a murderer, but I feel the Manhattan Project and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary, especially when examining the context of the time. Moreover, it is unfair for us, students of the 2000's, to criticize the decisions made over 60 years ago by the government, especially a government under the stresses of war. The decision to drop the bomb was not one backed by rash thinking, but instead by the moral values of the heads of our government. As an American citizen, knowing that a bomb's fate is controlled by our president may be surreal and uncomfortable for most, but at the time of the bombing no civilian had any notion of what was to come. Shortly after though thousands were celebrating across the U.S., and very few held regrets. 

It is difficult to think of an atom bomb being dropped by the U.S. today, partially because the present war is incomparable to that of WWII, and because there is little respect for the higher decision making of our government...otherwise known as patriotism. What does this mean? With no chance of a bomb being dropped, the idea becomes that much more outrageous, altering our mindset on the matter, causing us to make claims similar to "I would not drop the bomb for we need to think about the innocent." Such a statement lies on the back of emotion, and relies  not on context, but sympathy.

Analyzing the context is a crucial process when looking at the history surrounding an event. One must clear the humanitarian emotions from their mind, and look at the facts when deciding to do something as significant as killing thousands of people. Today, it seems as if emotion has taken over and the facts are set aside in the decision making process. Nevertheless, our government made a choice in 1945 that was based on instinct and fact, rather than on humanitarian perceptions that would have led to more days of war.

If you have the backbone to say that you would not end a war as soon as possible, then talk to a WWII veteran or a Vietnam veteran or a Korean War veteran who got the chance to watch their brothers and dear friends be killed by the enemy.... this might give you the perspective I am trying to get across. Dropping the atomic bomb was the necessary thing to do, because even if we had not bombed Japan, the war would still have continued, amounting to a greater death toll -- both American and Japanese. The U.S. military would have likely invaded Japan, prolonging the end date of the war, and the total war would continue.

I ran a little astray from the original assignment but I could not help but see that some people had the audacity to say that ending WWII with the bombing of Hiroshima was not the best way to handle the situation. I accept most all opinions, but this is something I feel too strongly about, and I will bet you most every American soldier of WWII would agree with me.