In particular, he posits that the Japanese were already close to surrender and that bombs were primarily intended as a political and diplomatic weapon against the Soviet Union. New York: Knopf, 1995.Īlperovitz, a prominent revisionist historian, argues that the bombs were unnecessary to force Japan’s surrender. The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth.
This is not an exhaustive list, but should illustrate some of the different arguments over the decision to use the bombs. These books and articles provide a range of perspectives on the atomic bombings. Many historians have taken positions between these two poles. Other experts, usually called “revisionists,” claim that the bombs were unnecessary and were dropped for other reasons, such as to intimidate the Soviet Union. 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. Historians and the public continue to debate if the bombings were justified, the causes of Japan’s surrender, the casualties that would have resulted if the U.S. More than seventy years after the end of World War II, the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains controversial.
0 kommentar(er)
