Fruits of Manhattan

Still remain overwhelmingly ambivalent regarding the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In a strange and deeply unsatisfying way I empathize with both sides of the issue, agreeing to varying degrees with each argument. Yet I also freely acknowledge the drawbacks to each position. The extreme statements of both positions can be, it seems to me, declared thusly:

a) the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to end the war

b) the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an unmitigated war crime

Can both positions be correct? They are not mutually exclusive. So I tend to go with a “both / and” approach here rather than an “either / or.” I have read a bit about World War II, especially last summer, and I do know a bit about Just War theory from my exploration of Catholicism. In light of this admittedly limited and non-expert personal knowledge base, I tend to think that

(a) is partially correct in that the bombs needed to be dropped to win the war, but I’m not convinced that they needed to be dropped on population centers.

Because of this, (b) is also correct, to a certain degree in which lessening factors may be applied.

I dunno. My gut still tells me that dropping Little Boy in Tokyo Bay and Fat Man on the largest active Japanese aircraft carrier group would be just as effective and less morally repugnant. Though I’m sure there are experts by the dozen to tell me why this couldn’t be done.

I read The Making of the Atomic Bomb this past spring and was aghast at the eyewitness accounts of those on the ground in those two Japanese cities. O that such a fate never ever befalls me or my loved ones, especially my little girls. I would have hated to be the one sitting in the oval office in the summer of 1945.

I wrote a nice post about the dropping of the A-bomb a few years back that I like to link to every anniversary. Here it is if you’re interested in my two cents.