,,,(text-color: "green")[##Perspectives on Hiroshima]
You are a historian
Your mission: To use primary source documents to determine whether or not the United States should or should not have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan at the end of WWII.
For each primary source document you read you will identify whether the document is evidence that supports the dropping of the use of atomic bombs against Japan or evidence against the use of atamic bombs against Japan
[[Primary Source 1]][PRIMARY SOURCE 1]
(text-color: "green")[##Consider the following primary Source:]
//"The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender… In being the first to use it, we . . . adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."//
<img src="https://thumbs-prod.si-cdn.com/Fk07u8c1QdZ8NSduJnaBSuRjLEs=/fit-in/1072x0/https://public-media.si-cdn.com/filer/f9/3d/f93d5ade-ddd3-4d26-93c3-10ac531e27ad/gettyimages-615311808.jpg" width="300" height="200">
//Admiral William E. Leahy, President Truman's Chief of Staff, in his memoir, I Was There//
Does this primary source argue for or against the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan?
[[FOR]]
[[AGAINST 2]]<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/8lQyyys3SGBoUUxrUp/giphy.gif" width="150" height="150">
Okay, read this source more carefully. What, specifically, leads you to believe this source could be used to argue that dropping the atomic bomb was the right decision?
As you read, what words or statements stand out to you the most in how Leahy characterizes the decision to drop the bomb?
//"The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender… In being the first to use it, we . . . adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."//
//Admiral William E. Leahy, President Truman's Chief of Staff, in his memoir, I Was There//
Now that you have read this source again more carefully, which statement do you believe best captures the main idea that Leahy is trying to make?
[[The atomic bomb is a barbarous weapon.]]
[[The Japanese were already defeated.]]
[[We should not make war on women and children]]
[[For many reasons, the dropping of the atomic bomb was immoral]]<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/mIZ9rPeMKefm0/giphy.gif" width="200" height="300">
Well done! While Stimson's language lays bare the nightmarish nature of the atomic bomb he is making an argument for its use agianst japan.
Now let's move on to [[Primary Source 3]].<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7TKAdOad9Y3eSMZG/giphy.gif" width="300" height="200">
Okay, read this source more carefully. What, specifically, leads you to believe this source could be used to argue that dropping the atomic bomb was the right decision?
As you read, what words or statements stand out to you the most in how Stimson rationalizes the decision to drop the bomb?
//"The face of war is the face of death; death is an inevitable part of every order that a wartime leader gives. The decision to use the atomic bomb was a decision that brought death to over a hundred thousand Japanese… But this deliberate, premeditated destruction was our least abhorrent alternative. The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki put an end to the Japanese war. It stopped the fire raids, and the strangling blockade; it ended the ghastly specter of a clash of great land armies. In this last great action of the Second World War we were given final proof that war is death."
—Secretary of War Henry Stimson//
Now that you have read this source again more carefully, which statement do you believe best captures the main idea that Stimson is trying to make?
[[The decision to drop the atomic bomb is no different than any other wartime decision a leader must make]]
[[The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki put an end to the Japanese war]]
[[Killing women and children is morally okay if it is for war]]
[[War is death and the atomic bomb was the least least abhorrent alternative]]<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/C89BNSRdbf5Bhjxgn4/giphy.gif" width="175" height="150"
This statement is one of several in which Leahy characterizes the use of the atomic bomb in negative terms.
For example, Leahy also states that in dropping dropping of the atomic bomb, the U.S. adopted an "ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages." While this is also a strong statement by Leahy, it is not the main point either.
Go back to the previous step and consider your choices again. Which statement best represents the entire reading?Excellent work!
This statement best captures Leahy's main point because in every statement in this passage, Leahy is clearly taking a moral position.
Now click on [[Primary Source 2]]<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/C89BNSRdbf5Bhjxgn4/giphy.gif" width="175" height="150"
This statement is one of several in which Leahy characterizes the use of the atomic bomb in negative terms.
For example, Leahy also states that in dropping dropping of the atomic bomb, the U.S. adopted an "ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages." While this is also a strong statement by Leahy, it is not the main point either.
Go back to the previous step and consider your choices again. Which statement best represents the entire reading?<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/C89BNSRdbf5Bhjxgn4/giphy.gif" width="175" height="150"
This statement is one of several in which Leahy characterizes the use of the atomic bomb in negative terms.
For example, Leahy also states that in dropping dropping of the atomic bomb, the U.S. adopted an "ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages." While this is also a strong statement by Leahy, it is not the main point either.
Go back to the previous step and consider your choices again. Which statement best represents the entire reading?[PRIMARY SOURCE 2]
(text-color: "green")[##Consider the following primary Source:]
//"The face of war is the face of death; death is an inevitable part of every order that a wartime leader gives. The decision to use the atomic bomb was a decision that brought death to over a hundred thousand Japanese… But this deliberate, premeditated destruction was our least abhorrent alternative. The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki put an end to the Japanese war. It stopped the fire raids, and the strangling blockade; it ended the ghastly specter of a clash of great land armies. In this last great action of the Second World War we were given final proof that war is death."//
<img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/Henry_Lewis_Stimson_cph.3b21803.jpg/180px-Henry_Lewis_Stimson_cph.3b21803.jpg" width="200" height="300" alt="Two foxes">
//—Secretary of War Henry Stimson//
Does this primary source argue for or against the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan?
[[FOR 2]]
[[AGAINST 2]]<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/C89BNSRdbf5Bhjxgn4/giphy.gif" width="175" height="150"
Okay, so think about the entirety of what Stimson said about the decision. What else must you consider from Stimsons words that is essential to his main argument?
Think about this question and return to the last window<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/C89BNSRdbf5Bhjxgn4/giphy.gif" width="175" height="150"
Hmmm, what reason do you have for selecting this option? Go back and read Stimson's statement again more carefully and try again.<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/C89BNSRdbf5Bhjxgn4/giphy.gif" width="175" height="150"
Hmmm, what reason do you have for selecting this option? Go back and read Stimson's statement agin more carefully and try again.<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/mIZ9rPeMKefm0/giphy.gif" width="200" height="300">
Great work!
Now let's move on to [[Primary Source 3]].<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7abKhOpu0NwenH3O/giphy.gif" width="200" height="100"
Excellent work! Leahy was very clear on how he viewed the decion to drop the atomic bomb on Japan.
Now consider another perspective on this decision. Consider what Secretary of War, Henry Stimpson, had to say in regard to the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japn. Please go to [[Primary Source 2]][PRIMARY SOURCE 3]
(text-color: "green")[##Consider the following primary Source:]
Following the bombing of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the United States War Department- now known as the Department of Defense- created the film, //"A Tale of Two Cities".//
Watch excerpts from the film below then decide if the film either supports and argues against the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan.
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/166409581" width="640" height="480" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; fullscreen" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So, what do you think? Does does this film argue FOR or AGAINST the dropping of the atomic bomb?
[[FOR 3]]
[[AGAINST 3]][PRIMARY SOURCE 4]
(text-color: "green")[##Consider the following primary Source:]
The essence of thinking like an historian is to consider the different frames of reference of any particular history. In the case of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, we have considered perspectives of people whose frame of reference is from an American point of view. To broaden our perspective on Hiroshima let us consider the experience of someone who witnessed and survived the atomic bomb, Keiko Ogura, who was 8 years old at the time of the dropping of the atomic bomb. Watch the interview below. While doing so, consider the following question:
//What previous source in this exercise would align with the experience and sentiments expressed by this survivor of the atmomic bomb attack on Hiroshima?//
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-07xiaBl2vk" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So which previous primary source do you believe corroborates with the video?
[[Primary Source 1: Admiral William E. Leahy]]
[[Primary Source 2: Secretary of War Henry Stimson]]
[[Primary Source 3: Department of Defense film, A Tale of Two Cities]]Excellent work! One of the most notable things about this film is what they DO NOT SHOW- what the bomb did to human beings, which brings us to [[Primary Source 4]]This film could be used as a source to argue against the use of the atomic bomb, however, the purpose of the film is to advertise the destructive capabilities of the bomb. Think about the following question- what did the film NOT SHOW regarding the effects of the atomic bomb?
Keep this question in mind as you watch an interview with a survivor of the atomic bomb attack in [[Primary Source 4]].<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/MTclfCr4tVgis/giphy.gif" width="300" height="200">
Awesome! Leahy argued against the bomb because of what it would have done to women and children. Keiko Ogura's experience was a demonstration of why Leahy argued against the use of the bomb against civilians.
So, what do you think? Should the United States have avoided using the atomic on Japan or was it the right decision?
Move on the the final part of this activity: the [[REFLECTION]]<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/xUPGcz2H1TXdCz4suY/giphy.gif" width="350" height="200">
As stated before, Stimson does not sugarcoat how devastating the atomic bomb would be but he still was making an argument for dropping the atomic bomb.
Go back to Primary Source 4 and reconsider your choice<img src="https://media.giphy.com/media/xUPGcz2H1TXdCz4suY/giphy.gif" width="350" height="200">
As stated before, what is most notable about A Tale of Two Cities is what the defense department left out- the toll taken on human life and lives.
Go back to Primary Source 4 and reconsider your choice(text-color: "green")[##REFLECTION]
For this final portion of this assignment you must do the following:
1. Write at least a one paragraph response to the following question:
//Should the United States have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan? Explain why or why not. List the two primary sources you would use to support your argument.//
2. List two primary sources that support your argument after your paragraph
<title>RESPONSE</title>
<form method="post" action="send_mail.php">
<p>
<label>First Name
<input type="text" name="first_name" required>
</label>
</p>
<p>
<label>Last Name
<input type="text" name="last_name" required>
</label>
</p>
<p>
<label>Email
<input type="email" name="email_address">
</label>
</p>
<p>
<label>Write your reflection and supporting primary sources here
<textarea name="Write Your Reflection Here" maxlength="500"></textarea>
</label>
</p>
<p><button>Submit the form</button></p>
</form>Double-click this passage to edit it.