The Hiroshima bombing and its historical impact

Hiroshima Bombing

The Manhattan Project

When I was asked to work on the Manhattan project during the late 1930's, I was delighted to be included in work of such magnitude. Not only would I work with the most prominent scientists in the world; I would also make a substantial contribution to the United States Government and its effort to keep the country safe.

Recently however I have begun experiencing considerable ambivalence regarding the work we were doing. Nuclear technology is extremely volatile and dangerous. The Government is also under pressure to end the war quickly, and plans are being made to use the atomic bomb for this purpose. Although the atomic bomb would effectively accomplish this, I am having serious misgivings about using it on human targets. My colleagues have voiced similar misgivings. For this reason I was asked to draw up a petition voicing our concerns about using the bomb in populated areas. In order to make a clear decision regarding the contents of this petition, and indeed whether or not such a petition is necessary, I have examined all the factors involved in this issue.

International Law

The most important consideration is international law. Several preventative laws have been implemented in order to prevent unnecessary brutality in events of war. I believe that these should enjoy careful scrutiny before proceeding with the plans for the atomic bomb.

Article XXII of the Hague convention with respect to the laws and customs of war on land for example states that the right to injure the enemy is not unlimited. Surely if a bomb as potent as the one we are developing is used against a nation, unlimited rights to harm the enemy are assumed. It has been shown that the effects of nuclear energy can be more devastating than is required by an act merely to end a war. Many civilians, including women and children, may be harmed if such measures are taken. It was found that plutonium is accompanied by two by-product effects.

The first is that an enormous amount of energy is produced by the chain reaction involved. In fact, a report by Dr. Smyth, one of the first working on such projects, suggests that a relative of the uranium pile may be sufficient to drive the machines of the entire world. Furthermore the Doctor found that the amount of daily radioactive poisons could cause large areas of land to become uninhabitable.

Article XXIII of the Hague Convention furthermore states that the use of poison or poisoned arms is especially prohibited, together with the use of material that would cause superfluous harm to the enemy. Surely rendering large areas of enemy land uninhabitable for long periods of time is harming the inhabitants superfluously. The atomic bomb is also poisonous, as seen above, which also makes it prohibited under the two Articles mentioned above.

Article XXIV, paragraph 1 of the Hague Rules for Aerial Warfare states that Aerial bombardment is only legitimate with the object of a military advantage for the belligerent. Paragraph 2 goes on to clarify specific objectives for aerial bombardment. These include military forces, military works, military establishments or depots, factories constituting important and well-known centers engaged in the manufacture of arms, etc. Paragraph 3 prohibits bombarding civilian areas such as cities or buildings not in the vicinity of military activity.

The bomb we developed will violate the above prohibitions if it is used. The poisonous gases released by the bomb will be harmful not only to the target areas, but also to distant civilian areas. The powerful effects of the bomb will reach farther than other explosives used in the past. Using the bomb in any area of Japan is tantamount to bombarding civilian areas, since the harm will be as great as for the military areas themselves. Can we in good conscience allow this? When considering the humanitarian and political factors involved, the answer has to be no.

Humanitarian and Political Considerations

Ralph A. Bard (June 27, 1945) has created a memorandum on the use of S-1 Bomb, stating that Japan should have preliminary warning two or three days in advance of using the bomb. This would reinforce the idea of the United States as a humanitarian nation, according to Bard. However, it is my feeling that the greater humanitarian purpose is served if the bomb is not used at all.

After witnessing the effects of the bomb at the Trinity test site, I cannot in good conscience allow our work to be used for mass destruction. The destructive effects - both foreseen and unforeseen - of the bomb are simply too extensive.

Bard goes on to suggest alternatives for using atomic power to force surrender from Japan. The country should be given the opportunity to surrender without using unnecessary and destructive force. It is suggested that representatives from Japan be contacted with negotiations regarding the surrender of this country. The threat of the atomic bomb should also be made clear, in order to inform the representatives of what is at stake.

Political considerations include similar technology that can be developed by rival countries such as Germany. Atomic power is more extreme than any of us could have foreseen. If the United States use the atomic bomb against other nations, this may cause our country's rivals to used the same technology against us. This could have dire consequences not only for the specific countries involved, but for the world at large.

There are thus two basic issues to consider here. Firstly the safety of the citizens of the United States should take the primary position of importance in all actions taken by the United States Defense Force. The safety of the citizens is placed in danger when the atomic bomb is used. Its power is extremely volatile, and the basic problem is that it could be used by other nations as well. Secondly, international safety and security are endangered by the use of this bomb. Not only the citizens of the United States, but also the citizens of the entire world are in danger if the use of this bomb should become global. Worldwide use of the atomic bomb in a world war could mean nothing short of global disaster.

Because of the above considerations, and after much deliberation with my colleagues, I have decided to draw up a petition voicing all the concerns mentioned above.

The Petition

The petition will consist of three parts. First, international laws regarding the use of bombs will be outlined. These will be followed by a discussion of the bomb we have developed, together with all the properties that make it so dangerous. The atomic bomb would violate many of the international standards for both land and aerial warfare. The reasons for this will be outlined and highlighted in a logical fashion.