Was+President+Truman's+decision+to+drop+the+atomic+bomb+consistent+with,+or+a+departure+from,+American+wartime+ideals,+goals,+and+tactics?

=The Scenario= One major group task over the next three days will be to develop position papers and group presentations on the question above. Groups will be organized to develop and deliver testimony for a fictitious Congressional hearing appointed in 1950 to evaluate this question.

As we will see, the question of whether to deploy an atomic bomb was controversial even before that fateful August 6, 1945, when the first bomb detonated over Hiroshima at 2:45 a.m. Opinion within the Truman administration was divided in some measure along a line between the Department of War and the Department of State, but there was no neat cleavage between diplomatic and military advisers. Members of the scientific community also held different points of view, though they attempted to forge a consensus in advance of the decision.

The months and years after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki witnessed an explosion of controversy over the morality of the both the decision and the very project of developing atomic weaponry. Dystopian novels set in post-nuclear landscapes began to appear, reflecting growing international fears that humankind might act on their newly-found ability to destroy the world in an atomic holocaust. In 1949, U.S. spy planes picked up undeniable evidence that the Soviet Union had developed and detonated its own nuclear device, setting off a nuclear arms race that seemed to bring those fears starkly closer to reality.

Some of the sources used for this workshop were produced after the surrender of Japan and reflect the grave concerns that began to develop shortly after the bombing of Hiroshima thrust the work of the Manhattan Project into the public spotlight. Many others on the Truman Library website were produced during the spring and summer of 1945, so lack the influence of hindsight. Groups may find it interesting to note when each source was produced and to take into consideration whether and how Hiroshima and Nagasaki influenced each writer's remembering and telling of the events.

=The Groups= To prepare testimony for the Congressional inquiry into the decision to drop the atom bomb, the workshop participants will be divided into three broad groups: 1) Truman administration officials who advocated dropping the bomb to shorten the war; 2) Truman administration officials who advocated pursuit of an alternative political solution; and 3) the scientific community and its allies, who harbored a variety of opinions about the morality or advisability of using this new and unprecedentedly destructive weapon.

Each group will begin by analyzing a single document representative of its point of view and reporting the viewpoint to the other two groups (during the Monday, 10:45-11:30 block). The purpose of this initial exercise will be to sketch the broad outlines of each position so that all participants will be aware of the major perspectives. When groups return to this activity in the afternoon, each will work with a much larger document set available at the [|Harry S. Truman Presidential Library website]. This extensive collection (over 600 documents in all) will provide the evidence base for both individual essays and the group presentations to be delivered on Day 3 of the workshop.

//Group 1: Drop the Bomb to Shorten the War//
Members of this group will begin by reviewing President Truman's own memoir recounting how he arrived at the decision to order the bombing of Hiroshima, and, shortly after, of Nagasaki. They will analyze Truman's own reasons for his decision and report these out to the other groups. During the remainder of the workshop, members will explore the larger body of evidence available at the Truman Library to develop their presentation and their papers. //Remember that your task in argumentative writing is not only to present evidence favorable to your own point of view, but to confront honestly and rebut opposing arguments.//

//Group 2: Pursue an Alternative Political End to the War//
Members of this group will begin by reviewing Undersecretary of State Joseph C. Grew's memoir arguing for a political settlement of the war that would avoid use of the Bomb. They will analyze the factors that led Grew to believe a political solution was possible and report these out to the other groups. During the remainder of the workshop, members will explore the larger body of evidence available at the Truman Library to develop their presentation and their papers. //Remember that your task in argumentative writing is not only to present evidence favorable to your own point of view, but to confront honestly and rebut opposing arguments.//

//Group 3: The Scientists' Viewpoint//
Members of this group will begin by reviewing the secret petition signed by 67 scientists and presented to the President in July, 1945. They will analyze the scientists' concerns and qualifications and report these out to the other groups. During the remainder of the workshop, members will explore the larger body of evidence available at the Truman Library to develop their presentation and their papers. In this particular group, you may find it interesting to trace how some of the concerns raised in the petition are echoed and developed in other documents, and how they are shared by others outside the scientific community. //Remember that your task in argumentative writing is not only to present evidence favorable to your own point of view, but to confront honestly and rebut opposing arguments.//


 * **Group 1: Drop the Bomb** || **Group 2: Alternative Political End ** || **Group 3: Scientists' Viewpoints** ||
 * * Never saw it as a moral decision; this is a legitimate weapon of war
 * Never considered //not// using the bomb; just where and when
 * Some concern expressed that Japan would surrender before they could use it ("I wanted to afford Japan a clear chance to end the fighting...")
 * Mentions the weapon to Stalin; implications of US power in relation to USSR
 * Message sent to sailors: "This is the greatest thing in history..."
 * Other factors involved: Soviet Union and Pacific Theater
 * General Marshall and the half million American lives that could potentially be lost
 * Scientists can see no demonstration that would end the war; or is this a reason he makes up to be able to use it?
 * Major reasons for deciding to drop the bomb
 * Scientific and military advisers
 * Support from other allied countries
 * Shortening the war; it is time for us to get home
 * Dropping it on a war production center; military strategy in accordance with the laws of war || * After the fire bombing of Tokyo, if the Emperor had been told that he could stay on the throne, they would have surrendered
 * There should have been a proclamation made to surrender and maintain the dynasty; however, the military is in control of the government
 * Major reasons for deciding not to drop the bomb
 * Civilian/military split || * Not totally opposed, but they wanted everyone to see the conditions and concerns
 * Give them an opportunity to surrender and know that they will live in peace
 * Public declaration in front of the world
 * Concerns: the country that sets the precedent of using the bomb may "open the door" to the nuclear era; "unimaginable destruction"
 * Also, they mention moral responsibility; US as moral compass of the world
 * Conventional means of war are available
 * Atomic weapons no longer a threat from Germany; this should be a defensive weapon
 * 67 signatures on the petition ||