Morality and Responsibility of the Atomic Bomb

As we first learned in class, it is hard to separate politics and science, and the atomic bomb is a prime example of this discord. Truman wanted to drop the bomb but not everyone's motives were the same, as the scientists knew the destruction that the bomb would bring. The ongoing battle between politicians and scientists show that it is hard for anything in international politics to be accomplished when varying ideologies have to work together.

Ethics plays a large part in the decision of dropping the bomb. In order to advance the U.S. and minimize Russian influence do we drop the bomb and risk innocent lives or are there other ways to deter Russian influence? Oppenheimer said that " the more horrible and inhumane the weapon, the stronger the case would be for its postwar control". Therefore, dropping the bomb looked like it would help the U.S. obtain its goal. It is hard when different ideologies are working on a common goal. Politicians, scientists, and historians, all have differing opinion on if the bomb should have been dropped. Politicians would want to advance the status of the country and make it powerful, as well as, increase international relations. While scientists would look at the bomb as scientific advancement and it opens up another window in the science realm that can be further explored. Historians could look at it from the perspective of how the bomb impacted events that spurred from the incident. Would certain wars have spurred if the bomb wasn't dropped or would our relations be any different between countries if we did not have the atomic bomb?

The notion of morals always comes into question in science and politics. From a politician's viewpoint, we wanted our country to be in a powerful position, so dropping the bomb would put the U.S. at the paramount of the international realm. Morally, it can be argued, it was right to drop the bomb because we were fearful Germany was working on an atomic bomb and we were scared of the Soviet power. We didn't want Germany to beat us or the Soviet to take over the world. It was in our best interest, especially later in life to drop the bomb. Looking at the atomic bomb from a scientifically moral standpoint is a little harder. Scientists often know better then anyone else the impact of such an explosion and how the after effects are going to hamper society. It is their duty to warn others who are less knowledgeable about the atomic bomb in this respect, of the consequences. In a sense, they were morally obligated to fully explain how the explosions would affect society. One must also think about the psychological factor that comes with the bomb. Killing civilians has the greatest psychological affect on anyone no matter your role in the act.

The dichotomy between the scientist and the politician is one that we grapple with. The Interim Committee was formed to decide what happens with the bomb and they had a Scientific Advisory Panel which aided them in their decision. One argument is that the scientist should be responsible because they built the bomb. Contrarily, the scientist believes that he is not held responsible because he did not launch the bomb; that is the responsibility of the politician. He was employed to build the bomb, but he has not responsibility with what happens to it. The issue between responsibility makes people wonder why even build something so destructive as a bomb is no one wants to take credit for it. It is common knowledge that a bomb causes ruin and chaos so inevitably someone has take responsibility.

The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a debate that will be left unanswered. President Truman's initial reaction was that it was a good idea because the war was going to be over. The public became uneasy of the fact that nuclear bombs existed because they feared their long term impact. The dropping of the atomic bomb was a pivotal point in history and no matter how long people scrutinize over it, there will always be an argument about it is was the appropriate thing to do.