A Brief History
On August 9, 1945, a Boeing B-29 bomber named “Bockscar” dropped the second atomic bomb on Japan, incinerating 39,000 people within seconds. In the following weeks, thousands more would die from exposure and their injuries, and more would keep dying from radiation-related illnesses for years to come. The Japanese quickly surrendered after this second nuclear attack, but the question of whether or not this bomb was necessary still haunts Americans to this day.
Digging Deeper
“Bockscar” was part of a special B-29 unit specially trained for dropping atomic bombs. The bombers were modified B-29s that had their bomb bays adapted to fit extra large bombs (the Uranium “gun” type and the Plutonium “pumpkin” type) and whose armor and guns had been removed to save weight. They had also been fitted with improved engines. Not only were these planes able to carry either the “Little Boy” or the “Fat Man” bombs, but their superior performance allowed them to escape the blast zones more quickly.
The first atomic bomb, “Little Boy” which had the “gun” type configuration, was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. The stunned Japanese had already started to debate whether or not to surrender when the second bomb, called “Fat Man,” a Plutonium-implosion “pumpkin” type, was dropped on Nagasaki.
The “Fat Man” bomb was considerably more powerful than the “Little Boy” bomb, but poor visibility caused it to be dropped off target, killing fewer people.
Normally the debate about the use of the atomic weapons against Japan focuses on whether the first bomb should have been dropped on a populated place at all, something we here at History and Headlines have discussed here. Whether or not the second bomb was needed is even more debatable. Why did the U.S. not give the Japanese a little more time to sort out the chaos of the first attack or, after a day or 2, communicate an ultimatum? Were the American planners that eager to test the effects of another type of bomb on real people? Some have speculated that the second bomb was needed to prove that the U.S. had more than one such weapon. This implies that the U.S. might have continued to drop atomic bombs until Japan finally surrendered.
The statement “With great power comes great responsibility” may come from a comic book, but it is certainly true. Was the United States using its great power responsibly in August of 1945? Most Americans would say yes, but many people around the world would say no. Question for students (and subscribers): What do you say? Should the U.S. have dropped that second bomb on Nagasaki, or should America have pursued other means before rushing to nuke another city? Feel free to share your opinions in the comments section below this article.
History and Headlines Note: “Bockscar” is on display at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio. The pilot of “Bockscar,” Major Charles Sweeney, later became a Major General in the Massachusetts Air National Guard and died in 2004 at the age of 84.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Evidence
For more information, please see…
Frank, Richard B. Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. Penguin Books, 2001.
KidCaps. The Atomic Bomb: A History Just For Kids! CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013.
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="3548 http://www.crackedhistory.com/?p=3548">121 Comments
should’ve bomb kyoto instead of nagasaki- too many pacificists and christians lived in nagasaki and kyoto was the cultural and intellectual center of Japan- should’ve flattened it-
and we should’ve dropped a third bomb- they insisted on keeping their so-called god emperor- that is simply unacceptable- we should’ve hanged hirohito like a pig, and if they don’t like it, keep dropping bombs
I understand what you are saying, but I really hope you are just doing your name justice.
The Japanese did not keep their “so-called god emperor” even after the 2nd bomb was dropped. One of the terms of the surrender was that Hirohito explicitly had to give up his divine right, and his role after the war was as a constitutional monarch that was similar to the British royal family.
We dropped the second bomb because we were in a hurry to get Japan to surrender. The Soviets had just declared war on Japan as per the Tehran conference and the US was afraid that if it took much longer for the Japanese to surrender, Stalin would want a peace of the Asian pie. Dropping the second bomb was considered justifiable with this in mind. But… if the US had allowed Japan to keep its emperor immediately following the first bomb, then Fat Man would probably not have been necessary. Unfortunately, in 1945 we were more concerned with what the USSR would do than with patiently waiting for the Japanese to give up.
The second bomb was definitely unnecessary. Japan was probably close to surrendering even before the first bomb. I feel that Japanese citizens were just guinea pigs in an experiment.
The second bomb was doing too much, obviously they were going to surrender they just needed time and now that Russia had declared war on them there was no way they could fight Russia and an atomic war with us.
I believe the tactic to drop the second bomb (and so quickly) was the right decision. It obviously left the Japanese with no other option except to surrender.
Whether right or wrong… War is… WAR! Hindsight is always 20/20! — DAVID WARDLE
It was the right move to drop the second bomb.
The second bomb was dropped because the Japanese did not surrender after we dropped the first one. In my opinion, I think it was necessary because we wanted the Japanese to know we are not messing around and they would regret for attacking us on Pearl Harbor.
Interesting to question whether the scientists just wanted to test another atomic bomb and see the effects of it. It is fortunate in hindsight that the second bomb was dropped off target which spared many lives
Necessity really depends upon vantage point. For those of us chilling out in the early 21st Century, we can debate the necessity with a degree of clarity from not being embroiled in total war. For GI Joe who would have to clamber down into a higgins boat and storm the shores, I’d be willing to bet he would consider it totally necessary.
I believe the US should have waited longer after the first bomb but dropping 2 sealed the deal and accomplished the US’ goal of getting them to surrender.
One may have done the job, but two would leave no doubt!
I don’t think the second atomic bomb was necessary. I understand they were trying to get the Japanese to surrender, but it cost Japan innocent civilian lives.
70 years ago to this date the second bomb was dropped. This method of warfare is dark and many believe unnecessary. Japan could have surrendered after the first bombing to prevent the second, but of course as a nation in war they would not want to give up. In a world currently filled with enough nuclear bombs to cause world catastrophe I hope there will never be a time where these bombs will be used.
No atomic bomb is necessary. We as human beings should never have to stoop that low.
I don’t think its necessary for a bomb to be use in any circumstance. That is the weak way out but It for-sure gets the job done.
I don’t know the second bomb was necessary or not. However, I think atmic bomb was unnecessary. As Japanese, I know the terrible situation in Japan. I learned a lot after the bomb. I went to the musium in Hiroshima, and there were a lot of things. The watch stopped at the time the bomb was dropped. I felt fear. Now, North Korea is trying experiment of atmic bomb. I want everyone to understand the fear of nuclear bomb.
Very generic names for extremely powerful weapons
I think the second bomb was necessary.
It is hard to say whether the second bomb was necessary or not.
My family is from Dayton and as an Air Force family we’ve been to the Air Force Museum more times than I can count. That being said at any time other countries will judge others and think they should be more or less involved in political affairs. It seems like if Japan was going to surrender after the first bomb they would of done so rather quickly to avoid further attack. The second bomb more than likely just sped up the process since the allies were already over the war at that point.
The footage and pictures of the destruction of the cities makes me want to say there is no way the US needed to drop two bombs. We should’ve at least given them a few days to surrender after the first bomb.
The mere thought of the incineration of a huge magnitude of people is disturbing. How sad that, in order for Japan to surrender, the extremely violent war had to use savage warfare causing unimaginable devastation.
I believe that the US did not use there responsibilities wisely. The second second bomb was not needed, and US should be glad that it was dropped off target.
This second bomb I do not believe needed to be dropped. We shown them that we meant business with the first bomb and there is no reason for a second one.
The US should have given Japan some time to think before they dropped the second bomb. I don’t think the second one was even necessary. The first one already did so much damage.
I think they would have surrendered if they had more time.
I don’t think it was necessary to cause this much destruction.
I don’t believe there was a need for a second bomb. Surrender was near!
I think it was very much unneeded to cause this much destruction since war was coming to an ending i believe it was just to signify how much power we have as a whole.
I don’t think the second bomb was necessary, the end was near and they were about to surrender.
I don’t think killing that many people in one minute is ever necessary
I don’t think that the second bomb was necessary since the Japanese were so close to surrendering.
It seems as though we could have given them an ultimatum, but we don’t know all of the nuances concerning the decision.
i do not agree that it was necessary, i also do not agree in any atomic bomb being put in to use
This really makes you think…
It is easy to question these decisions in 2016. It is different if you are making that decision with the intent to spare the lives of U.S. troops and also coming fresh off Pearl Harbor.
people today say you would not drop them, but back then we had ever intention of doing so. i would have
I do not think the second bomb was necessarily needed but when the U.S wanted the war over faster they pulled all the stops.
Both bombings were probably not nessecary however tensions and emotions ran high after thing long and bloody war and it was probably expected the japs would still not consider surrender until the US could prove their total military superiority with a 2nd bomb
While I believe the first bombing was necessary due to the fact that it ended up saving American lives, I in no way believe the second bomb was necessary. Japan received the message loud and clear and would have soon surrendered.
I think we dropped the second bomb too soon to know how effective the first one was. Perhaps Hiroshima would have been enough to convince Japan to surrender, just that they needed time to process what had happened and to make the decision.
I do not think the second bomb was necessary. The first bomb proved the point that America was making, and I think that Japan would have surrendered shortly after the first one anyways.
I think the second bombing of Nagasaki was too soon to give the Japanese time to react. But again, they should have surrendered immediately after the first bomb like they did after the second bomb. They should not be waiting around to see how events unfolded. I concede that it is easy for us today to judge events that happened 70 years ago, but in reality we do not really know the mindsets facing our leaders and the pressure they must have faced. You would have thought Japan would have surrendered after the horrible bombings of Tokyo, but they did not. I am just glad I never have to be put into situations like these.
I cannot believe that so many people could die within seconds. Families wiped from existence. It almost seems to be something that you question is possible. The sad realization is that these weapons have been improved. Made to be more deadlier. I pray that no one ever sees the day where they are used again.
It doesn’t sound like the second bomb was necessary at all. We had only just dropped the first bomb causing hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and we dropped another one so soon after that the Japanese had no time to surrender. If the United States would have just threatened the Japanese with more bombings I can’t imagine they would not have surrendered right away.
After reading this, I do not think the second bomb was necessary at the time they dropped it. The US should have given Japan some time to sort out the chaos of the first attack and have a chance to surrender. If they did not surrender, then the second bomb may have been necessary.
The second atomic bomb was unnecessary. The United States government should have given the Japanese more time to surrender, which they should have done sooner. The use of the second atomic bomb should not have happened.
This second atomic bomb was not necessary. The United States could have just threatened Japan and they probably would have listened. I think the USA wanted to show what they were capable of and wanted to scare the rest of the world so they bombed Japan anyways.
This may be what the Japanese civilians sued the government about not ending the war earlier, however, the second bomb should not have been dropped anyway.
The U.S. dropped the second bomb to assert that they could keep attacking Japan. They wanted the Japanese to surrender, and that is what they got. The problem is how many lives were lost, especially innocent ones. This was an act of war, not morality.
The second atomic bomb was just a slap in the face to Japan and the United States proving a point that the US was finished with the war. The second bomb was not necessary.
The fact that Japan didn’t surrender after the first atomic bomb I think was a shock to the US and they were seriously driven to prove to Japan that they were not messing around (this should have been proven the first time) and had to make their mark.
The second atomic bomb did not need to be used. The US should have waited longer in-between bombings to see if the Japan government still did not surrender. The US proved that they were strong but did not need a second bomb to do so.
Hard to understand the circumstances and situation at that time through an article, but it does seem US should have waited longer to see a surrender.
I feel that the U.S. should not have dropped the second bomb on Nagasaki. I would agree with the statement “With great power comes great responsibility”. I believe it perfectly applies to the situation back then and certainly now. With the magnitude of these bombs back then and now makes me worry about who will be calling the shots as the new president.
Again, we did not need the atomic bomb.
I say no, I don’t think we were being responsible. I think dropping a first bomb was one thing, but dropping two was unnecessary. We should have given Japan a longer span of time to surrender, to figure things out after the tragedy. If we would have told Japan they could have kept their Emperor than things probably could of ended long before the bomb was necessary.
The second bomb dropping by the US was unnecessary. Yes, with the first bomb dropping the US was trying to get Japan to surrender and end the war, but the second was a killing of innocent of lives for no good reason.
I do not believe that the second atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki was necessary. I think after the first bomb, they received the message. Dropping another bomb, with even more power than the first was just overkill.
With the information given, I believe that the second bomb was unnecessary id the Japanese were already heavily contemplating surrender.
It seems that the first atomic bomb was motivation enough for the Japanese the surrender. They were already on their way to surrender when the second bomb was dropped. It seemed unnecessary.
I feel that the second bomb was necessary to put Japan at a halt. I feel that the use of bombs is extreme but, in this case a must.
I do not think the second bomb was necessary. America should have given Japan some time to surrender but instead they took more innocent lives. The US should have threatened the Japanese first before dropping the second bomb.
I do not have an opinion on this because it already happen and there is nothing you can do about it now.
I personally don’t think the ‘fat boy’ was necessary, but I can understand why the US did drop two to make a point to Japan that they could come back bigger and stronger and that they need to give up and surrender.
I can see why the U.S. dropped the second bomb. Why didn’t Japan agree to surrender immediately after the first bomb is crazy. They saw the devastation the first bomb caused, but they were unwilling to give up.
The U.S. made a final stance by dropping the second bomb. I do not see how the Japanese could ever forgive the United States for this though.
I think dropping a second bomb is kind of unnecessary. With the soviets declaring war on Japan, I think they would have surrender soon.
I think that a bomb that was less powerful than an atom bomb would have been able to convince Japan to surrender. There were many more casualties than necessary throughout this entire war. We could have at least dropped the bomb in a less populated area to spare more lives.
The second bomb was not dropped on target because of the lack of visibility and killed fewer people than expected. Japan should have surrendered after the first nuke was dropped.
I believe that the second bomb was necessary for the surrendering of Japan. I think they should have dropped it on a less populated area though.
I completely agree with the statement, “with great power comes responsibility.” I always aligned this quote with having a high office position or being very good at something rather than having the ability to bomb another country.
I think the U.S. should have given Japan more time instead of jumping the gun and dropping a second bomb, but I also think their purpose of the second bomb was to show Japan the power they had and they wanted to ensure the surrender of Japan.
I would have to think that the second bomb was not necessary to have the Japanese surrender. If the United States was so worried about waiting on the Japanese I would hope that they could have found a different solution instead of dropping a bomb that didn’t just kill 39,000 people, but it incinerated them within seconds!
I do not feel that the dropping of the second bomb was very necessary. I feel that there were better measures that could have been taken to get the Japanese to surrender than dropping another bomb and killing innocent people. I understand their reasoning and desire to get Japan to surrender as soon as they could, but I still feel that it could have been done in a more civil manor.
I agree with Alyssa’s opinion. Dropping of the second bomb was not necessary. As we all know, bomb is the most powerful weapon in the world. It can easily take off humans’ lives. Even for peace, we should use it advisedly.
I don’t think the second bomb is necessary. One of the reason that the America dropped the bomb may be just wanted to show its power and destroyed Japan completely to make sure they cannot fight back in a short period.
I do not believe the second bomb was necessary. I believe it was an overuse of power to ensure the surrender of Japan.
The quote “With great power, comes great responsibility” I believe works great with this article. I do not believe that the second bomb was necessary. I believe that it was used to show the full power of the U.S. Just because we have this weapon does not/did not mean we should automatically use it.
I don’t think that the second bombing on Japan was necessary.
I think the second bomb was unecessary. However, I understand that Japan didn’t suffer, but more lives didn’t need to be taken.
This article raises some very good questions. Was the United States just tired of the fighting and ready to end the war quickly with these bombs? Or did we find a great way to test the bomb on people? Did we just not trust the Japanese enough or just needed to finish annihilating them?
I believe it was necessary knowing that if we invaded the homeland of Japan we would have lost millions and millions on both sides the lose of life is sad but less.
I think this article made me question a lot. I am not sure if the second bomb was all that necessary because so many innocent lives were lost but then again Japan attacked us and killed many of our innocent lives. I think America was just trying to show that we were not going to back down and that we were not messing around. I also agree with the previous post that if we would have invaded their homeland we would have lost many American lives.
In order to get Japan to surrender quicker, we needed to drop the second bomb. Although I am not sure if the second bomb was needed, but Japan attacked us, unprovoked.
I believe it was the right decision, while this article says that japan was debating surrendering I remember hearing that there was no answer from japan the first time we dropped the bomb, so we decided to seal the deal on their decision basically forcing them to surrender with the second bomb.
you really have to play yes or no give or go , and that’s what they did rather safe then sorry decision, and we know their decision but i just hate how war kills innocent people because the population that incinerated 39,000 people within seconds may been innocent or anything , but glad they surrendered.
I don’t think this was the right decision but I understand why they made it. They didn’t want to risk Japan not surrendering right away so they dropped the second one to ensure they would.
I don’t feel the second bomb was necessary but we don’t know what would have happened if we only dropped the first. The Japanese could have come and attacked us. I feel not making the surrender was a bad decision on there part however we shouldn’t have dropped them so close together.
I think it was the right decision because if the Japanese decided not to surrender after the first many more American soldiers would have been sent to invade Japan. By dropping the second bomb, it eliminated all debate if they were going to surrender or not.
I do think the second bombing was necessary. Japan understood they needed to surrender after this, and they would not dare to attack us again.
This was a way of telling the Japanese to surrender or be destroyed.
It may of been a little much to drop two bombs but we had to prove a point to Japan. We were done playing games with them.
I really wonder if the second bombing was needed. But then, they did not surrender after the first one. So were they planning something on us?
The second bomb may have been unnecessary, however, we had to be effective. The war had reached a point that it needed to end or even more destruction was going to occur. I think we had the reasoning to drop the second bomb to end the war. Unfortunately, the civilian lives were just a side factor.
Japan should have surrendered. I do not understand why they didn’t, after just being bombed.
After reading this article and the previous one regarding Japan & nuclear war, I am still so shocked that they did not surrender sooner. I don’t know how exactly you could justify whether a second bomb was “necessary.”
Crazy how much a technology advantage can be!
I would certainly have to think that one bomb would have been enough to convince them to surrender and show anyone else what kind of power these weapons had.
It is incredible to see how these bombs devastate and cause countries to “give up”. You would have thought after the first bomb, that would have been enough to make them surrender.
I think the Japanese should have been given some time to decide. I cannot believe we dropped the first bomb, let alone the second.
Not only were these planes able to carry Little Boy or Fat Men bombs, but their superior performance allowed them to escape the blast zones more quickly.
We may never know whether or not we needed that second atomic bomb. The Japanese could’ve thought we only had one and thought it would take awhile for us to create another one giving them time to resist. It’s sad that the hundreds of thousands of lives were lost, but if we had decided to invade Japan instead, millions of lives would’ve been lost. The U.S. would’ve faced total war against Japan.
There is no way to say yes we should have or no we should not have dropped the bomb. It is was a decision had to be made and they made it.
To answer the question “Should the U.S. have dropped that second bomb on Nagasaki, or should America have pursued other means before rushing to nuke another city?” Who are we to judge the decisions that were made so many years ago. I could say “yes” they should have bombed the second time to show that we mean business. I could also say “no” we should have given them time to surrender and not killed so many other people. In reality, we will never know why the decision was made to bomb the second time. We will never know all of the aspects to making that decision to send the second bomb. We will never know how it would have turned out if we would have decided to wait. What we do know is how it turned out and what the outcome was. You have to take that information and hope to learn from it in the case of a next time.
It’s surreal to see the devastation one, let alone two, atomic bombs did to Japan.
This is such a hard question. The patriot in us all wants to say “Yes! It’s time to end this!” While the
humanitarian is us feels the guilt of taking innocent lives. War sucks.
After reading the article it sure does make you question if the second atomic bomb was necessary. I do not think Japan would have been able to come back after the dropping of the first bomb. I think President Truman, in his mind, thought it was absolutely necessary in order to protect American lives. Just remember, we are attempting to judge the decision with 20/20 hindsight.
We can question all we want to now hinds sight is 20/20. If we did not drop that second bomb would we now be saying we should have? There will always be questions about what should have or what we should have not done. There is no way of knowing the outcome either way.
I hate that so many people died just to get a surrender from Japan. So many innocent people.
I believe there is no way to gage whether or not to drop a bomb. So many people lost their lives just to get Japan to surrender.
If it wasn’t for dropping the second bomb I do not believe that Japan would have surrendered. I cannot attest to is this was the right or wrong thing to do, but in the end we had the outcome we desired.
Our trust in our government comes when issues like this present themselves. Hopefully Nagasaki was necessary and it was not some vicious cover to test the bomb.
I personally think after the first bomb was dropped we should have waited to see what the Japanese were going to do, we could have given them time. If they were going to surrender then there was no need for that second bomb, but obviously, we don’t know what the outcome would have been.
Having the lives of thousands of people would be overwhelming for me. And then to just kill of them innocent, is just really appalling and upsetting.
The atomic bomb had a brutal impact on people, and civilians received the same damage
I was little happy by seeing Japanese was surrender for the war because of the atomic weapon. It is a strong weapon that can ruin half of the country.
I believe this bomb was less toxic than the atomic bomb.