This is the “Classic” interpretation of why the government used the atomic bomb, written by Henry Stimson.   During World War Two Stimson served as Secretary of War and was one of Franklin Roosevelt’s, and later Harry Truman’s, most important advisors concerning the use of the atomic bomb.  This was first published in Harper’s Magazine in 1947 (a full citation is at the end of this selection).



In recent months there has been much comment about the decision to use atomic bombs in attacks on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  This decision was one of the gravest made by our government in recent years, and it is entirely proper that it should be widely discussed.  I have therefore decided to record for all who may be interested in my understanding of events which led up to the attack on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, on Nagasaki on August 9, and the Japanese decision to surrender, on August 10. 



          The policy adopted and steadily pursued by President Roosevelt and his advisers [concerning the decision to develop the atomic bomb] was a simple one.  It was to spare no effort in securing the earliest possible successful development of an atomic weapon.  The reasons for this policy were equally simple.  The original experimental achievement of atomic fission had occurred in Germany in 1938, and it was known that the Germans had continued their experiments.  In 1941 and 1942 they were believed to be ahead of us, and it was vital that they should not be the first to bring atomic weapons into the field of battle.  Furthermore, if we should be the first to develop the weapon, we should have a great new instrument of shortening the war and minimizing destruction…


          …the Interim Committee [the committee charged with advising the president on the possible use of the atomic bomb] carefully considered such alternatives as a detailed advanced warning or a demonstration in some uninhabited area.Both of these suggestions were discarded as impractical.  They were not regarded as likely to be effective in compelling a surrender of Japan, and both of them involved serious risks.  Even the New Mexico test would not give final proof that any given bomb was certain to explode when dropped from an airplane.  Quite apart from the generally unfamiliar nature of atomic explosives, there was the whole problem of exploding a bomb at a predetermined height in the air by a complicated mechanism which could not be tested in the static test of New Mexico.  Nothing would have been more damaging to our effort to obtain surrender than a warning or a demonstration followed by a dud—and this was a real possibility.  Furthermore, we had no bombs to waste.  It was vital that a sufficient effect be quickly obtained with the few we had.


          …We were planning an intensified sea and air blockade, and greatly intensified strategic air bombing through the summer and early fall, to be followed on November 1 by an invasion of the southern island of Kyushu.  This would be followed in turn by an invasion of the main island of Honshu in the spring of 1946.The total U.S. military and naval force involved in this grand design was of the order of 5,000,000 men; if all those indirectly concerned are included, it was larger still.


          We estimated that if we should be forced to carry this plan to its conclusion, the major fighting would not end until the latter part of 1946, at the earliest.  I was informed that such operations might be expected to cost over a million casualties, to American forces alone.  Additional large losses might be expected among our allies, and, of course, if our campaign were successful and if we could judge by previous experience, enemy casualties would be much larger than our own.

A Personal Summary

          Two great nations were approaching contact in a fight to a finish which would  begin on November 1, 1945.Our enemy, Japan, commanded forces of somewhat over 5,000,000 armed men.  Men of these armies had already inflicted upon us, in our breakthrough of the outer perimeter of their defenses, over 300,000 battle casualties.


          My chief purpose was to end the war in victory with the least possible cost in the lives of the men in the armies which I had helped to raise.  In the light of the alternatives, which on a fair estimate, were open to us I believe that no man, in our position and subject to our responsibilities, holding in his hands a weapon of such possibilities for accomplishing this purpose and saving those lives, could have failed to use it and afterwards looked his countrymen in the face… The decision to use the atomic bomb was a decision that brought death to over a hundred thousand Japanese.  No explanation can change the fact and I do not wish to gloss it over.  But this deliberate, premeditated destruction was our least abhorrent choice.  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. 



Stimson, Henry L.  "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.”

Harpers Magazine .  194 (February 1947):  98-101.