Harry S. Truman Persuasive Essay
There has always been a debate on the necessity of the bomb, but its implications were so severe that such an attack has never been carried out again. Through the Mock Trial, Harry S. Truman was put on trial for crimes against humanity. At the end of the three day trial, and after much deliberation the jury came to the decision that Harry S. Truman was guilty of crimes against humanity. I was not fully content with this decision, however, I am able to understand why the jury came to the decision that they made.
First of all, the jury felt that even though bombing was required to end the war, the US could have dropped conventional bombs. We came to this conclusion since Admiral William stated that the conventional bombs "would have had a similar …show more content…
We were convinced this way since Admiral William stated "President Truman convinced everyone that the AB would target the military base and the Japanese would surrender, but there was no military benefit when dropping the bomb." We felt that the killing of innocent civilians was immoral and therefore a crime against humanity which simply could not be justified. We came to this conclusion when we were shown evidence 7 which showed the injuries faced by the victims. I believe that by this point the attorneys were trying to use a sympathetic maneuver to convince the jury that Harry S. Truman was guilty which was very clever because it worked. This tactic used by the attorney prevented the jury from looking beyond this point so the jury was very stubborn in their views during our deliberation. "Japanese citizens even today continue to suffer from the radioactive effects of the bomb." (Jade, closing statement) Once she stated this we felt that the dropping of the atomic bomb could not be justified due to the fact that we believed it was a crime against humanity since it had killed 80,000 people and severely injured many more causing them excruciating
First of all, the jury felt that even though bombing was required to end the war, the US could have dropped conventional bombs. We came to this conclusion since Admiral William stated that the conventional bombs "would have had a similar …show more content…
We were convinced this way since Admiral William stated "President Truman convinced everyone that the AB would target the military base and the Japanese would surrender, but there was no military benefit when dropping the bomb." We felt that the killing of innocent civilians was immoral and therefore a crime against humanity which simply could not be justified. We came to this conclusion when we were shown evidence 7 which showed the injuries faced by the victims. I believe that by this point the attorneys were trying to use a sympathetic maneuver to convince the jury that Harry S. Truman was guilty which was very clever because it worked. This tactic used by the attorney prevented the jury from looking beyond this point so the jury was very stubborn in their views during our deliberation. "Japanese citizens even today continue to suffer from the radioactive effects of the bomb." (Jade, closing statement) Once she stated this we felt that the dropping of the atomic bomb could not be justified due to the fact that we believed it was a crime against humanity since it had killed 80,000 people and severely injured many more causing them excruciating