The Instigator
Bareswilte
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CJKAllstar
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

Should the United States have used the atomic bomb on Japan?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
CJKAllstar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 625 times Debate No: 51146
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

Bareswilte

Con

Instead of stating my opinion on this subject, I would like to provide an open forum for my students and others to state their opinions and defend them. Remember, you should always back your opinions with educated reasoning. Thanks!
CJKAllstar

Pro

I accept this debate, you can put forward your points.
Debate Round No. 1
Bareswilte

Con

Bareswilte forfeited this round.
CJKAllstar

Pro

2,536,800 American and Japanese men had died during WW2[1]. But at the end, there was still a possibility of Japan waging war. A single month of battle would have cost about 43,000 men then if you take the average. But that is a single month. The Battle of the Atlantic lasted the entirety of WW2, so there was simply no way of knowing whether 50,000 to 1,000,000 would die in a ground battle. Let us not forget the cost of war. For food, equipment and supplies. Let us not forget other possible countries that would have got involved and the fact that it could spiral. In short, America simply had no way whatsoever of knowing how the battle would spiral if they'd got involved. If they had attacked and it was only partly successful, that wouldn't have been enough. The safest option was something that would damage and deter Japan. Yes, 135,000 people were killed, but a land battle lasting six months on average could have cost twice more, and still have a chance of retribution. The deterrence came from the fact that it was new technology, and it was successful, ending what was left of WW2. Sorry that this was so rushed, I am quite busy.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 2
Bareswilte

Con

Bareswilte forfeited this round.
CJKAllstar

Pro

I extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Tiger5573 3 years ago
Tiger5573
It would only want to make them drop a bomb, or worse, on us.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by NiamC 3 years ago
NiamC
BareswilteCJKAllstarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: CON FORFEITED
Vote Placed by Geogeer 3 years ago
Geogeer
BareswilteCJKAllstarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeits, Points pro.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
BareswilteCJKAllstarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Pro. Con forfeited 2 rounds and left Pro hanging. S&G - Tied. Both failed to make any spelling or grammatical errors. Argument - Pro. Con did not present any argument throughout the debate whereas Pro presented an argument that was supported with sources. Source - Pro. Con failed to present any sources to verify his position on the resolution, whereas Pro presented sources to validate the claims made within his argument.