The Instigator
malvelda
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Should the atomic bomb have been dropped?

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...
lannan13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 690 times Debate No: 87666
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

malvelda

Con

The atomic bomb should not have been dropped because
1. It was very expensive
2. It caused thousands upon thousands of unnecessary deaths
3. We had lots of alternatives.
4. Japan was going to end the war anyways
5. It caused a lot of health and safety issues for years afterwards
lannan13

Pro

Contention 1: It saved Lives

During World War 2, Japan was in national suicide mode to the point that when the US would invade Japan it would have taken over 1 million Americans to do so making the war last a lot longer than it did. [1] With Japan in national suicide mode they have proved at the battles of Iwo Jima and Okinawa that they would kill until either they achieved victory or all the Japanese were dead. [2] The Japanese were so intimidated by the US that they threw their own children into the ocean and then themselves committed suicide than rather being captured by the Americans. This occurred at the Battle of Saipan [3]

We can see here that the Japanese would have fought to the last man in Japan and the island of Japan would have been a desolate waste land. It has been estimated that in the early hours of the invasion that the Japanese would take 1,000 causalities per hour. [4] The Japanese were also training their children during recess at this time to carry bombs on them and that when the Americans would come for Operation Downfall, to run under American tanks and blow themselves up. It is obvious here that we have saved Japanese lives.

Operation Downfall has had many estimates. Operation Olympic (invasion of southern Japan) has been estimated a lone would be 1.2 million US casualties. While only 267,000 deaths. [5] Within the first month is was predicted about 31,000 US deaths alone. General Marshal estimated that the Japanese would suffer 10 million causalities.

After the 2 atom bombs, Japan still was not going to surrender as the Kyujo Incident occurred afterwards. This was when the Japanese military attempted to overthrow the Japanese Emperor in order to prevent him from surrendering. This Coups was stopped due to a US aerial bombing that day killed most of the Coup leaders and stopped the Coup from occurring. [6]

We also tried to warn Japan as we dropped leaflets that were in Japanese that had warned the Japanese of such an attack, but they ignored it.[7] Also imagine if the US told the Japanese government that, "Hey look at the Tokyo bay and we'll drop our new super awesome weapon." We drop it and nothing happens. This would only make the Japanese fight harder as they would be calling our bluff

Contention 2: The Cold War

It is known that we were developing the atomic bomb in the Manhattan Project to the point where it took $2 billion to complete [8]. Let's look at some interesting stats. For one second let's imagine the US did not use the bomb, but still the won the war. We had the atomic bomb and so did Russia. The Cold War began and due to the fact that we did not know what the bomb did we would have been more likely to use it on Russia or another communist satellite state during the Cold War causing Nuclear War.

Today nuclear weapons are stronger than they are back then and we currently have Neutron Bombs, which military leaders prefer, because its radiation penetrates even the deepest bunkers, but it comes with a price. Dr. Chalko has found that the radiation penetration from the neutron bombs will cause the Earth’s Interior to increase temperature substantially, increase volcanic activity, and even in the most extreme chances it may cause the world to explode. [9]

Contention 3: Japanese War Crimes.

Many people tend to look at Japan with sympathy after the Atomic Bombings, but they do not remember all of the horrible things that the Japanese did. They had violated several international treaties like the Briand-Kellogg Pact by invading Japan. They have also forced anywhere from 4-10 million people to work for the Japanese military. We all know that NAZI Germany killed 6 million Jews along with 30 million Russians, but what are the Japanese numbers you may ask? They killed a total of 30 million Asians (excluding Chinese) and they killed 23 million Chinese. [10] They have also violated the 1907 Hague Convention which outlawed the attacking of neutral states during wartime by their attack on the United States. The Japanese have also done torturing to the POWs, Japanese Army Office Uno Shintaro who served in China during the War said this on torture:

“The major means of getting intelligence was to extract information by interrogating prisoners. Torture was an unavoidable necessity. Murdering and burying them follows naturally. You do it so you won't be found out. I believed and acted this way because I was convinced of what I was doing. We carried out our duty as instructed by our masters. We did it for the sake of our country. From our filial obligation to our ancestors. On the battlefield, we never really considered the Chinese humans. When you're winning, the losers look really miserable. We concluded that the Yamato race [i.e., Japanese] was superior.” [11]

Out of the many Massacres and atrocities that the Japanese committed the Rape of Nanking (also known as the Nanking Massacre) where over 300,000 people were killed and the women were raped.[12] They also had a contest of who could kill 100 Chinese by sword contest which drove the death toll up even more and not to mention that they would play caught the baby with their Baqunents.

Caption reads: "Incredible Record' (in the Contest to Cut Down 100 People) —Mukai 106 – 105 Noda—Both 2nd Lieutenants Go Into Extra Innings."

Contention 4: Japan would not have surrendered otherwise.

One thing that the bombings also helped with was the silencing of the Kyoto incident where the Japanese were attempting to overthrow the empower. If this assassination would have been completed then the Atomic bombings would have continued on Japan and the next scheduled bombing was on the 18th of August and the bombing of Japan into submission would have continued with the same effects of that of Operation Rolling Thunder in Vietnam. Con also dropped this argument so I’ll extend the defeating of the Kyujo incident across the board.

The US government would not permit the forfeiture of the US constitution for the entire US and the we would likely see a reaction similar to Bush’s War on Terror to exterminate the bomber and the rest of his gang. The Japanese Security of War initiated martial law over the nation to prevent anyone from surrendering after the bombing of Hiroshima forcing the US to launch the second atomic bomb. Plus after the first bombing the Japanese came to the Japanese press and told them that the Japanese would ignore the Allied surrender demands and continue fighting.[13]

The US dropped leaflet warnings to the people of Hiroshima that the US is planning on dropping the Atom Bomb. As a matter of fact the US dropped 65 million leaflets warning the Japanese of this attack months before detonation. [14]


Warning LeafletWarning Leaflet


On August 7th, one day after the bombing on Hiroshima, the Japanese cabinet meet and even though Emperor Hirohito wanted the war to end the cabinet stood at disagreement with a 3-3 debate lock and they missed 3 key military leaders for the okay for the surrender. The military leaders disagreed that the bomb was of atomic nature and didn’t want to consider surrender. Emperor Hirohito conjured up another emergency meeting on the 9th of August and they agreed that the Americans didn’t have the ability to create another atomic bomb, and then Nagasaki happened. Emperor Hirohito then made a surprise appearance and broke the 3-3 tie since it required an animous decision for surrender. Hirohito said this to the cabinet:

“I have given serious thought to the situation prevailing at home and abroad and have concluded that continuing the war can only mean destruction for the nation and prolongation of bloodshed and cruelty in the world. I cannot bear to see my innocent people suffer any longer.” [15]

As you can see that the atomic bombs caused the Japanese Emperor to act and urge the cabinet for surrender and if it wasn’t for the atomic bombings the Japanese would not have surrender without the speech and forced second meeting called by Emperor Hirohito. In the 1947 edition of Harper’s, former Secretary of War Stimson had seemingly changed his views on the bombings then what Con has stated when he stated:

All the evidence I have seen indicates that the controlling factor in the final Japanese decision to accept our terms of surrender was the atomic bomb.”

On June 1st the US Scientific Panel wrote the following:

Mr. Byrnes recommended, and the Committee agreed, that the Secretary of War should be advised that, while recognizing that the final selection of the target was essentially a military decision, the present view of the Committee was that the bomb should be used against Japan as soon as possible; that it be used on a war plant surrounded by workers’ homes; and that it be used without prior warning.” [16]

However the US did give the Japanese warning, as stated before, with the leaflets warning the Japanese of the bombing that would occur. Truman, who had just inherited the war from FDR, was advised by military, scientists, and political to drop the bomb and to end the war.

Due to restrictions, sources are in the comments section.

Debate Round No. 1
malvelda

Con

malvelda forfeited this round.
lannan13

Pro

All points extended.
Debate Round No. 2
malvelda

Con

malvelda forfeited this round.
lannan13

Pro

All points extended.

Thank you and please vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by mwilliams1014 1 year ago
mwilliams1014
Maybe I'm wrong...but...we won...right...LOL
Posted by Glovski 1 year ago
Glovski
Lmao he quit
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Round 1 Sources
1. (https://thoughtsonmilitaryhistory.wordpress.com...)
2. (http://www.bbc.co.uk...)
3. (http://apjjf.org...)
4. (http://www.kilroywashere.org...)
5. (http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...)
6. (https://en.wikipedia.org...)
7. (http://www.authentichistory.com...)
8. (http://www.ushistory.org...)
9. (http://sci-e-research.com...)
10. (http://www.lrb.co.uk...)
11. Haruko Taya Cook & Theodore F. Cook, Japan at War 1993 ISBN 1-56584-039-9, p. 153
12. (https://en.wikipedia.org...)
13. Scoenberger, Walter (1969). Decision of Destiny. Columbus: Ohio University Press. pp. 248"249
14. (http://www.authentichistory.com...)
15. (http://www.liquisearch.com...)
16. (http://www.atomicheritage.org...)
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
If you bump it to 10k characters, challenge it to me and I'll accept.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by fire_wings 1 year ago
fire_wings
malveldalannan13Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
malveldalannan13Tied
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: Conduct goes to Pro due to the forfeitures. The burden of proof is shared due to this being a normative resolution. Since Pro presented arguments and explained their impact (contrary to Con) this mean that Pro's burden could be fulfilled. Since some of Con's arguments were negated (regarding deaths in particular due to the saving lives argument). Pro's burden was fulfilled. Con's was mitigated. Due to a larger burden fulfillment on Pro's behalf I vote Pro.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
malveldalannan13Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff many times, so conduct to Pro.