The Instigator
Titereus
Pro (for)
Winning
20 Points
The Contender
arthurv
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

The Usage of Atomic Bombs to End World War II

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 6 votes the winner is...
Titereus
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,137 times Debate No: 52161
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (6)

 

Titereus

Pro

The Atomic Bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended the second World War and resulted in more than 5 million less casualties. According to a study done by Secretary of War Stimson"s staff by William Shockley, going ahead with Operation Downfall (conquering Japan) would have costed 1.7-4 million American casualties, including 400,000-800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese casualties (http://www.upa.pdx.edu...). In this one article alone, there are many different studies done on the total amount of casualties resulting from Operation Downfall, and every one of them says that there would have been more than one million Japanese and American casualties, as apposed to the 199,000 casualties of the Atomic Bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ("The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Total Casualties. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2014.). Therefore, I conclude that the Atomic Bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a more effective way of ending World War II than Operation Downfall.
arthurv

Con

Well the use of an atomic bomb is and will always be a crime against the human society in any aspect you will look at it even if the country is in war this is not the way to resolve this. I don't need any statistics or citations to argue this. But ask yourself the question with all these people that died how many were innocent children and women and also men that were not involved in this war. So in my opinion this use of atomic bombs is a really cowardly way to end the war because the users ( United-States) have a lot of innocent blood on their hands. And this is to be honest quite sad...
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Titereus 3 years ago
Titereus
I am excited to observe any defense against my claim that the Atomic Bomb's part in ending World War II was superior to Operation Downfall.

May the best man/woman win.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by travis18352 3 years ago
travis18352
TitereusarthurvTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: pro was the only one who used any sources.
Vote Placed by Haroush 3 years ago
Haroush
TitereusarthurvTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Despite Con's claim, he doesn't address the statistics Pro gave. Con somehow believed he didn't have to address the statistics.
Vote Placed by gabbsmcswaggin 3 years ago
gabbsmcswaggin
TitereusarthurvTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons rebuttal was all his opinion
Vote Placed by Hematite12 3 years ago
Hematite12
TitereusarthurvTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used sources to back up their claims, Con used none. Sources by Con COULD have been provided, but none were. However, Pro's argument was insufficient to defend the resolution.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
TitereusarthurvTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's entire argument is just plain false. Con did nothing to point out the problems with Pro argument. The idea that nukes were used to end WW2 is questionable at best, and the possibility of Downfall actually happening pretty much zero. No nukes nor invasions would have been necessary, not for WW2 at least. The Cold War, that is a different story! Yet the Con could only say a weak argument about innocent civilians and "crimes against humanity". Look, you may mean well, but in total war, there is no such thing as innocent civilians. Additionally, the one who wins the war NEVER commits a war crime, no matter what they do. Go figure why.
Vote Placed by TheRussian 3 years ago
TheRussian
TitereusarthurvTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both have valid points. Although if the bombs weren't dropped, many more soldiers would be killed, dropping the atomic bombs destroys the lives of those who were not involved in the war. That is totally unfair.