The Instigator
sjd_f89
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Mediator
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

US in WW II & the use of Atomic Bomb

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/2/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,197 times Debate No: 15076
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

sjd_f89

Con

Hi, I'm new at this and I Hope people critics me on my mistake and stuff. Thank you

So, I'm against the US involvement with the war specifically on the used of the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

My argument is that the used of Atomic Bomb was unnecessary and it kills innocent civilians. War, as it should be, the fight between 2 opponents or more that should only target military base,personnel, and everything that involve with military and not civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor is something that cannot be compared to the dropping of the atomic bombs and for these reasons. Pearl Harbor killed about 2,000 military was killed and 57 civilians were killed. The main purpose of the attack on Pearl Harbor was to cripple our navy, which is the point of war. To cripple the other side's military. Therefore, that was a somewhat justified move. The dropping of the bomb in Hiroshima killed between 90,000 and 140,000 civilians. That was not to cripple the military. That was to kill civilians who had very little or no part of the war. Also, the second Bomb on Nagasaki which is 3 days after Hiroshima is very out of line and is inhuman.

Also, the Japanese were going to conditionally surrendered to US and there are many option in ending the war with Japanese.

First, used the Atomic Bomb.
Second, invasion of Japanese main land.
Third, constants bombardment of Japan strategic military places, personnel, etc.
Fourth, bomb and demolished Tokyo

Most certainly, is it that the US want to show world dominance by first, inviting Soviet Union to enter the war in Japan but then when SU agree to join the war on the 15th of August, the US decided that bombing 2 Japanese city 1 week before SU join the war is necessary because the US has spend more than $2 Billion dollar on developing Atomic Bomb and to show SU and the world that the US is powerful (the impact of this is COLD WAR). Furthermore, the US know the effects of this bomb (with the successful test in New Mexico) so the US basically decided that bombing H.and N. is necessary and the cost are civilians life, the radiation that last for very long time, and unconditional surrendered by the Japanese.

Truman argue that the cost affect of not dropping the Atomic bomb would be Millions of US soldiers, which is not true because with the success of constant bombing of Japanese territory, out man, out resources, and the fact that Japanese are no longer can afford to fight anymore and the fact that they want to conditionally surrendered, why can't the US accept this and/or work some kind of treaty, just like what the US and allies did to German with the Treaty of Versailles. All Japanese wanted is to keep their Empire, and he fact that US proud of being the leading country in spreading DEMOCRACY, why can't the US be the "Bigger or Wiser Man" by working some kind of agreement with Japanese instead of dropping Atomic Bombs that claim millions of civilians life's.
Mediator

Pro

I believe that the US involvement with the war is justified, including the use of the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

First, the Japanese provoked the war, by attacking not only Pearl Harbor, but many United States territories and United States' allies. Before I begin this explanation, I would also like to explain the difference between war and total war. Warfare is where one country seeks to destroy another country's military and government, while total war is where one country seeks to completely demolish another country. Japan was seeking total war when it instigated the attacks upon the United States, with attacks on the Philippines, Mariana Islands, China, Australia, Solomon Islands, among countless other islands. The result of Japanese conquest was massacre and enslavement, as shown in the Nanking Massacre and the countless instances where the people of conquered lands were forced to work as slaves.

In addition, the Atomic Bomb broke the Japanese will to fight. Before, the Japanese were training everybody on their mainland to fight with anything at hand, including guns, swords, and bamboo rods. Even schoolchildren were trained to repel the expected invasion. However, the Atomic Bomb gave an unexpected blow to the Japanese, as it completely devastated the population, and forced the surrender. Without its use, many American lives would have been risked by a direct invasion, which was the only way to put Japan out of the war.

Finally, the Japanese were settling for a conditional surrender, which was against the United States' wishes. The US demanded a full, unconditional surrender due to the havoc the Japanese caused to the whole pacific region and to Asia. The Japanese were trying to stall the surrender with a variety of methods, yet the Atomic Bomb forced the quick surrender and end of the war.
Debate Round No. 1
sjd_f89

Con

I will refute my opponent's argument.

"First, the Japanese provoked the war, by attacking not only Pearl Harbor, but many United States territories and United States' allies. Before I begin this explanation, I would also like to explain the difference between war and total war. Warfare is where one country seeks to destroy another country's military and government, while total war is where one country seeks to completely demolish another country. Japan was seeking total war when it instigated the attacks upon the United States, with attacks on the Philippines, Mariana Islands, China, Australia, Solomon Islands, among countless other islands. The result of Japanese conquest was massacre and enslavement, as shown in the Nanking Massacre and the countless instances where the people of conquered lands were forced to work as slaves."

My counter argument will be that:

First, Japanese did attack US first but what Japanese did to US is in the affect and fear that started by the US back when they had to expand their believe in "Manifest Destiny". The US want to expand their land by conquering California from Mexico, killing Native American and put the in camps, conquering Hawaii, Philippines, Puerto Rico, etc.
Because of this and that every other country in the world with Germany and Axis taking over most of the Europe, Africa and the US and their allies control of some of Asian countries, Phillippines, part of Europe, that the Japanese are felt threatened by it.
We should see US as if they're Japan, what will the US do if most of the countries and island around them is being control by other countries, EX: if Canada, Mexico, Hawaii, Cuba were under control of Japan, what will the US do? I can most certainly sure that the US will start to worry and they will have planned to take over Canada, Mexico, etc. plus the US have it's own problem in its own country, because they just experience Great Depression, the New Deal isn't really working, the fact that the war can help the US economy and statistics showed that during the war, 17 million new jobs were created, industrial production increase by 96%, business were booming, women can now go to work, the invention started (Refrigerator, TV, etc).

Also, the development of weapon such as Atomic Bomb, create 100,000 jobs, and cost $2 billion to invest, certainly, the US would like to show it's power, resources, capabilities to the world. Even after the fact that many scientist, general and Truman himself disagree with the used of A.B., the opportunity of flexing US power is to great to be missed, and also, US is the only country that ever used Nuclear Bomb. All of this just for the US to comes out as a winner and savior in WWII and to start Cold War, is so shameful.

"In addition, the Atomic Bomb broke the Japanese will to fight. Before, the Japanese were training everybody on their mainland to fight with anything at hand, including guns, swords, and bamboo rods. Even schoolchildren were trained to repel the expected invasion. However, the Atomic Bomb gave an unexpected blow to the Japanese, as it completely devastated the population, and forced the surrender. Without its use, many American lives would have been risked by a direct invasion, which was the only way to put Japan out of the war."

I disagree with this comment. Japanese already loosing the battle, shown by the fact that in communication between Japanese and US with their settling for conditional surrender, clearly shown that they have no power left, the US didn't need to drop 2 Atomic bomb on them. Many American lives wouldn't have been risked, the total lost that Japanese took, especially with their civilians is 1000x more than the US would have lost. The fact shown that the US constant bombing alone, devastated Japanese so the believe that US still need to drop 2 A.B. on H. and N. (fact, shown in the picture that had been taken by US showed that their isn't any military base, or equipment in the area) with mostly civilians is over the top of the line.

The used of A.B. is mostly for Political purposes. The war in Europe is almost over, Russia looks very good and the US want to show that they're more powerful than Russia so they US did want they had to do. Which is ask Russia to join the invasion of Japan but then the US drop 2 A.B. on Japan a week before the Russia enter Japan.

My conclusion is that the truth about A.B. is still being covered up as always and that for the sole of American "Greed of power, world dominance", the spread of "Democracy" and the fear of the spread of Communism by Russia if the US hadn't drop the A.B. on Japan and flex its muscle, the cost of innocent people live and he effects from the A.B. can't be avoided.
Mediator

Pro

Mediator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
sjd_f89

Con

sjd_f89 forfeited this round.
Mediator

Pro

Mediator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
sjd_f89

Con

sjd_f89 forfeited this round.
Mediator

Pro

Mediator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
sjd_f89

Con

sjd_f89 forfeited this round.
Mediator

Pro

Mediator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Mediator 5 years ago
Mediator
When is the voting period over?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
sjd_f89MediatorTied
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: FAIL DEBATE, as both sides dropped out... (checking the voting period debates, from Least To Most votes. By giving this one, it won't be prioritized in the system anymore.)