The Instigator
savvygraff
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
dsjpk5
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Was it the right thing to do to bomb Japan?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
dsjpk5
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/2/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 448 times Debate No: 80445
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

savvygraff

Pro

Ending the war at the earliest possible moment - The primary objective for the U.S. was to win the war at the lowest possible cost. Specifically, Truman was looking for the most effective way to end the war quickly, not for a way to not use the bomb.

To justify the cost of the Manhattan Project - The Manhattan Project was a secret program to which the U.S. had funneled an estimated $1,889,604,000 (in 1945 dollars) through December 31, 1945.

To impress the Soviets - With the end of the war nearing, the Soviets were an important strategic consideration, especially with their military control over most of Eastern Europe. As Yale Professor Gaddis Smith has noted, "It has been demonstrated that the decision to bomb Japan was centrally connected to Truman's confrontational approach to the Soviet Union." However, this idea is thought to be more appropriately understood as an ancillary benefit of dropping the bomb and not so much its sole purpose.

A lack of incentives not to use the bomb - Weapons were created to be used. By 1945, the bombing of civilians was already an established practice. In fact, the earlier U.S. firebombing campaign of Japan, which began in 1944, killed an estimated 315,922 Japanese, a greater number than the estimated deaths attributed to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The firebombing of Tokyo alone resulted in roughly 100,000 Japanese killed.

Responding to Pearl Harbor - When a general raised objections to the use of the bombs, Truman responded by noting the atrocities of Pearl Harbor and said that "When you have to deal with a beast you have to treat him as a beast."
dsjpk5

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for creating this debate.

PLAGIARISM

My opponent plagiarized her entire first round argument from the following website:

http://csis.org...

I ask the voters to consider this when voting.
Debate Round No. 1
savvygraff

Pro

I am knew to all this. Dont be so harsh.
dsjpk5

Con

I don't see how I was harsh. All I did was point out the emporer wasn't wearing any clothes.
Debate Round No. 2
savvygraff

Pro

savvygraff forfeited this round.
dsjpk5

Con

Since my opponent has either plagiarized or forfeited in each round, she has given me nothing to rebut. Having said that, I will now make my own case against the resolution:

Argument: Killing people is immoral, therefore bombing Japan was not right.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by KyronTheWise 1 year ago
KyronTheWise
Alrighty then, time to drop something.

So, it's immoral to kill people? Okay then. What do you do if both of your options are killing people, out of curiosity?

When it comes to the bombing, what you need to recall is that there were two options for ending the war, that is to say, limiting the number of people killed. Option 1 is bombing. Option 2 is massive land invasion of Japan. Projections for death count of the latter VASTLY outweighed that of the prior. So, either way, people are going to die. What do you do?

Also, saying "Nothing, both are immoral" does not work, because if you do not, the war continues, and people keep dying. No matter your choice, Inaction or Action, people keep dying. So what do you do?
Posted by dorkysmile 1 year ago
dorkysmile
That wasn't right to plagiarise the website. I think Con should be (and rightfully so) really offended. I think it was wrong to bomb Japan even though it was necessary. It killed thousands of people which was not good. I agree with Con. Who wants to kill thousands of people? That's just wrong.
Posted by dorkysmile 1 year ago
dorkysmile
That wasn't right to plagiarise the website. I think Con should be (and rightfully so) really offended. I think it was wrong to bomb Japan even though it was necessary. It killed thousands of people which was not good. I agree with Con. Who wants to kill thousands of people? That's just wrong.
Posted by LoserBro2003 1 year ago
LoserBro2003
I wish you were con, I would have had a great offensive for this.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Lexus 1 year ago
Lexus
savvygraffdsjpk5Tied
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