Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Atomic Bomb

Citizen_of_the_Web
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 2:47:05 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
In your opinion, was the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a justifiable action, and was its long-term effects beneficial or detrimental?
I am a full fledged citizen of the Web
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 2:57:59 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
Absolutely, seeing that doing so actually saved more civilian and combatant lives. The Japanese Government had a propaganda machine unleashed on the US military, which succeeded in guaranteeing that the public believed they were devils. Because of this, if the US did invade, mass amounts of Japanese citizens would've committed suicide. This actually happened at the Battle of Saipan. The native population of the island was literally wiped out due to suicide when it became clear the Marines were about to win the island. By some estimates, the two bombs saved 35 million lives.
BlazingRodent
Posts: 1,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 1:26:42 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 2:57:59 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
Absolutely, seeing that doing so actually saved more civilian and combatant lives. The Japanese Government had a propaganda machine unleashed on the US military, which succeeded in guaranteeing that the public believed they were devils. Because of this, if the US did invade, mass amounts of Japanese citizens would've committed suicide. This actually happened at the Battle of Saipan. The native population of the island was literally wiped out due to suicide when it became clear the Marines were about to win the island. By some estimates, the two bombs saved 35 million lives.

A great analogy.
Citizen_of_the_Web
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 6:23:29 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
I read some reasons online as to why the atomic bomb wasn't justified. Some say it was inhumane and that the Japanese would've surrendered anyway. In my opinion, I believed it was justified, but it's interesting to see the other side of the debate.
I am a full fledged citizen of the Web
Peepette
Posts: 1,238
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2016 7:34:48 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
It was good and bad. The bomb stopped the war in its tracks, although many lives were lost, it saved lives in balance with the continuance of war. Most poignant was the after effect. It spurred the development nuclear arms in the Soviet Union, England, France and China.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 2:00:55 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 2:47:05 AM, Citizen_of_the_Web wrote:
In your opinion, was the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a justifiable action, and was its long-term effects beneficial or detrimental?

The radiation has been cleared for the most part, and both of the towns are now populated once more.

In a humanitarian sense, it was detrimental, as many innocents died, but so did quite a lot of the Japanese military. It wasn't a bombing designed to kill civilians, but to wipe out military bases and naval bases. If they wanted to kill civilians, they would have bombed Tokyo and Kyoto.

Furthermore, it prevented the deaths of many American soldiers and the continuation of the war, and if Japan had invaded the Soviets from the East, then there would have been no way that the Soviets could have defeated Germany.

Countries have to thinking about themselves before they think about others.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 2:01:20 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/28/2016 2:57:59 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
Absolutely, seeing that doing so actually saved more civilian and combatant lives. The Japanese Government had a propaganda machine unleashed on the US military, which succeeded in guaranteeing that the public believed they were devils. Because of this, if the US did invade, mass amounts of Japanese citizens would've committed suicide. This actually happened at the Battle of Saipan. The native population of the island was literally wiped out due to suicide when it became clear the Marines were about to win the island. By some estimates, the two bombs saved 35 million lives.

+1

A land invasion of Japan is like running into a feminist conference with an MGTOW shirt. Plain suicide.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.