The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justifiest

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Hadii has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 517 times Debate No: 110827
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Rules: Total of 4 rounds, con may start first


Japan surrendered because of the Soviets not the atomic bombing.

Before Hiroshima a numerous amount of cities were destroyed by the U.S. Army Air Force, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not the most destructive. Hiroshima was 2nd in civilian deaths, ranked 4th in the number of square miles destroyed, and 17th in cities destroyed. Why would Japan surrender after these bombings, but didn't for the others. The retired Japanese Foreign Minister, Shidehara Kijuro, even said that the people will get used to the bombings and not give up because of them. The only explanation for Japan's unconditional surrender, was the Soviet Union declaration of war, followed by invasion of Manchuria on 9 August, 1945.

What was the result of the atomic bombings? Thousands dead and Japanese citizens being affected by radiation to this day. I know the cities had milltary bases, but more innocent people died than soilders. This is why I do not believe that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified.

Debate Round No. 1


That you for accepting this Challenge, and my deepest apology for spelling the word justified wrong.

To be honest with you, I get where you're going at. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki maybe is a bit overboard. But first of all, let me clarify a few things. The US was more interested in ending the war faster, so they wouldn't hesitate to use the a-bombs, even if it means to break their own laws (Hague Convention, Article XXII) Also, there are actually 4 reasons why Japan decided to "unconditionally surrender" and Soviet invading Manchuria is just one of them. I'm sure you know Hirohito didn't decide to surrender after 2 A-bombs, it was the bombing after the a-bombs that forced Hirohito to surrender. He was mainly afraid of his civilians dying from another a-bomb. So you see, if the atomic bomb did not have the devastating effect they had, then it would have been utterly pointless.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Hadii 3 years ago
Sorry didn't have time to write my 2nd argument.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.