Do you think dropping an atomic bomb on Hiroshima was a good way to end the Pacific War?

Asked by: Skt1Faker
  • The Japanese wouldn't give up.

    If it wasn't for the Japanese being so hard headed, the U.S. Wouldn't have to of dropped an atomic bomb on them in the first place. It's not like the U.S. Wanted to do it, but we also had to send a message to the entire world because of all the violence taking place in other places. That being said, this how we said to the entire world, the war is over.

  • Hard War, Easy Peace

    War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.

    -- General William Tecumseh Sherman

    Military analysts during the Pacific war and historians agree, had the atomic bombs not been dropped, the was would have cost millions of American's lives with a ground offensive that some experts speculate could have lasted into the 1970's. Not to mention the countless civilian and military causualties of the people of Japan.

  • It was the good way to end the war

    It was a fair way to end the war Japan started the Pacific War and many people died. Many countries and UN tried to stop the Pacific war but Japan don't even cares about what other countries are saying. Because of this UN decided to shoot a atomic bomb to Japan. When they get hitted by the atomic bomb, they finally stopped the Pacific War. I think it was the fair way and fastest way to end a war and I also think it was the result what Japan had made.

  • Japanese military is very honorable

    They would not give up just because their allies surrendered. They probably thought "Nazi Germany lost, so what? We an still beat the Americans!" Bushido, my friends, is the Japanese form of chivalry. One part of Bushido is "Honor until death" They probably think it's better to die gloriously then return a failure. I've heard of veterans from failed battles being shunned by their families. Therefore, why would they surrender against someone they were beating? Nukes were the only was to stop Bushido. They had to turn away from America and focus on helping the victims.

  • Facing the hard truth

    The atomic bombs did not, and I repeat DID NOT end the war with Japan.
    I know this may sound outlandish and wrong, but I deeply encourage you to do some research on this topic, or at least just Google it.

    The event that pushed Japan to surrender was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. It destroyed Japan's kwantung army, which they were planning to use for the defense of the home islands.
    That, now reinforced by the threat that the Soviets were going to actually invade mainland Japan before the US, finally pushed Japan's military leaders to surrender.

    After the first bombing (Hiroshima), the non-military and military leaders were going to have a meeting on the issue, but then it was canceled because the problem wasn't actually that big. The fire bombing of Tokyo had a much more severe impact than both the A-bombs combined, really.

  • This doesn't make sense.

    Of course it wasn't, especially since it didn't even end the Pacific War! The Nagasaki bomb did.
    Of course it wasn't, especially since it didn't even end the Pacific War! The Nagasaki bomb did.
    Of course it wasn't, especially since it didn't even end the Pacific War! The Nagasaki bomb did.

  • Hiroshima didn't end the war

    If Hiroshima ended the war, why did the US bomb Nagasaki? That's moronic. It was the Soviet threat of invasion that convinced the Japanese to surrender. Since it was the first a-bomb ever used, no one really knew what the implications of the detonation would be. But it didn't stop the war.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.