Opinion Question
Argument
Posted by:

Lesser of two evils.

   The Japanese predicted twenty million clandestine deaths defending the home islands. The more revised US estimates predicted up to four million Allied casualties with one million dead. Not to mention the 1.6million Soviet troops who had just entered the theatre of conflict and who were ruthless in their warfighting and had a tendency to die in their thousands themselves. In comparison, the atomic bombs killed between 150,000-250,000 depending on the source. Can you really say that they were unnecessary when looking at these statistics? They unquestionably saved MILLIONS and MILLIONS of lives. Sure, it could be said that the use of atomic weapons created a nuclear precedent that led to the Cold War, but the Soviets themselves were developing atomic weapons anyway as Soviet spies had gained access to the Manhattan Project and implemented an atomic weapons program in Russia. Other historians have said that the US dropped them simply to show their might and assert their authority. This is absolute rubbish, the US homefront was relatively unscathed and industry was booming with exports and war manufacturing. The US was in pole position to dominate the post-war world with or without the atomic bomb. Furthermore, cases have been made for using the bombs over non-populated areas, but where's the guarantee that Japan would have heeded this warning? They outright rejected the threat of annihilation promised in the Potsdam declaration and despite some cities suffering up to 97% damage as a result of area bombing and firebombing, Japan still refused to surrender. Elsewhere, historians believed that a continued naval blockade along with conventional bombing would have eventually brought Japan to her knees, however, the US nor the allies for that matter had any intention of allowing a war that had raged for six years to rumble on any further when the means to end it swiftly were readily available. Anyway, with the Soviets invading on the other side, allied lives would still have been lost in their droves, not to mention the lives of the fanatical defenders. It wasn't just the Japanese army that was defending the islands, but a 'civilian militia' that numbered in the millions, all of whom were expected to fight until the last bullet. I see these comments about 'de-classified documents estimating 40,000-60,000 deaths' and can't help but laugh at your naivety. On Iwo Jima alone there were almost 50,000 combined casualties, and while it was soverign territory, the home islands of Japan would prove a different battle. The terrain of Japan made a land invasion highly predictable to the defenders and the planned guerilla style resistance would have created a battle of attrition. The death toll would have been millions, WITHOUT QUESTION. I am a former member of the British military and a third-year American History student, I know what I'm talking about. I challenge any of you to come up with a more thoroughly researched argument.
zenRoxas says2013-10-30T23:57:47.810
Excellently worded debate, greatly researched.
bob555bob says2013-12-14T05:58:16.557
End of debate, this man/women has won!

It's good to see someone who knows their stuff and is using accurate sources, and not just jumping to false conclusions and speculation like 90% of the other 'debaters' seem to be. Excellent work.
bob555bob says2013-12-14T05:59:37.393
Oh also, I should have added. Good to see someone who is actually looking at it logically, and not just emotionally haha.
jlsmell77 says2014-02-26T23:45:17.393
Thank you for this---definitely well-thought-out.
askmeanything says2014-03-30T15:44:29.610
How can you say that he/she has won. Do you believe this is a game, thousands dying and your calling us naïve. Just because more Americans died that doesn't make dropping the bomb any more moral. I'll admit you have a fancy title but at least I'm not laughing over this.
I challenge you to respond to that.
akreke says2014-04-21T01:01:09.130
They are saying he won the debate.......
samjw says2015-04-04T17:29:52.967
Askmeanything: Challenge accepted. Did you not see that he also stated that the Japanese estimated 20 million deaths defending the island? That is probably at least 20 times that the bomb killed, even over time.
samaking523 says2015-04-15T02:45:09.803
Thank you u said everything that ive been telling people.
swong2000 says2015-08-08T09:29:53.837
Like being in the British military is anything prestigious
ThatGuyJimBob says2016-03-11T14:38:33.673
I like how you took the firebombing raids into account.






Gud job
sihoosecond says2016-03-14T18:19:15.697
So, are you saying that it's right that the United States bomb Japan and rise to the top of the power and harass other countries with their moeny? I think you might be a bit racist about some subjects.
WilliamWS says2016-04-27T18:44:27.723
Well said
HeavenlyPanda says2016-08-06T19:42:56.187
My, my, my, what on earth do thy teach Americans in history? Maybe you should have took Japanese history instead of American history. Did you know that president Truman received 5 different peace overtures from high level Japanese officials. Did you know he received them on the 20, of January 1945. And he refused them. Did you know that the conditions for those 5 peace overtures were the exact same as unconditional surrender America was asking for except for one condition. That the emperor would stay safe. Did you know the irony is that the emperor was allowed to keep his seat of power. So president Truman could have signed those peace overtures and the war would have ended then.
Japan was already militarily defeated before the bombs were dropped. The fact that Truman prolonged the war just to show off how powerful America was to the Russians proved he didn't care about the American soldiers. He valued showing off more valuable than the lives of thousands of soldiers. Don't be deluded into thinking that America actually cared about the Japanese civilians. Did you know that America actually locked up all its American-Japanese people becuase it was "suspicious" of them. They placed them all in camps similar to concentration camps. Bet you America didn't teach you that in grade 5 history. The atomic bomb was just as much, a revenge against the Japanese people as it was showing off. If there was any justification for te first atomic bomb, there was none for the second bomb.
SomeGuyWhoIsCool says2016-08-24T22:55:25.167
American history, they always present it in such a bias way. Japan DID tried to surrender under conditions (Hirohito would not be tried) before the atomic bombings, but of course the excuse for a military of the US refused (and the president), and did it anyways. Japan knew that they were going to lose the war. They would have surrendered. Without the bombs. They were already on terms of surrender, yet the U.S. denied them all.
Ashlynne says2016-11-02T23:09:08.247
No, other countries including the U.S. offered terms for Japan to surrender. They're the ones who disagreed because then they'll have to overthrow their dearest Emperor Hirohito that they love oh so much. It is within Japan's culture to fight till no one's left and surrendering is the biggest shame.
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)

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