Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes i do think we should have drop the bomb

    I think we should have dropped the bomb on Japan they deserved it. Remember at Pearl Harbor, they bombed us. The war would keep going until they were tired of fighting or until they didn't have any more men to fight with or even if they didn't have any more equipment to fight with. I think you should agree with me.

  • 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.

  • Yes, we should have!

    We dropped the bomb because the Japanese were ruthless jerks who dropped bombs on us first. They destroyed our ships making it to where we couldn't ship as much and defend ourselves. They tore apart Pearl Harbor so much that they could have invaded there and took over and they were sad they didn't. It was only fair that we bomb them in return. It may have killed hundreds but they killed our people, too!

  • Yes they should have

    Yes we should have because they had plenty of opportunities to surrender and they didn't. We told them if they didn't surrender, there would be utter mass destruction put upon them. They chose to ignore it and brush it off. If we had invaded, then probably 1/4th of Japan's population would have been killed. Yes, it was terrible that so many people died, but in the end, it was what the U.S. Thought was necessary. Japan still didn't surrender after the first bomb was dropped, only after the second one was dropped, the emperor of Japan stepped in and gave the final decision of surrendering.

  • The atomic bomb was the best choice.

    If the atomic bomb didn't happen a lot of people would have died for no reason. The Japanese only kept fighting because there leader was making them. All the had to do was just kick him out or something. They started the war so they deserve to bombed. It saved millions of people lives.

  • Of course they should have.

    Think of it, they killed about 15000 people, but if they didn't do it, who knows what could of happened! The war have gone on and on and billions of people could have died! Yes, they could have just stopped at Hiroshima, but still! They killed thousands to save millions.

  • The U.S had to drop the bomb

    The dropping of those two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was very bad. However, a land invasion would have costed an excess of one million American lives. The Japanese of the 1940's would have fought to the last inch of that island, and the body count would have been astronomically higher if the bombs weren't dropped.

  • WHY NOT DROP

    What if that was your Family member, Friend, Lover.
    What if that was you fighting in the war. Would you want to get killed, So all people who said we shouldnt have dropped the bomb i think you need Think agian because without that bomb we would have lost more than we killed so think about that maybe just maybe you will change you mind.

  • Quick ending to the war.

    The us wanted to end the war quickly without costing the lives of more soldiers. So the president agreed to drop the bombs. It made the Japanese surrender because they knew that if they continued the war they could not win. The atomic bomb's destructive power would have defeated them anyways.

  • Not good at tittles :)

    A lot of the arguments I am seeing on the opposing side talks about how lots of innocent people would have been spared if the bombs were not dropped but in reality that would not have been the case.
    If the US would have continued fighting without the dropping of the bomb it would have ended in the invasion of the Japanese home islands since a larger majority of Japanese people did not believe in surrender because of their Samurai code. If the US had decided to go ahead with an invasion it would have resulted in a lot more deaths since the Japanese were teaching children to run into large groups of US soldiers and under tanks and then trigger the explosives, School children were also told to attack them with sharpened wooden sticks. These sort of tactics would probably have had a lot of physiological affects on a lot of people. On top of that once the Nazis had been defeated the Soviet Union had set up a lot of puppet governments in European countries that the Nazis had previously been in control of. If the US were to do a conventional invasion the Soviet Union would probably have done the same thing, with this happening to the Japanese Home Islands a lot of other countries may have also turned against the Japanese (mainly the Pacific ocean countries).
    In conclusion the US was also looking for a fast way out of the war that would have resulted in the last amount of US citizen deaths. The US also gave Japan a chance to surrender before they dropped the 1st bomb but the Japanese government did not understand the power of this weapon since nothing like this has never been seen before. In response to people who say the the bomb was dropped without warning and that their was no reason to do so, the bombing of pearl harbour procured without warning or a solid reason.

    Sorry If I missed anything important or if some of my arguments are not 100% accurate, most of my sources are from western documentaries which can be a little 1 sided.
    (also to lazy to fix any Grammar issues cause I was in class while typing this and that is now over :) )

  • Complete reasons to not

    While its often overlooked due to the U. S. Victory in the war, The atom bomb was actually illegal. According to the International laws made on September 30, 1938, The bombing was very much illegal as it had imposed on the civilian population with the use of a bomb as well as chemical weapons. For the exact quote, Please refer to www. Dannen. Com. Secondly, The affects of the bomb were unlike the affects of a casual war. These affects caused radiation sicknesses and overall, Up to 250, 000 deaths. The bomb had even affected pregnant mothers, Whose children were wildly affected by this and carried on birth defects for generation upon generation. Even so, The bomb put an advance on nuclear arsenals and led other countries to begin working on their own. To this day, The bombings put us in a high security risk as it's now more accessible. Even General Eisenhour had confirmed that the bomb was no longer necessary to save American lives, Which many claim otherwise. It's often spoken that it would have cost the U. S. More American lives, Which even if it had, You can't put a cost on lives. Japanese or American, Any amount of lives lost in war can't be justified. By dropping the bomb, 70 percent of homes and buildings were completely destroyed to no repair and left the town completely radiated. Many of the lakes and much of the area was extremely polluted as well.

    And finally, If you're reading this for a school project, Please enjoy the hard work that I put in for mine and listed above. Please add on to it and turn it into something great and feel free to write your own. The more people we can inform, We're helping. So pass it on for someone else to enjoy and make their week. Thank you. :)

  • It was illegal

    Being that the U. S. Won the war, The known fact that the atom bomb dropping was illegal is often overlooked. As of September 30th, 1938, The international laws were revised and included the following:
    "Any attacks of legitimate military objectives must be carried out in such a way that civilian populations in the neighborhood are not bombed through negligence. "
    The international laws then go on to reaffirm that the use of chemical or bacterial methods is contrary to international law. The U. S. Could not have picked a better way to break these laws than the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Not to mention that 70 percent of the city buildings were damaged to no repair and that up to 250, 000 people were affected. Of those people, Many of them died of radiation poison later on as well as suffered from other related sicknesses. Pregnant women also later gave birth to children with birth defects to pass on for ongoing generations. Many of the affects were not fixable, As the Japanese were even ready to surrender. In the Japanese culture, It is considered a taboo to surrender, But in this case, They were short on supplies leaving them physically unable to continue. Even then, It would have been easier to wait out until November 1st, The next possible attack the U. S. Had planned. If they had waited, It's likely Japan would have been so weak, They'd already surrendered peacefully. Maybe the attack wouldn't have even been necessary then. Just as this one, According to General Dwight D. Eisenhour had quoted that the bomb wasn't mandatory to save any American lives as many claim.

    Also, I'd assume many of you are using this for a school project, Please enjoy and continue my research that I, Myself have used for my own school project :)

  • The bomb was against the international laws

    Being that it's often overlooked as the U. S. Had won the war, Dropping the atom bomb had actually violated two laws. As of September 30th, 1938, The International Laws had included the following:

    "Any attack on legitimate military objectives must be carried out such a way that civilian populations in neighborhoods are not bombed through negligence. "

    "The use of chemical or bacterial methods in the war is contrary to international law. "

    Clearly, It has been overlooked due to the U. S. Victory, But it's still a very important factor in determining this. IT WAS ILLEGAL FOR A REASON!

  • Absolutely not. This was terrorism, Genocide

    Dropping those nukes should be considered one of the greatest acts of terrorism the world has ever seen under the guise of a last resort to end a war. According to the U. S. , The Nazis were on the brink if developing this technology, But would they have been insane enough to use it. The U. S. Put itself in the leading position, Effectively holding the world at gunpoint, And in the process they've put in place an enormous military economy. Eisenhower's warning about the military industrial complex was heard all over the world but none have listened. This is a nation that welcomed Nazi war criminals with open arms, And continues to house the biggest group of today's war criminals, And protects them from prosecution.

  • It was barbaric and unnecessary

    The atomic bomb was dropped on innocent people instead of the military area. The explosion destroyed the cities and killed thousands of people. Radiation was a huge problem. Many animals and people got either sick or died due to radiation which also caused many children to be born with disabilities. The United States was already winning the war and Japan was close to surrender which makes it even more unnecessary for the United States to take such a move.

  • The U. S. Shouldn't have dropped the atomic bomb!

    Even Though the U. S chose to use the atomic bomb, Because of the Japanese refusal to surrender, It is clear that it wasn't the best option. Murdering millions of innocent Japanese citizens, The subsequent radiation, The contamination of their water sources and crop, And radiation poisoning and the damage to the environment was clearly unnecessary! According to experts, Fausto Pocar and Renato Zerbini,
    the attacks in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are classified as war crimes because they violate two principles of the rules governing armed conflicts. Added to incentivizing other countries to develop weapons of mass destruction and nuclear missile programs, That became a vast threat to World Peace.
    Here and now we suffer from atomic-scale threats, And we pay the price for the inhuman decision of the united states.

  • Dropping the atomic bomb was wrong.

    One bomb is understandable, But to be completely honest Japan would have surrendered without bombs. The mass murdering (because that's exactly what it was) of millions of Japanese citizens was unnecessary! We would have been devastated if they bombed America and it was our families that were wiped out. Then after all of it America decides they can say who gets to use their nuclear weapons and who can't. I don't think so!

  • The U. S. Shouldn't have dropped the bombs in Japan.

    The bombs that the USA let in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1942 destroyed civilians' homes (people that weren't involved with the war at all), Killed
    many people and its consequences impact the place till today because of the radioactive material. Sure that if the US had kept the operation and attacked by land more people could have died (including civilians and American soldiers), But the government could have reacted to the Japanese attack in another way, They had an enormous army and weapons that weren’t
    radioactive.
    The US knew the cruelty that it was using the radioactive bomb and not so long before they dropped it they started a plan that assured that no one would produce or use nuclear weapons again and that the studies that involved it should be shared.

  • No more bombs!

    There should never have been bombs made, Or any other weapon for that matter. All this violence should've never been started. Yes Countries had their differences but they could have handled it differently. Innocent people died that day and for what? Just to prove a point. How sad. We should stop all the violence and destroy all weapons.

  • Many innocent people were killed.

    It’s a fact that The United States caused a lot of pain and suffering to Japan, By throwing a bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. More than 140. 000 people died in these two cities, And most of them were innocent civilians, Who had nothing to do with the war. With this in mind, We can infer that this bomb was a cruel way to end the war, Even though “necessary”, In Truman’s view. However, There surely were better ways to make the Japanese surrender, Without killing a big part of them.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Jaguar_999 says2013-05-05T20:23:25.890
Shoud the U.S drop atomic bomb on Japan?
Introduction
In 1945 when World War I alost ended United States drop atomic bomb on the two cities of Japan, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki, with roughly half of the deaths in each city occurring on the first day. The Hiroshima prefecture health department estimated that, of the people who died on the day of the explosion, 60% died from flash or flame burns, 30% from falling debris and 10% from other causes. During the following months, large numbers died from the effect of burns, radiation sickness, and other injuries. In both cities, most of the dead were civilians.

On 15 August, six days after the bombing of Nagasaki, Japan announced its surrender to the Allies, signing the Instrument of Surrender on 2 September, officially ending World War II. The bombings led, in part, to post-war Japan's adopting Three Non-Nuclear Principles, forbidding the nation from nuclear armament. The role of the bombings in Japan's surrender and their ethical justification are still debated.

In my opinion United States of America shoudn't use nuclear bomb on Japan. But they did. Because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.In two waves of terror lasting two long hours, they killed or wounded over 3,500 Americans and sank or badly damaged 18 ships - including all 8 battleships of the Pacific Fleet - and over 350 destroyed or damaged aircraft. At least 1,177 lives were lost when the Battleship Arizona exploded and sank.

However, they did not sink any of Pacific aircraft carriers and they left most of the fuel that was needed to win the war in the Pacific. In one stroke, the Japanese navy scored a brilliant success. At the Pearl Harbor 3,500 soldiers died. According to the number of deaths at Pearl Harbor to the number of deaths at the Hiroshima and Nagasaki the nuber of deaths at Pearl Harbor is almost nothing. Also most of those who died in Pearl Harbor was soldiers and most who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was innocent people.

The day after the attack, President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed a joint session of United States Congress. Roosevelt called December 7 "a date which will live in infamy". Congress declared war on the Empire of Japan amid outrage at the attack and the late delivery of the note from the Japanese government breaking off relations with the U.S. Government, actions considered treacherous. Pacifist Representative Jeannette Rankin, a Republican from Montana, cast the only dissenting vote. Roosevelt signed the declaration of war later the same day. Continuing to intensify its military mobilization, the U.S. Government finished converting to a war economy, a process begun by provision of weapons and supplies to the Soviet Union and Great Britain.

After they join the was vs japan they took all of the Japaneese people who lived in America and put them in prison. I think it is also unfair to them, because in world war one or at other war those Japanese people was fighting there protecting them. And now they took them to prison because their Native country attacked the U.S, its not fair. Also when the U.S. Drops those two atomic bomb dozens of thousands of people died. When atomic bomb explodes people who are in radius of explsion dieing first. They die because of explasiaon that destroys almost everything around its radius and also people also died because of light damage the just burm them. Also the atomic shodow the went up damge the atmosphere. After the bombing very small amount of people survived because they died of explsion and the the radiation the was just burning them slowly from inside. After all of the peopl was have to almost remove the city they ere have remove the graund building almost everything to get red of readiation. So I think that was a bad idea to drop those atomic bombs.

Althought some people disagree with me. They think that it was good idea that U.S droped the atomic bomb at Japan. But i won't change my mind i still think that it is was a bad idea and i hope you will agree with me.
Anonymous says2013-05-15T20:17:14.360
I believe that the United States shouldn’t have dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki because of all the damage it caused to Japanese citizens in Hiroshima, Nagasaki or surrounding cities. I think the right thing to do if the atomic bomb was our only choice to end the war, is to drop one on an evacuated Iwo Jima island. To demonstrate power, but I wouldn’t drop the atomic bomb twice on two populated area’s. All in all I think it was wrong for the U.S. To have dropped the two bombs, on innocent people.

Another reason I believe it is wrong to have dropped bombs of those magnitudes is because if the same thing were to of happened to day. Not only would it count as a crime against humanity, but also act of terrorism. Then after this crime of terror the arms race started which wouldn’t have happened if we didn’t drop an atomic bomb on Japan in the first place. In my opinion if we didnt drop the atomic bombs, the world would be way less of the dangerous, chemical weapons filled, nuclear warzone it could now become today. All because the atomic bomb started the race to build and mass produce weapons of mass destruction.
Anonymous says2013-06-03T00:43:02.380
So many people who have said yes are saying that the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are justified because "they bombed Pearl Harbor first". Revenge does not justify the dropping of the atomic bombs. If that is the only reason you think the bombings were justified then you really shouldn't be picking a side yet of wether it was justified or not as you don't have enough information on the topic.
RealAmerican says2013-06-15T06:18:48.217
NO, NO, NO. We should have NEVER dropped the nuclear bombs. Japan had already offered to surrendered BEFORE we decided to use our new nuclear weapon on them. Therefore, the decision to drop the bomb had reasons other than ending the war with Japan. We wanted to show the world, and especially The Soviet Union, our new toy, and what we were capable of doing. As an American with roots all the way back to the Mayflower, I feel sad and ashamed that we have massacred hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, just to show the world our strength.
Anonymous says2013-06-25T21:24:12.337
There were over 200,000 people who died when we dropped the bombs (high estimate) as well as inter-generational effects. This might seem like a complete tragedy, and completely unrequited, but what were the alternatives? What was the goal? What was the outcome? Finally, what was accomplished? The alternatives were two: Invasion or negotiation. In the invasion scenario, it would have been more or less impossible to subdue Japan without 1,500,000 million military casualties (counting both sides, low estimate,) which does not mention the civilian casualties, which would have been at most comparable to 1/2 the civilian casualties that the bomb caused. Some would say this is better, attacking more so those who "chose" to be in the military, but considering 1) conscription and 2) the Japanese code of honor, shaming any who refused to enlist, this is more like killing twice the number of male civilians, and saving many women and children. This is regardless of tactics, death would be unavoidable in a war of that scale. In the situation of negotiation, There would be a possibility of negotiating peace, likely with the idea that we give Japan a large amount of the territory it captured (reached nearly to Australia) and would have taken quite a long time. There also would have been little to discourage them from attacking again quite later, if the war could have been seen as a "success" from their point of view. If we wished to negotiate them back further, we could have refused to trade with Japan (which had very little fuel reserves to sustain themselves) but the idea of Japanese honor and integrity (among other things) kept them separate from the world for several hundred years. Not the most winning plan, and subject to counter attack, as well as vast militarization on both sides of the ocean. The goal of dropping the bomb, in the end, was to demonstrate the power of the U.S. As well as end the war. Check. Does that justify anything? Nope. Moving on. The outcome was exactly as expected, with a kick: The Japanese agreed to sign a treaty of unconditional surrender, after we killed several hundred thousand civilians (still high estimate,) the U.S. Demonstrated their power, the world was shocked, more people died from the poisoning, the place where the city was was scorched, irradiated, and massively messed up, and (the kick) people would suffer (horribly and by extension) for years and decades (and generations) afterwards. Woo. And what was accomplished? (different from outcome) What was accomplished was that 200,000 people died (still, still, a high estimate) and were irradiated when really, they didn't need to be. Yes there could have been future problems (could(!) have been) but hey, we guaranteed future problems with the bomb, so who cares. Yes we saved lives, but hey! Negotiation could have done that too! In conclusion, I think that as a decision at the time, it wasn't the best one that could have been made, but it also wasn't someone completely evil pressing a button. It was a group of people who made a weapon of war. Then, they told the people who were in charge what would happen if they used it. Those people told the President, who found a way to justify it to himself and the people around him, and they as a group decided to drop it. Not with a light heart, but a heavy mind. So bad, but not evil. Unfortunate for all parties.

P.S. Food for thought: you don't see someone key your car, and then shoot him. That would be the comparison between Pearl Harbour (Yes Harbour with a "u" because I am Canadian) and Hiroshima.

P.P.S. The Japanese had an estimated 6 weeks of oil reserves left. Their military would have been semi-useless and also had no spare parts or ability to repair anything afterwards. Their surrender would have been necessary afterwards, and their military crippled.

Food for thought.
Anonymous says2013-08-27T23:13:55.963
It was bad
vick.yyyy says2016-05-04T06:18:47.170
I say that they should have because it saved millions of lives and brought an abrupt end to the war. If not for the bomb who knows how many more lives would have been lost?
luizabc says2020-06-15T17:35:16.620
I believe the United States should not have used nuclear weapons against Japan because the possible disadvantages of a conditional surrender weight less than the thousands of lives killed during the attack, Which is unjustifiable taking in consideration the information we have today about Japan’s circumstances at the end of the war.
Pedro.Pinto says2020-09-18T18:00:55.050
Yes, I do think we should have Dropped the atomic bomb.
It's not a vengeance of Pearl Harbor, But it is a way to stop the war with a view that manny more people could die if this war continues and not only Americans but so much more japananes.
mariapardauil1234 says2021-01-19T02:23:51.823
Considering the events of the war and the enormous number of deaths, It is clear that the decision taken by President Truman was necessary for the time to end.

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