Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes, It unfortunately had to happen.

    There were many consequences including the lost of life and resources but It lead to the future we are in. If the U. S had not dropped the bombs then the Japanese would have kept the war going killing more lives even though they had already lost. Plus the government had the chances to surrender and there were warning given. Although it is a very bad event, It was necessary.

  • We Got Anime :D

    While the atomic bombs were definitely devastating and caused the death of millions of civilians, It was most likely a necessary step in ensuring both the end of the fighting with Japan and the preservation of American lives, Which would be an essential contribution to the Allied victory in World War 2. On top of that, Such a strong victory over Japan allowed the Allies to do away with the militaristic nature of the Japanese government and restructure the society, Which would also lead to the creation of manga and anime.

  • America Should Have Dropped the Bomb

    According to Japanese military philosophy they would have kept fighting down to the last person, All the bomb did was show the Japanese just how likely that as a possibility is. I think that the target should have been a military target such as an army or naval base but the effect took effect either way.

  • Japan would not surrender

    The option was given to surrender or face destruction, And Japan chose not to surrender which meant that the only true way to stop them was to force the Japanese to surrender by hitting them with them with the atomic bombs and then the second bomb was also necessary because they refused to surrender and at the end of the day it was the lives of the Japanese or the Lives of the Americans.

  • Another North Korea

    Had a ground invasion been launched, The Soviets would have invaded from the North. Remember what happened to Germany? Look at North Korea in the present! If it weren't for bombings, There would be a "communist" North and a free South. Look at how that's working out in the Korean peninsula!

  • U. S. Was right to use nuclear weapons against Japan.

    America was right to drop the nuclear bombs against Japan, They asked for it. Although the many deaths caused by the attack, The bomb did his job, Ended with the war, Without the attack, The war would be prolonged for more time, And possibly not finished yet these days, At this period, More americans could dye, And in times of war, We have to think mainly in our own survive, And that’s what president Truman did, When decided by this way. In his personal diary he righted that this was the most difficult decision that he had to do, He tried to don't drop the bomb, Just asking for japan to surrender, But they didn’t, So he dropped the “Little boy” in Hiroshima, Although the destruction caused by it, Japan did not surrendered, And just after the attack of the “Fat Man” on Nagasaki, They did it, Proving that all of this japanese deaths, Was fault of the emperor’s pride.

  • U. S. Was right to use nuclear weapons against Japan.

    America was right to drop the nuclear bombs against Japan, They asked for it. Although the many deaths caused by the attack, The bomb did his job, Ended with the war, Without the attack, The war would be prolonged for more time, And possibly not finished yet these days, At this period, More americans could dye, And in times of war, We have to think mainly in our own survive, And that’s what president Truman did, When decided by this way. In his personal diary he righted that this was the most difficult decision that he had to do, He tried to don't drop the bomb, Just asking for japan to surrender, But they didn’t, So he dropped the “Little boy” in Hiroshima, Although the destruction caused by it, Japan did not surrendered, And just after the attack of the “Fat Man” on Nagasaki, They did it, Proving that all of this japanese deaths, Was fault of the emperor’s pride.

  • The U. S. Should have dropped a atomic bomb in Japan

    They should have done that because it was the fastest and most efficient way to stop the war and obligate Japan to surrender. But, I think that they could have dropped only at Hiroshima, Avoiding the death of thousands of INNOCENTS who also wanted the end of the war. Truman had already warned Japan that they would suffer a massive destruction if Hirohito did not surrendered, But this decision has nothing to do with the citizens lives. The bomb of Hiroshima was enough to show the world all the American belic force and to intimidate the Japanese army, Which would eventually surrender without needing both bombs. Besides that, Dropping a nuke affects not only the living generation, But also the people who will be born in that region for years; So, It is not fair to punish a part of the population which were not even born. The bomb of Nagasaki was a pure power demonstration and killed or wounded people unnecessarily; But I recognize the necessity of dropping Hiroshima bomb to put an end in the war

  • Yes, I believe the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima was a good idea, But I don’t think the bombing of Nagasaki was necessary

    Mainly because the first bombing saved thousands of lives that would've been lost otherwise, If the war kept going, However, The second nuclear attack doesn't feel that necessary since Japan would've folded at the threat of another Hiroshima happening inside their precious island that they had been dying and sacrificing themselves to protect

  • The bomb, Economically speaking, Was good.

    There has always been a great discussion about the atomic bomb dropped by the US in 1945. However, It is hard to see people considering the economical consequences of the bomb. What were the good economic outcomes of the bomb, And why do they outweigh the bad consequences and outcomes it had?

  • 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 cant. I don't think so!

  • Totally DECIMATED Japan

    So what if the U.S. would've fought in the war longer? Japan would've been spared the horror. Harmless, innocent civilians were brutally murdered, the subsequent radiation made the cities unlivable for the longest time, and the environment was harmed horribly. Forget bombings, we should've fought longer!

  • That bomb killed millions of innocent lives.

    If America was trying to show that it had power, they could have dropped the bomb in a less populated area still showing the damage the bomb could do without having to take so many innocent souls. That would have scared the Japanese and still caused them to surrender, especially considering the fact that America could have been planning to drop more and destroy everything.

  • Atomic Bombs- A little too extreme

    Even though bombing was required to end the war, the US could have dropped fire bombs which would have had a similar effect in terms of death tolls and destruction to the infrastructure, but would not have lead to the after effects of an atomic bomb, like the contamination of their water sources and crop, and radiation poisoning. It also lead to other countries developing WMD and nuclear missile programs. This has become a huge threat to World Peace and had the US not played the "Atomic Bomb card", we wouldn't be facing this threat today.

  • Well then okay then 9/11 was worse than this.

    So 9/11 was so bad, but you can kill thousands more and slowly let thousands more die from the radiation and die even now, but if some died from a plane it has to become World Tower day. The nukes were hundreds of times worse than 9/11 but America we did it to save our life so the lives of Americans are more important then the live of thousands of Japanese women, men and children.

  • The U.S. should not have bombed Japan.

    Not all of the people in Japan were guilty. Some were innocent, and weren't even involved. It just wasn't very fair to the citizens in Japan. They should have just stuck with a simple war. At least less people would have died and the innocent people would have been safe.

  • Killing innocent people is wrong!

    Why end war with more war? It is not at all necessary. It isn't right to kill kids and murder whole families just because the government thinks it is okay to do so. It isn't right, and the United States should not have done what they did. It was the wrong decision for the United States to do that to innocent people.

  • Innocent lives were lost.

    No, because the reason the United States did this was just to intimidate Russia and many, many innocent lives were lost. There were diplomatic options available. The United States remains the only country to have used such a devastating bomb to this day. It was evil and a black mark on the United States.

  • It was inhumane.

    The people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not criminals. They were just normal people going about their day. Not only was it inhumane to the survivors, but that land is now ruined by radiation. There is no excuse for causing the devastation that the U.S. Released upon that area of land.

  • No they shouldn't have.

    If you were a small 5 year old child and you were just sat inside your house with your mother, and suddenly, the whole world seems to have disappeared and you're dying....Well, it's not really a great idea to drop atomic bombs then, is it? Yes, Japan was totally wrong in attacking Pearl Harbour, and going along with the wrong side, but in the end, sometimes you have to think about the negatives before the positives. Japan had already lost (even though they wouldn't admit it to themselves), and the U.S., England and France had already won. Japan were the only enemies who were still trying to fight. Fair enough, if it weren't for the bombs, Japan mightn't have surrendered. Who knows? But murdering the millions of such innocent lives isn't really the best answer. Nor is invading. Maybe if the government came up with a better plan then that would've been necessary, not nuclear bombings which has totally wiped out any chance of world peace. Killing and injuring millions of innocent people isn't the best solution to ending a world war, in my opinion. In fact, if I had ended the war like that, I would have it on my conscience forever. I would feel like a murderer who got away with it.


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.