• Think about it from Trooman's perspective.

    Now, This question is quite a subjective one, Regarding how the person’s own philosophy functions and what they perceive to be morally correct or not. I do understand the fact that it was a massacre without proper warning, However it was the only way to fully prevent Japan from continuing the war on the pacific side. To fully comprehend this question, You have to view it from the perspective of Trooman. As the president of the United States, Your country has just been a victim to a surprise attack on pearl harbor without much provoking ensuing prior. The worst being done is cutting off Japanese trade routes, Leading to less oil income, However their own imperialistic strategies giving them access to territory very near to the US. This already draws Trooman in, And with the majority of the war in Europe ending, And Hitler beginning to fade away, The war in Japan is the last of the last. Sending US troops to war in Japan is not a feasible option, As that, Would lead to far more US casualties, Something Trooman cannot risk. He does, However, Have two relatively new, Untested bombs which may solve the issue. While they have been portrayed to have an incredibly strong blast zone, The effects they have on humans is unknown. It is either lose thousands of US troops and Japanese troops in hope that the war will stop, When it could carry on for years and years after, Leading to more tension and more countries joining in, Continuing WW2, Or they could drop the bomb and end the war instantly. This is really the only logical choice at the time, And the Japanese should be taught a lesson, While of course killing that many children and families is unjustified from certain viewpoints, It may have made the Japanese think about the horrors they have done to other nations, And in hindsight, It was the best option.

  • Yes they were

    The U. S. Was not in the wrong dropping the atomic bomb, Because Japan killed Lots people in the attack on Pearl Harbor. I think that was unreasonable for for them to bomb us. They learned how strong the US is fighting us and they learned for future reference not to attack us us again.

  • It was pay back time for japan

    Japan killed thousands of people in an unprovoked attack, Where also the us’s naval fleet was destroyed. Not only what they did to america was bad, But also other countries. Japan after all of this madness needed to wake up and get payback for there in humans actions. Bombing was the best thing possible for this to happen.

  • All war is an evil, Thus, This was merely an extension of said evil.

    The dropping of the atomic bomb was something necessary to the success of allied forces in the Pacific. If it were not for the destruction of these two cities, American and other allied forces would have been required to invade the island of Japan. This invasion was slated to result in over 1, 000, 000 casualties, Something which was to be drastically avoided. Besides, How can you condemn an action that would result in the death of 200, 00 innocents when an event like the holocaust had already occurred, Or the battle of Stalingrad, Where millions of people and soldiers died. This is again an extension of the evil that is war, And the atomic bomb was simply the weapon that ended the fighting. This is something that was absolutely necessary because it prevented the loss of life that would have been 4 times greater, Not including Japanese casualties or suicides that would have been ordered by the government. And with the rising death toll from these events, You haven't even factored in the number of POWs that would have died as a result of mass murder by the Japanese camp guards. This action was also justified because the two cities were legitimate military targets, And that didn't stop anyone from bombing the sh*t out of them. If these two cities were bombed in a manner similar to that of London, Would you bat an eye or just chalk it up as a consequence of war? All war is made up of individual actions that determine the outcome. The destruction of these two cities was the event that ended their suicidal emperor's desire to fight the war, And prevent the death of millions more soldiers and civilians.

  • Slap them Silly Japs

    So to put it simply, We could have nuked the germans, But they were just assholes, The Japanese messed with our boats, And if there is one thing Americans like to do, Its fishing. No Boats = No fishing= kill those idiots that wanted to mess with a famous American hobby and all we really wanted to do was catch so whoppers!

  • No becouse no

    I don't think so because the no peope are wrong with the desision to bomb perl harbor we sould bomb it again. Thats why i am trying to win the argument to soo i will seses in th best comp i the world umm thats it for today good bey.

  • GG Man, They got clapped

    They bombed us so we bombed them back with an even better bomb. F



  • They were dead anyway. They are just trying to be cool even though they are not and they didn't stand a chance against the U. S. A.

    Those losers thought they could take the United states. They are very weak and they need a special aid to help them. If Japan was smart they would have just surrendered when we gave them the chance to do so. They are very dumb for that and that is why the U. S. A beat them.

  • Good Idea because. . .

    There was no other way to win the war quickly without using extreme force, So we the atomic bomb because the japanese were using kamikaze pilots to suicide fly into soldiers, Ships and other planes just to win the battles, And the death toll would have been much higher if the war went on (the atomic bomb killed around 135, 000 japanese people)

  • It was certainly reasonable view for the USA

    The devastation caused by the bombs sped up the japenese surrender which was the best solution for all parties. The immediate deaths that it caused are outweighed by lived potentially saved in the long run by quick end to war. Japense didn’t have an option but to surrender which left 5e United States to victory in world war two

  • Other lives matter too not just ours

    There is no justification for killing innocent men women and children if we can justify killing thousands of japanese civilians is going to save americans then we should not b surprised if terrorist justify their cause and survival by killing the innocent. We have to fight injustice but not at the expense of innocent lives

  • USA was not justified

    Although it is true that an invasion may have killed more civilians, there surely had to be another way to end the war. It is clearly not right to kill this many people, and in the long term it is still bad, as there is still radiation in these places. There could have been another way. Apart from the test explosion, no one knew what the bomb could do.

  • The US was not justified

    The US was in no way justified. Not only did the bomb kill innocent civilians, but it was not necessary. Admiral Leahy (President Truman's advisor) said himself that 'Japan was already defeated' and that there was 'no reason to use the bomb'. But most appalling of all, Hiroshima was only chosen as a target because they wanted to see the full effect of the bomb. We already know that Nagasaki was the second target, but why? According to the booklet by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Nagasaki was simply an 'experiment', but an experiment that cost Japan innocent lives. The US denied any knowledge about radiation, even though it was radiation which killed 200,000 in Hiroshima. This decision was totally unnacceptable and inhumane.

  • Doing this for gcse history

    On 6 August 1945, the first atomic bomb to be dropped on foreign soil was released from Enola Gay on Hiroshima, Japan. This nuclear bomb, named Little Boy was dropped as a devastating attack in an attempt to make Japan surrender, and destroyed Hiroshima as over 70,000 people were instantly killed.

    When Hirohito, emperor of Japan refused to accept the United States' terms of surrender, the second atomic bomb, 'Fat Man' was dropped over Nagasaki on August 9th, 1945. Many people detested the use of the atomic bombs as the mass murder of civilians was believed to be an inhumane act. The aim of this investigation is to find out whether America's decision to drop the Atomic Bombs on Japan was justified. This investigation will concisely cover the events that brought the US into the Second World War and its connections with Japan during the war before the nuclear attack. This investigation will also examine the US's decision to allow the bombs to be dropped over the cities. Content from a variety of documents, stories from those who witnessed the event, and writings from Truman's speeches and diary will help reveal if his decision to drop the atomic bombs was justified or not.

  • Please don't hate all american citizens and think that we all are proud of it.

    Im gunna keep it short and sweet. They were way out of line and should have found another way to end the war. But I want to and will say this, I happen to be an american. So want to inform you all that not all Americans agree with it. So please stop insulting america and its citizens because a vast majority of them do not like and are not proud of the past. So just don't go thinking that all american people are the same please.

  • It was not payback it was a war crime

    Yes the Japanese had no right to attack us in the first place and we did have to come back harder. However 68 civilians died in pearl harbor while 140,000 civilians died because of the Atomic Bomb. No civilians should ever be touched in war but we should not have dropped them with out knowing its full strength and not caring about all the innocent people.

  • NO It's Not.

    The bomb was not justified. I don't care if Japan started it or dropped the bomb first, be the bigger man or in this case country and just stop. Don't react. The only thing that dropping the bombs did was kill more and more innocent people. While the US sat there all fine and happy you had people in Japan starving and dying because America thought "Lets show them who the boss is and teach them a lesson." America needs to step off its high horse and do what's best for its people not the leaders. They had the choice to not do it but they still did and that is why America is hated till this day, not just by other countries but by those in this one.

  • They were going to surrender.

    "But U.S. officials chose not to test whether this intelligence was correct. Instead, Hiroshima was bombed on August 6, and Nagasaki on August 9. Because of logistics, an invasion of Japan could not begin for another three months, so the U.S. could have waited to see if Japan would surrender before dropping the atomic bombs" (upfront 1).
    The atomic bomb was necessary to end the war with Japan at the earliest possible moment. By the early summer of 1945, Japanese leaders knew they could not win. But they fought on in hopes of securing better surrender terms.

  • It is more effective to do nonviolent actions to solve conflicts that violent., shows you how such is evaluated. However, one may say that the Japanese would not have listened to nonviolence, unfortunately, such is not the case. People in Japan where already getting ready to surrender, nonviolent advocators in their country were trying to be peaceful, and as shown by what happened, the emperor was quite frankly leaning that way too. The reason this happened was because the military had control of not only Japan, but of America. If that money had not been spent on the bomb, and rather on nonviolent protests, it would have been an easier task for both moral and financial reasons. How much money does nonviolent protest cost? Less then 25 billion dollars I assure you.

  • Dis wepsit sukz

    Y dos tis wepsit sukz pecuz it wnt let me wite les tan fidy wordza a a a a a a a a aa a a a a a a a a a aa a aa a a a a a a a aa aa aSUPA SANIC FEST a a a a a a a

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-02-22T15:49:35.680
We gave them a fair warning and they Didn't leave so that's there fault
Anonymous says2013-02-22T15:50:36.877
They were warned, since they didn't leave that's their problem
Anonymous says2013-02-22T15:52:05.860
It wasn't justified. We killed more Japanese people than they killed us and we killed so many civilians. The bombing was too much.
Anonymous says2013-03-05T17:59:51.083
Many of the people that were killed were INNOCENT! Besides they only killed 2,000 people at Pearl Harbor. We killed 140,000+ of them.
Anonymous says2013-03-27T22:39:32.093
The Japanese weren't warned about the first bomb on Hiroshima.
Anonymous says2013-04-06T00:05:45.757
We had no major beef with Japan until Pearl Harbor, they didn't warn us, we warned them about Nagasaki, they deserved what they got
Anonymous says2013-04-06T02:12:22.257
Oh my god, so many of you are SHEEP, do some research, then there'd be no controversy, they deserved it!!! With that I am so sorry for the children that have to live with the choices of those before you,this had nothing to do with you
Anonymous says2013-04-09T20:54:58.490
BBC commentator Jim Holt would later put it a bit more bluntly:

"It is always wrong to boil a baby even if lives are saved thereby."
Anonymous says2013-04-10T01:23:26.157
I'm sorry for all those kids who are affected by Japan's decisions, but I lose respect for those who are super bias and think Japan didn't have it coming, need I say coming the SECOND TIME as well
Anonymous says2013-04-22T05:11:40.990
Something all of you should look into is that the United States provoked the war with Japan, not the other way around. Pearl Harbor wasn't the first swing, the war with economics and resources was.
Anonymous says2013-04-22T17:58:58.663
Thus the altitude would be around 15,00 feet so the Clanmi would have dropped it on us because the alitude was high.
Anonymous says2013-05-08T21:39:19.947
Yes, Japan was not playing by the rules of war, but two wrongs never make a right. No matter what good could have come out of the dropping of the atomic bomb, killing innocent civilians was not justifiable, and it never will be. America justified itself by saying that it would save the lives of our boys. What we forgot is that our boys were fighting in this war because of the horror we experienced at Pearl Harbor, where soldiers and sailors, belonging to a country then on peace terms with Japan, were blown to bits. Those Americans that died were innocent, the remaining were horrified. And what do we do with that just anger? At the end, instead of negotiating peace, we demand unconditional surrender. Japan refused. Historians sneer at Japan for not surrendering sooner, but it would be suicide itself to surrender to a country that granted its defeated enemy no certainty of how it was to be dealt with. America did not back down on its terms. Unconditional surrender was what we required, and we would take no less. So even though we were justified in partaking in war with Japan, we used that justification to do wrong: (1) demand unconditional surrender, and because they would not accept, (2) drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We justified it then and still try to justify the obvious wrong of vaporizing thousands of innocent men, women, and children, including 23 American prisoners of war. This is not morally acceptable, and how we try to clean our consciences of the blood bath is pathetic. Common sense points out to the facts that backup this view… Hiroshima and Nagasaki were of limited military value; civilians outnumbered troops in Hiroshima SIX to one. The radiation effects are still suffered TODAY, not only causing Leukemia and other diseases, but leaving land unfertile and unless for the Japanese people.
Anonymous says2013-05-11T00:54:42.233
The bombs, put together, incinarated approximately 100,000 people within seconds. About 60,000 died during the next month because of overdosages of radiation. I don't think the U.S had a right to bomb Japan. First of all, they should have picked their targets better. Hiroshima, especially, was not a major military base, but rather, a densely populated civilian area. Moreover, the bomb had many acute and long term effects, including leukemia and cancer. The bombs contaminated water and soil within a large area, preventing people from eating and from living in those areas. It is true that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor without warning, but at least Pearl Harbor was a major military target. Also, Regular warfare which Japan used in very different from nuclear weapons, which an be seen when you compare civil casualties: 68 vs 180,000.
Finally, Japan was actually attempting to surrender before the bombs. They had asked the ussr to intercede for them, saying that they would surrender I f allowed to keep their emperor. The u.S, however, proceeded to bomb, wishing for unconditional surrender. After the bombs, the us gave Japan the terms they first refused, so they basically said "yeah, we will accept your terms after we blow up a couple of cities".

If you have a terrible weapon in your hand, the morality of tool use should demand you do not use it until you are in extremis. The u.S was definitely not in extremis. They were winning in Europe, were beating the axis powers in men and resources, and finally, their Russian ally was ready to join war against Japan. So, the only reason left for dropping those bombs would be murderour vengeance.

Many people say it saved millions of life's, but this so called fact is absolutely ludicrous. Studies done at the time, which were shown to president Truman, showed that it would take about 47,500 soldiers to invade Japan.
Anonymous says2013-05-11T22:28:29.350
Pearl Harbor was a strategic assault, engaging and destroying military assets. The troops that died there were hardly innocent; they swear allegiance to their flag, just as any other military staff would do. This flag had already committed political and economic hostilities against Japan, and a military conflict as the next escalation of this event. Pearl Harbor cannot at all be used as justification for the destruction of civilian locations by the nuclear bombings.
Anonymous says2013-05-28T00:44:18.830
I think that the dropping the bomb was a mistake. Sure, it saved plenty of american and japanese SOLDIERS, but innocent people are a lot different. We are talking about women and children here.
GeekiTheGreat says2013-05-31T13:52:43.063
People who are saying no really do not know what they are talking about.
Anonymous says2013-06-03T23:46:58.490
Every human being is selfish. Americans and japanese alike. They couldve stopped everything and had an actual conversation like REAL civalized people. But no. Destroy thousands of lives and cause two atomic bombings that couldve been prevented.
Anonymous says2013-06-04T15:54:26.393
The actions of the Japanese that led up to us leveling a couple of their cities were not justified either. They asked for it. It was not justified, but acts of war rarely are. But all's well that ends well. America and Japan get along pretty well considering World War II wasn't all that long ago.
Anonymous says2013-06-10T10:00:59.380
Any justification of USA's nuking of Japanese cities justifies USA's cities getting nuked.
NoorAli says2014-03-11T15:41:13.633
A Barbarian Act.Smoking out innocents in a matter of seconds with no thought of diplomacy and politics, completely Barbarian. Power is something that has always been either in the East or in the West, but no one on earth has killed innocents than United States.
SweetTea says2014-03-25T18:41:29.377
In war, it isn't any country's job to consider the casualties suffered by the enemy. Collateral damage, or civilians, have been killed in every war throughout history. It's an unfortunate reality. Japan started the war with the U.S., when they attacked Pearl Harbor. Truman finished the war, with Nagasaki & Hiroshima. We were at war & the bombings were justified.
David48 says2015-08-06T21:31:34.777
From a British point of view, the British fought the Japanese in Burma( as our great American allies fought them in other areas of south east asia and the Pacific islands) I spoke to a veteran who was in the Chindits( google it). Who fought them, he said ' They will never surrender, we had to kill all of them, in battles, so the bomb was the correct thing to do', we must ask the generation of people that actually fought them what they think, because their opinion must be respected

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