Amazon.com Widgets
  • 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
    ef
    e
    fe
    f
    ef
    ef
    e
    fe
    f
    ef
    ef
    e
    fe
    fe
    fe
    f
    ef
    ef
    efe
    f
    ef
    ef
    ef
    ef
    e
    f
    e
    f
    e
    fef

    e
    f
    ef

    ef
    e
    f
    e
    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

  • It was not justified to bomb hiroshima and nagasaki

    It is not right to value american lives more than japanese lives. It is unacceptable to think that one country would bomb another with a weapon so powerful it will instantly kill thousands, Cause many injurys and the rest could suffer long term health problems. The whole bomb as unknown and taking the lives of all not just the soldiers is unhumane. It annihilated a three mile area killing over 600, 000 people and 1500 people have been seen to have problems due tothe radiation.

  • The US was not justified to drop the bombs

    I do not think that the US was justified to drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No-one should decide if someone should die. Also, There could have been better ways to end the war. More peaceful ways. America would not have had to make the war end in such tragedy.

  • No I don't think it was fair

    No I don't think the bombs were justified because of 3 reasons

    1. The Japanese only had about 1 week to move to some place else, Away from the blast radius because the US only sent out the leaflets 1 week from when they were going to drop that bomb

    2. Innocent civilians should not be included in the war because that is a War crime https://www. Un. Org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes. Shtml

    3. The Japanese economy was at the brink of collapsing after the Manchuria invasion and the bombs being dropped, Almost turned Japan into a 3rd world country.

  • They did not have the right to drop the atomic bomb

    They were not justified to drop the atomic bombs because they didnt know the damage that it did so they dropped the bomb blindly without knowing the damage and how much it destroy and on top of that hey killed thousands of civillians. So they shouldnt have dropped the bombs

  • No it wasn't.

    First off, It killed S O many lives, Sure the Japanese were heading for it, But the Americans wanted to drop the bomb either way, They spent so much time and money on it, Ofc they wanted to use it, But in all honesty, Its for the sake of anime.

  • Japan was already on the brink of collapse and ready to surrender soon enough.

    The constant losses as we pushed towards Japan, The fall of its allies, And the blockade around the Japense mainland islands were enough for them to eventually surrender. Not to mention we had been repeatedly firebombing there cities with our war winning B-29 superfortress. The Japense navy was basically defeated too. They were on the literally bring if collapse by July 1945. And many leaders and scientist Including Dwight Eisenhower himself said Japan was already going to surrender. And Leo Szilard warned Truman of the dangers of atomic weapons. Of the 200'000 or so killed in the bombings only around 35'000 were military personnel. The bombings are also considered against the Geneva convention.

  • I strongly believe that america was not justified

    The us was no justified to drop the bomb because japan did nothing to amrica and us was just being a baby and drop a bomb on japan as revenge because there crybabys and japan rules and us sucks chicken tenders and schools fun and i need to sleep a

  • America was not justified

    I KNOW that America was not justified in dropping the atomic bomb because of the damage that was caused and the lives that were lost.

    America constantly declined compromises that were changed multiple times to go benefit the things that America wanted Japan tried everything in there power to have peace over the Pacific and still receive oil. Japan attacked people that signed a contract saying that they would die for there country and that's who died Japan fought for there oil. Once America attacked Japan they didn't decide to attack people who also signed up to die for there country buy decided to attack people that were not apart of attacking in this war. The radiation that America put on Japan affected them for many years.
    This Is why America wasn ot justified with attacking Japan.

  • I believe that America was not justified in dropping the Atomic Bomb.

    I understand that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 but, It was for a reason. Japan was invading China and America just got themselves included in the war when they stopped the embargo with Japan. The U. S. A stopped trade with Japan because they claimed that Japan was trying to take over the Asian and Pacific territories. I don't agree with Japan's actions but, When they dropped the Atomic bomb I can see why. Japan has tried to comprimise so many times and the United Stated would just decline. Japan had to take actions so they planned to make the Atomic Bomb since America was hard to work with.

  • I don't think that we should have had dropped the atomic bomb

    We were not justified to drop this atomic bomb because we didn't the long term effects that it would have on innocent civilian lives. Many people in those areas died from radiation poison and many were still suffering generations later when they started to give birth it mutated children. Not only did this last for generation. In a short term affected it wiped out 2 entire cities of civilian people that should have not been put in the middle of the military war as collateral damage between America and Japan.


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.