Amazon.com Widgets
  • The US was justified in dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Japan already killed over 2,000 people in the Pearl Harbor bombings. We had done nothing to provoke them, unless you count our cutting off trade with Japan, limiting their oil supply. That was also reasonable, as they were rapidly conquering the Indian Ocean and wanted to take the Pacific too.
    In addition, this was nearing the end of WWII. Hitler and Germany were already out of the picture, but Japan was still strong, holding several hundred islands in the Indian Ocean. We moved to take out Japan by defeating the Japanese on several islands, but because of their kamikazes, we took heavy casualties, and the Japanese lost far less men than we did. A full-scale invasion of Japan would have cost thousands upon thousands of American lives, and that was simply unacceptable! Dropping the atomic bombs saved American lives and crippled the Japanese from attacking us, thus effectively ending WWII in the Pacific Ocean.

  • You're all dumb

    It cost the equivalent of 25 billion dollars to make this bomb and the American government wanted to see if it would work. It would have caused 2 million allied deaths and 3 million Japanese deaths for full scale invasion along with countless civilian catalysis, so it was a good idea.

  • Yes it was justified because they were warned.

    I have one simple argument if the bomb was not dropped a land invasion was planned for the 1st of November 1945, which would have cost the U.S. 1 million troops, and the Japanese 3 to 4 million troops civilians ect... all Japanesse were ordered to fight to the death.

  • Japanese civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were gravely warned to leave the city days prior to the A-bombings.

    The U.S. had dropped leaflets on two cities a few days prior to the A-bombings of Hiroshima warning civilians of air raids within a few days and advised them to leave the city immediately. They did not leave so you chose to put yourself and your families at risk of bombs being dropped on your head. If you don't believe me, then Google "America warned Hiroshima".

    And Pickle, Japanese planes also shot American civilians at Pearl Harbor and killed directly over 68 so it's not just soldiers and marines. Not to mention the attack on Pearl Harbor was done without a declaration of war and without a warning so it's not acceptable by any means to kill non-war people (soldiers and civilians) out of nowhere, thus placing Japan in violation of peace.

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki had tens of thousands Japanese soldiers, plus both cities had military / industrial installations and were protected by anti-aircraft defense batteries in case if hundreds of B-29s would come in to firebomb their city. It's also the Japanese fault that they placed military /industrial installations in middle of the civilian-populated areas and "innocent" people you called them were working in factories and workships producing weapons of war and last time according to the 1907 Hague Convention, civilians working in factories and workshops engaging in production of war supplies were legitimate targets.

  • We had no other choice.

    It was either drop the bombs, kill a few thousand people or not drop the bomb, the war lingers on and more people die than the bombs killed. WW2 had to stop and this made it happen. Neither country could afford any more warring on the other, this was a costly expense. True we killed innocent people, but if we didn't more would have died at the hands of the Japanese and of the Americans. The bombs not only made sense, they saved lives. Despite taking some.

  • Duties of the President - Utilitarinism.

    Yes, President Truman was in every way justified to drop nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War 2, at least from his viewpoint. From his viewpoint as a president, he was required to put the safety of, and the lives of his own citizens first and foremost over others, and not one can argue that the dropping of the bombs quickly ended the Second World War, and that it was much faster and efficient for the Americans(of the U.S.A.) than any other method. Also, had Truman not ended the war quickly, more lives from all over the world would have been lost, due to the fact that without the bombs, there would have been many more classic head-to-head confrontations, in which more lives total would have been lost.

  • In 1945, America made one of the biggest decisions it has ever had to face: dropping the atomic bomb.

    After much debate and careful thought, the conclusion was made to drop it. There are many reasons for why President Truman decided to make the choice, ranging from protection of the states to just wanting the war to end. But was his fatal decision justified based on the given evidence? This controversial topic is still being discussed even today. The Japanese were showing no sign of giving up, despite the relentless bombardments by the U.S. troops. Truman knew that, due to traditional Japanese honor, there would most likely be no end until one side surrendered, and it wouldn't’t be America. America could not afford to continue fighting such an expensive war, which could have also contributed to the decision to use the bomb. Because of the circumstances Truman was in at the time, he made what he thought was the correct decision. Truman’s choice was correct because there may not have been another way out, and it would cost too much to take that kind of a risk. Due to the economic crisis America was in, the unceasing Japanese fighting, and the protection of U.S. citizens, America was forced into a decision that could have saved millions.

  • Japan is crazy.

    They would've fought until the last person in Japan died because that's their mentality. This would have made the war last longer, resulting in many more casualties for the allies. It ultimately saved more people. It is not war mentality to think of preserving the lives of innocent people when the safety of the world is at stake.

  • They made it personal. They attacked us first.

    Japan attacked Pearl Harbor when we had done nothing to provoke them, there were also innocent children in Pearl Harbor and it is an eye for an eye. Besides, it is not like the people who died from the explosion weren't warned a luxury we were not given. The US was completely justified.

  • Needed to stop evil

    Of course it was justified. We got attacked, their country was supporting unjustified war, and simply experienced the consequences of perpetuating an unjust war. They sought to take over the world and propped up a genocidal, horribly despicable country named Germany.

    That the war was dragging on and more lives would have probably been lost if not for the bombing, is relevant but somewhat beside the point. They were attacking us, seeking to perpetuate global evil, and we ultimately had a right to defend ourselves and fight back. We did what was necessary to stop a horrible evil and it's sad that that proved necessary, but it was.

    What I think was NOT just was the internment of Japanese Americans in prison camps, that was NOT justified. However, the bombing was.

  • Killing civilians

    The bombs were dropped as a direct retaliation action of the U.S.A. To the attack of pearl harbor, which is a military facility. It was USA's military naval gateway to the pacific and south east Asia. But why must the bombs dropped in the middle of civilian cities, i.e. Nagasaki and Hiroshima, where the majority casualties were civilians. Not to mention the long term effect the nuclear weapon has on the public health for decades. U.s.a. Was and still is the only nation that have deployed full scale nuclear attack on another nation. And now they are ironically championing the anti-nuclear campaign. To me, the bomb on Japan was far worst than the alleged holocaust during the ww2. Nagasaki and Hiroshima are the real holocaust!

  • No to using nuclear weapons on civilians

    Nuclear weapons shouldn't have been used on the civilians of Japan, if they were going to use bombs then they should have used the weapons on armed military. I used to think the bombing was justified to end the war and save allied lives, but I now think using weapons on unarmed civilians is wrong. It could be seen as an atrocity.

  • It was unnecessary

    Japan was a falling nation. They were low on resources, only had their home island, and their cities were burned to crisps from the firebombing before the bomb. There was no need for invasion anyway, we should have just stopped advancing. They hit us once at pearl harbor, but not again! We hit them so hard, we pushed them across the ocean and took all of their territories. Their civilians wanted to stop, but were oppressed by the military. They were too afraid to take action, and our country knew that. The island has few natural resources, they lacked war materials such as petroleum, metals, rubber, and guns. All we had to do was wait, they would run out of material if we had waited. They say hitler murdering jews was horrible, then the dropping of not one but two atomic bombs on populated cities full of civilians not soldiers. Some people say." Who would you have sacrificed, the few or the many(the Japanese civilians or the us military)?" I say, there is a third option, just stop. They were in no position to attack anyone. Their navy, decimated, their air force, outmatched, their army/marines, too few to do much. They didn't even have any superweapons, the Nazis, v2 missiles, the us, the atomic bomb, Japan, nothing. It was like hitting a wounded deer with .50 cal. The atom bomb and invasion, just unnecessary. -my name is jared crummey, I am 12 years old and I believe that the atomic bomb was unnecessary.

  • No. never.

    Many people are misunderstanding the power of the atomic bomb. Still, to this very day, people are dying from radiation in forms of cancer and disease. Even the American government knows what they did was wrong and have tried to cover up the intensity of their actions by denying it, and undermining its severity. We fail to speak about this in classrooms and in the public in general. We are the only nation in the whole entire world who have resorted to such monstrosity. We make a big deal out of 9/11 and yes as tragic as it was, we feel a more passionate connection to this issue because it happened on our soil, hurting our people. But the atomic bomb was far worse. In fact, it is one of the most ugliest things that humans have done to one another. Shortly after the drop of the bomb, instantly hundreds of people were melted on the spot. But it is the survivors that suffered the most. Many of them have had bits and pieces of their skin melted off with no hospitals to attend to, no family, no money, absolutely nothing. Many have described it as a living hell. Maggots and insects have been known to lay eggs on their wounds. All of these details are just one hundredth of the gruesome reality of it all. To those who say "ye?" To the justification of Japan without much of a reasoning other than "because they attacked us firs?" Should read or see the movie "grave of the fireflie?" Or other forms of media on this horrendous act of humanity and educate themselves on just how much suffering was caused.

  • The Americans had no right to kill Japanese civilians

    The Americans were not able to control who the bomb affected. They should never have dropped it when they couldn't control the effects. It was also wrong for them to use Japan to show Russia how strong they were.

  • It wasn't justified

    They dropped the bomb on innocent women, children, and other citizens that were not directly involved in the war and Japanese were ready to surrender. Many people died and many became maimed for life because of the atomic bombs.

  • Crime against humanity

    Purposely targeting civilians is never justified. The Japanese people were no more responsible for the actions of their government that we in the U.S. Are. The U.S. Killed women, children, the elderly. If Japan had done that, they would have been condemned in history forever.

  • America had other choices.

    To say that dropping a nuclear bomb on these two islands was a last resort and 'the only way out' is just stupid. Even the doctor who was on the Manhattan project didn't agree that we should even have nuclear weapons such as this? And in America developing this we opened other countries to the arms race and possibly the outcome of nuclear war. You could say this stupid decision could lead to another world war if someone wanted it too.

  • Nuclear war is never the proper action.

    Killing people in mass numbers without even giving them a chance to defend themselves is wrong. Killing thousands of innocent men, women, and children is never acceptable.

    Posted by: FithBoosh
  • I would never second America?\'s action of dropping those killer bombs on the Japanese cities. There are over a thousand reasons that I detest the same; but the top reason may be that war is never a way to try to dominate over another country.

    The atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has changed Japan for ever perhaps. The amount of destruction and death that the bombs had caused is perhaps unparalleled in any other human induced destruction. Not only thousands of people died; millions were maimed for life, rendered homeless, suffered mental shocks and remained traumatized all their lives even decades afterwards. The bombs destroyed the twin cities to a mere heap of rubble and charred corpses. I guess no body of a sound mental condition will ever second this ghastly act by the Americans.

    Posted by: SmarterTabby

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.