there are many arguments with regard to this issue
many believe that it was justified by saying that the only alternative was full invasion which would have resulted in vastly more casualties than the dropping of the bomb
they say this was due to the japanese mentality of no surrender
others say that the japanese were on the verge of surrender even without the dropping of the bomb
i think the only justification for me is that the world has seen the horror of these weapons while they were at their weakest and has seemed to have learned not to use them again...without their use at that point in history i believe they would have been used in ignorance much later and with much deadlier consequences
i think a much more controvertial aspect in ww2 was the bombing of Dresden...
The atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima for one reason, and one reason only.... so that America, the bastion of capitalism, could say to Russia, that terrifying commy nation, "Look what we can do..." The japanese were ready to surrender anyway... unfortunately, the Russian observers were not in place at the time of the Hiroshima bomb, so the second was dropped on nagasaki.... despite japanese overtures for peace..... the original plan was, allegedly, to let the Russians get very close to Berlin, then drop the bomb on Germany's capital, and say "oops! Didn't realsie your men were so near..." but luckily the western powers realised the futility of provoking the Red Army... if this sounds far fetched, remember that before the war boithe Britain and America were looking towards Nazi Germany as a protector of Europe against communism, and several prominent people during the war in America and Britain (Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, Montgomery, patton, Eisenhower among others) stated that it should always be rtemembered that Communism and therefore Russia was the true enemy....
it's not at all justified, Japan was already almost on its knees and Russia already was in war with them too at that point.
Without the bombs, they would have perhaps faught a week or two more but that's the real maximum
There really is no justification for murdering that many innocent civilians, however Jaden's point is a very good one.
Imagine if they hadn't dropped the bombs. The potential for a world wide nuclear war would increase dramatically. Too many countries have them now and without that warning of what they can do, I doubt we'd be here now.
Last year I saw an exhibition about the tragedy. It showed clips of the test explosions, photos of the aftermath, and items recovered from the blasts.
I left there a whole lot more sceptical about the survival of the human race...
__________________ Not every rogue is a Thief
Blast.org - "Its not that there should be a death penelty for stupidity, just remove the warning labels and let nature take its course!"
if a country these days drops a nuke on another, that country will retalliate with two nukes etc.
so, no one will start that cause they know they'll get it back
the only one you have to fear that'll use it are terrorists not commies or anything
Actually, Russia did not declare war on the Japanese until August 8, two days after the bombing of Hiroshima.
I disagree. I think that Truman was not focusing so much on, "Haha, take that, you dirty Commies!" but on a few other things.
1. The number of American troops that would be lost in an amphibious invasion--some denounce it, citing figures of ~30,000, while others say it would be more along the lines of 500,000.
2. The best way to force the Japanese to surrender was uncertain--frightening them into an unconditional surrender was extremely risky and improbable.
3. Was the atomic bomb that much different from fire bombing, a tactic already used throughout the war?
4. Unconditional surrender called for the dethronement of Emperor Hirohito, which did not go over well with the Japanese.
5. Looking back, one can say, "They were only going to be fighting for a few more weeks!"--called the hindsight bias--but perhaps it was not that clear-cut to Truman or his advisers.
Also, I have been reading about this, and I had to LMAO at some ultra-liberal website that stated how, even if the United States had not gotten involved in WWII (at all), the Germans would have had to contend with the Red Army and would have been defeated by them.
__________________ Signatures are retarded, and yet I'm writing one.
Hell, yes. I just ate Starburst and chocolate, so my system is energized with glucose and caffeine! Haha--sugar is to me what Earth's yellow sun is to Superman!
__________________ Signatures are retarded, and yet I'm writing one.
Nah I don't think it was the most reasonable way to end the war, just the easiest. I think it definitely had something to do with showing off our firepower to the rest of the world.
What Happened in Horoshima and Nagasaki can NEVER be justified, they killed millions of innocents. There was no need for the bambs to be droped, the war with Japan was basically over and even the war its self seemed to be eding, it was just a bunch of curupt polotitians playing with fire!
KMC Community Forums
May 19th, 2005 07:39 PM
.
