Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Dropping the Bomb on Japan, Right or Wrong?
I have given you two articles with very different views on the events leading to the decision on whether to use atomic bombs on Japan and the motive. They say that hindsight is 20/20, however, sixty-two years later people still can not agree on whether America was right or wrong. After reading the articles what is your opinion?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
I can see why people view the bombing on japan as crucial to their victory during World War II. Although it may have been crucial, i dont really view it as being an absolute necessity that America had to accomplish since the Japanese were already at a time of surrender and mere defeat. The two bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, i believe, were sort a redemption or retaliation to the bombing of Pearl Harbor. It was almost as if it was their avengence to pearl harbor. I believe that when you add up all the losses and statistics of the bombing, it was morally wrong of America to drop the two bombs. If the country was already ready to surrender, the dropping of those two bombs were not necessary to take the lives of many innocent civilians.
THE BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI WAS NOT NEEDED TO WIN WORLD WAR 2. THE JAPENESE WERE ALREADY GONNA SURRENDER AND NO EXTRA MILITARY FORCE WAS REQUIRED TO ENSURE THIS. FURTHERMORE, WHY DID WE DROP 2 BOMBS? WOULDNT ONE HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO INTIMIDATE ANYBODY INTO SURRENDERING? DROPPING THE BOMBS WAS UNNECISSARY.
I do believe that the atomic bombs were not needed to win the war. However, what we say today changes nothing. I do believe that it was wrong of us to drop two bombs though. I do believe that almost everyone today agrees that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were wrong. But a more valid question is- Was it necessary to win the war?
I agree with gary's commenting on the two bombs that were dropped in Japan. The fact that it was two bombs instead of one just further more proves the point that it was unnecessary and as Mrs Burr put it," they just wanted to play with their new toys." It was not a crucial time to get the Japanese to surrender since they were already in the state of doing so.
An answer to Brett Mallette's valid question is, no, these bombs were not needed to win World War II. Yes they were highly wrong to drop the bombs in a moral sense, but even more wrong to drop two of them on an already surrendering force. Although one could argue that these bombs are what put the Japanese away for good, it was not a pivotal point since the Japanese army was significantly damaged and not able to fight back.
I THINK WE ALL HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT THE DROPPING OF THE BOMBS WERE UNNECISSARY, UNLESS SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO ARGUE OTHERWISE, BUT THE MORE IMPORTANT ISSUE IS THAT WE NEVER UNLEASH A FORCE OF THAT GREATNESS EVER AGAIN UNLESS WE HAVE A REAL GOOD REASON. THE U.S. DOESNT WANT TO BE SEEN AS A COUNTRY THAT DROPS BOMBS HERE AND THERE AS WE PLEASE IF ANYONE DOESNT PLAY BY OUR RULES. THE PROBLEM IS THAT PEOPLE GET WAY TO INTO THINGS SOMETIMES. FOR EXAMPLE, ON 9/11 EVERY1 WAS ALL ABOUT GOING TO WAR EVEN THOUGH IT WAS WRONG BUT ANYONE WHO DIDNT WANT TO GO TO WAR WAS CONSIDERED A TERRORIST, AL QUIDA LOVER, OR COMMUNIST. AND LOOK WHERE THAT GOT US.
I think that the bombings on hiroshima and nagasaki were very wrong. I don't think we should have bombed them because the japanese were already going to surrender and we were going to win regardless. Even dropping just one bomb is not good but let alone two, thats just crazy. The bombing was in no way necessary or appropriate, and we would have been just fine if we hadn't done that, either way the result would have been the same. If we never dropped the bombs and went on winning the war in a normal fashion then who knows how different things could be today? I think that the bombing was very unnecessary and we should never do anything like that again unless there is an unbelievably good reason.
I agree with Colin. The bombing on Japan was not necessary because the Japenese were already going to surrender. Like Colin said with all the people who died due to the two bombs dropped it was very wrong. No innocent person deserves to die just because a country feels the need to drop two bombs on a country that was already going to surrender.
I agree with Gary. One bomb would have been enough to intimidate them into surrendering, even though that is still wrong, but to go the extra mile and drop TWO bombs is just wrong and unnecessary.
Along with everyone else I agree that it was wrong for us to bomb Japan, however with America being the way it was, and is, they probably felt the need to show who's boss. I feel that we bombed Japan to strictly show that we could.
I can also see why bombing Japan was an important victory to WWII but I do think we could have avoided that. I do agree that something should have been done, but not to the extent of dropping two atomic bombs and killing so many innocent lives.
I agree with Dillon, I think that we dropped the bombs to show up Japan.
After reading the two articles about the dropping of two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki I think that it could go both ways. Now yes everyone is saying "they were already surrendering" but who really knows if they were actually going to. Ya Japan was in not too good of a position when we dropped the bomb, but it is a foreign country and how do we really know if what they say is true.
Im not saying that it was right to drop them, i am just saying he did what he needed to do. Maybe just droppng one would have been better so i do not agree with how we dropped two. Also i think that he dropped the bomb not only to end the war but to get a point across to everyone else that we are a very powerful country. This might not have been correct in doing, but none of us have been put in his position so how can we judge.
I agree with some of colins points
I believe that the bombing on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was completely unnecessary on our part. We looked like hypocrits bombing them when they were about to surrener. The U.S. killed many innocent lives, it was uncalled for. If the Japanese were not about to surrender then maybe it would be more ok to bomb them. But still even that doesnt seem right, killing hundreds and thousands of inocent people isnt right.
I agree with what Colin has to say. And i think that we as a nation got way to carried away.
I AGREE, DEREK! I MEAN THEY WERE GONNA SURENDER BUT NO ONE SHOULD TRUST THOSE DIRTY SNEAKY JAPS! ....IF YOU HAVNT GUESSED IM BEING SARCASTIC... BESIDES, THIS WASNT AT ALL ABOUT MAKING THE JAPENESE SURENDER. IT WAS A MIX OF PREASURING THE GOVERNMENT TO NOT PUT OUR DEFENSE BONDS TO WASTE, WANTING TO SEE WHAT OUR NEW STUFF CAN DO IN ACTION, AND SHOWING OFF TO THE WORLD HOW TOUGH AMERICA IS. AND BECAUSE OF THAT WE WERE DOING ALL THE THINGS IN OUR COUNTRY THAT WE WERE FIGHTING AGAINST.
I belive that they shouldn't have dropped the bombs in the first place, but dropping it twice? once is enough and it should of ended right then and there. There is no need to strike twice. At the time, America doesn't need to dominate over them when Japan already cried "Uncle".(surrendering) Its inhumane for killing the innocent, the poor,and acting brutal.
As a nation "We don't need to become a monster in order to defeat a monster."
I think the atomic bombs were not needed to win the war. The fact that we dropped two kinda seems like we were trying to show off our power. Although my veiws might have been incredibly different if I was living during the war. Also if we did have to drop the bombs why not drop it on a military encampment. It still would have killed lots of people but at least it wouldnt have been innocent civilians.
I agree with Derek. I dont think we should be able to judge that strongly about dropping the bombs. I do belive it should not have happened but what would it have been like if we were the ones fighting in the war and not just reading about it years later. I dont know... maybe then some of our opinions would be different.
I was wondering.. Do you think anyone voting to drop the bomb back then was thinking of some pay back for Pearl Harbor? I know its not the same at all but some people can really hold a grudge. :/
It was completely wrong to use an A bomb. I'm not really arguing the fact that invading tokyo would cost thousands of american lives and that bombing would be a better way to go. I don't think the A bomb was necesary, considering the arsenal of bombs already at the army's disposal. Bombing with regualr bombs would have gotten the job done( though still killin civilians), without the inhumane deaths from radiation.
Gary is right. using two bombs was uncalled for. I mean, using just one was uncalled for. I think truman may be one of my least favorite presidents, just becasue he took a big role in the murder of so, so many people.
It was stupid for them to think that we would be not be able to take japan out quickly. the japanese military was already severely weakened. The russians invaded them after the bomb was dropped, meaning they could have helped us take out japan in a sweep where military fought military and radiation did not fight humans.
I think that bombing HIroshima and Nagasaki weren't absolutely NECESSARy to win the war, but i do think that it helped America end the war in a more timnely fashion. However, the citizens of Japan had to suffer great and long lasting consequences from the bombs, such as radiation and trying to rebuild their homes. I think Americans could have found a better solution to end the war that would have been more humane and equally efficient.
I think dropping the bombs on Japan was unnecessary for us to win the war. America should have found a better way to end the war then taking innocent civilian lives.
this is a split decision i can see why people would think that it is wrong. we killed tons of innocent people. like colin said if the were about to surrender any wqay what was the real point of droping those bombs,just to show that we still have the strongest military in the world? from an econmic stand point did we really need to make two bombs? a B-2 bomer cost about 2.2 billion dollors in todays world.also after we droped the bomb we helped them financially and tryed to get a strog government set up for the just like ours. What works for us may not wor for every body else. I dont know how to interchange the times and money. but i think that,that would be a lot of money back then.
Then on the other hand i can see from a military stand piont of view we didn't know that the japanese were going to surrender or we just didnt want to take any chances and have them start another attack on us. im sure that we could have used our allies to do a sweep of japan and done the same thing but with out all the distruction. There may have been a feew deaths on the American side but if we find out that it is becoming to hostial for that then we can take more drastic measures not just jumping right to the hevy artilerity.
8th line down-5th word in (bomber)
Post a Comment