What is your opinion as to whether the United States should have used the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Before entering your blog response please read the following pros and cons paper Your response must not only include your opinion, but facts to back them up.
67 comments:
I think so. Its like having a guy teasing a tiger just because it wasn't doing anything yet. The only way to teach him a lesson is by letting him get hurt so it doesn't happen again.
I don't believe it was necessary. It killed so many civilians, people who had nothing to do with the war. We ruined their cities, and generations after were still getting the affects of the radiation.
And Japan was already close to giving up. Had we done something less drastic, they might have surrenedered without all the unnecessary killing.
I don't think we should have bombed them because, as it says in the pros and cons page, Japan was already going to end their position in war. meaning that since they were leaving, it was unnecessary in the dropping of the bombs.
I think that is was necessary for that to happen to them to end the war but not at the extent that it happened because that we diddnt give them a heads up because i think that they would have surendered ether way.
I like Anthony's response. Yes I think so too because no one else has used a nuclear bomb since then and it also saved many American lives because we did not invade the cities.
katrina G.
I think that the japs deserved what they got. Hey its war! we must commit to everything we do with full strength and put all of the pressure on the opposing countries. You must do what you need to do to win the war, who knows if we would have won if we did not DROP BOMBS!
Well we hadn't really but our heads into the war until it directly affected us or unless it was profitable in some way or another. They just made the mistake of attacking our home soil. Thats not usually something that happens in war so we reacted in a relative manor by doing something unexpected.
In my opinion I think that we were right in choosing to drop the a bomb. I believe that our decision to do so was the reason that we ended the war. The two targeted cities would have been firebombed anyways. I agree with ryan uber and his response.
I don't think we should of dropped a-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki because Japanese lives were sacrificed simply for power politics between us and the soviet union. Another reason why the bombs were not needed is because even if Hiroshima was necessary, we did not give enough time for word to filter out of its devastation before bombing Nagasaki. I also think we didn't have enough legit reasons to bomb another country, but that's just my opinion.
my opinion is that i agree with the decision on using the a bomb because if we didnt try to end the war as soon as we could we would've had even more casualty's and it also would've given them more time to think up another plan like peral harbor.
I think so because that was the only way they could stop them. If United States dont stoped them who knoe what would be happening today
i think that using an atomic bomb was indeed necessary because it proved some facts and some losses and gains came between the two opinions. it convinced the world of horror and 2 cities would have been bombed anyways reasons for not using it was because japan was going to call it quits anyways and they did not give enough time for bombing filter.
I think that it depends on how you look at it because to us I was the best thing to do and to them it was like a terrorist attack. But if it was the other way around people would have said that they killed a bunch of people for no reason. And we would have gotten in a war. This is just like the Iraqi war from 9/11 to them it was normal; there religon to them and to us it was considered as a terrorist attack and for that we went into war
Killing people in war is always necessary because without it when will anyone actually learn anything? I like the idea of peaceful solution and I believe one day we can do that but thats when war will be gone all together. Till then war needs killing in order to learn and move forward. It needs someone with a bigger gun and a bigger threat. It just happened to be us with the stones to use it.
I do not think it was necessary because the cons definitely out weigh the pros. The US killed so many innocent civilians & I think that bombing these cities just to see how the bombs worked & to not waste money is horrible. Also, if Japan was going to be surrendering soon anyway, why even do that?
I think we should have. We needed to show them that they shouldnt mess with a country that will fight back. When the bombs were dropped. The US put their friendship metals to the bombs. The A bomb was used to stop the war and push them back. It wouldnt matter if there where civilians there. All men were going to become Japs troops.
I am caught in between honestly. I am usually NEVER for killing or wars but if somthing needed to be done, then we had to do it. I understand that it killed many of the japanese, but its better than loosing thoasands of our own american citizens. Besides! They screwed us over, they went behind our back. so yeah, sure i guess it was necessary. It also shows who was in charge! us ;)
An invasion of Japan would have caused casualties on both sides that could easily have exceeded the toll at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I think they shouldn't have dropped the bomb. There was other ways to make the Japanese surrender besides killing so many people
i think we should have bombed them anyways because they were the ones who bombed pearl habor and tried to knock us out. even through those to cities had been bombed before, it was a way for us to end the war.
I feel it wasn't necessary. the pro-con article stated that Firebombing would have taken just as many lives and had the same "just surrender"affect. America did not need to be the first country to drop an atomic bomb even if they did spend 2 billion dollars in the production of the bomb.
But on the negative side its cost to build was over two million dollars and people still feel the effects of the bomb there to this day
Kyle Peterson-
It was necessary, Japan would not have surrendered if the bomb had not been dropped. If not, those same cities would have been fire bombed and we probably would have gone to war with a higher power, the ussr, who we had been at odds with since the beginning, and that war could have gone nuclear quickly.
I think that it is reasonable in some ways like they weren't ready to surrender even though they were obviously losing. Even if they wouldn't have dropped them they would have had to go in on foot and would have had more casualties then were caused by the bombs. Another good point is that if we hadn't used them the world wouldn't know the horrible effects of the nuclear weapons.
I think the bomb was not necessary at all. The U.S. only bombed them so we could be the first to use an atomic bomb. We probably just did it because it took 2 billion dollars to make. Killing is stupid, and they were going to surender anyways.
katrina g- America had made the right choice in bombing Japan. This is because we needed someting big to actually end the war and we didn't want to wasre the bomb anyway
ALEX REGA
I THINK THAT THE BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI WAS HORRIBLE, BUT NECESSARY THE WAR WOULD not have ended if it didnt happen. the alternative was to invade china. if tht happened then the usa would have lost coutless live.
I strongly believe it was not necessary.We would kill so many innocent people,and ruined their cities.And i dont think this would end war,it could led us to something worst.But in the other had they deserve it.
Michel
Dropping the bomb, which was a monstrous thing to do, was the lesser of two evils when it came to defeating Japan.
Had the US decided to use conventional bombing, firebombing, and a mass troop invasion, there would have easily been hundreds of thousands of death rather than a hundred thousand casualties.
Also, I back the dropping of the bomb because without it, I never would've been born. My great-grandpa was the chief scout/sniper for the Walking Dead, and had we invaded Japan, he would've been killed.
But honestly, the past is long gone. Us arguing over the dropping of the bomb won't change all the civilian losses and environmental damage that was done in Japan.
I do not think that it was necessary to drop the bomb because Japan was going to surrender whether we bombed them or not. We could have used conventional firebombing and caused just as much damage.
I do not think that we should have dropped the bomb on Japan, because although it taught them a 'lesson', in this time which was prominently led by leaders who killed millions of innocent people, the U.S should not have involved civilians, and although it ended the war, it started a much larger nuclear war. By starting this much larger nuclear war, the consequences could be much larger and much more fatal then any war that has ever occurred.
In a way I think that the dropping of the bomb was good.. the reasons that I have is that that way they would know that we are powerful and that it is not easy to mess with use.. but in other hand we killed many innocent people and that isn't fair..
I think it was the correct decision to drop the atomic bombs because it needed to be done. It was the only way and faster way to put a stop to the Japanese. The only bad part was that it killed 100,000 people. Many innocent people.
I think using the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary. Mostly because it stopped the war quickly enough so that the USSR would not have joint occupation of Japan. The atomic bomb would have been used in the future anyways, and by then it would be much more disasterous.
i think in a way we needed to show that they need to end the war and all that but then again it did kill inocent civilian lives.
The bomb's use halted the war quickly enough that the USSR did not demand joint occupation of Japan. so therefor it was necessary for the atomic bomb to be dropped in hiroshima and nagasaki.
dropping of the bomb was a evil doing however i think it was necessary. the bomb let the rest of the world what the US is actually capibul of. the wars end depended on this bomb being dropped however it has had and still has effects the people today.
I think that is was necessary for that to happen to them to end the war
but there should have been a warning sent multiple times befor et was done or at least it their should have been a example showing of its power
I think that we should have only bombed one of those islands, why was the second one necessary? We also could have threatened them with Godzilla.
I'm kinda yes and no on this subject, yes it was messed up, but it did have a reason to it. They were ready to give up and stuff, but they needed to learn their lesson, they bombed us in the first place so what do we do? We bomb them even harder, is what America always does. You do something to us we'll do it 100times worse. Is it right? no was it wrong? Who knows.
In my opinion, i don't think we should have dropped the bombs on hiroshima and nagasaki. i don't think killing that many people need to die just to make the point that we did, and the US spent over $2 billion dollars on the production of the bombs which we did not need to waste. and the aftermath was terrible, generations after still were affected by the radiation. Therefore the bombs were not needed.
Even though the after effects were devastating to innocent civilians, dropping the atomic bombs, in my opinion, was necessary for a quick defeat. We had already fought in the war and lost so many lives (on both sides) that one final, swift, blow to Japan ensured a satisfying victory. Since in the Asian culture its dishonorable to accept defeat and surrender i feel that without dropping the bombs the war may have continued for a lot longer and the lives lost may have been even more.
I believe that the bomb was dropped for a reason, and though it resulted badly for the Japanese people it was necessary. Based on the pros and cons page we had a good reason for doing it and multiple warnings were presented before actually dropping the bomb on the cities. So all in all it was the last resort and very necessary.
I think they should have done it because of the horrible attack Japan did on Pearl Harbor. Japan was already destroyed and there was pretty much nothing left. But the one thing why we should have not dropped the bombs was because of all the innocent people. Americans should have warned them so they cold have got the people. It's almost just like a holocaust.
I think they should have done it because of the horrible attack Japan did on Pearl Harbor. Japan was already destroyed and there was pretty much nothing left. But the one thing why we should have not dropped the bombs was because of all the innocent people. Americans should have warned them so they cold have got the people. It's almost just like a holocaust.
I think we should of, it didn't end badly so why not! It probably could have gotten worse if we didn't. We just did it to show them that they should back off, but showing them what we could do.
It was necessary, Who knows what the Japanese had under their sleeves. The A-bomb shocked them so much they were in so much hysteria they had no clue what to do and surrender. I believe that the A-Bomb was necessary to end the war with Japan. A con about it is that now other countries have been mass producing atomic weapons which could be a fault. To think about it the A-bomb is a United States creation. Should we have never revealed it?
i think that it was totally necessary to bomb them because we had nothing to do with the war and they came and attacked us and then when we actually are in the war and we cant attack them with a bigger force. They wanted a war and they got one.
I think the first bomb was necessary t show them that they should stop messing with us or we can do even more damage the second one was unnecessary because they cause of just regular bombs to blow up the factories
Japan attacked us first so I think it was necessary to fight back. I'm usually the one not to support the war because I think it's wrong. An atomic bomb is pretty serious, but at least we won the war.
I think it was necessary because if we had invaded Japan, those people would have died anyway. We saved american lives from having to be killed and pushing the casualty rate higher by dropping them. Some of us might not even be here had we not dropped them so the world would be completely different and we might still be at odds with Japan
I do not think the United States should have used the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki for many reasons. First of all, doing that is ultimately just starting more problems and there is never a necessary time to use an A-Bomb. Besides that more than 60 of the cities were destroyed and the bomb was so expensive and a waste of money. Innocent people died just because of the power in politics with the U.S, and the Soviet Union. Yes we do not know what Japan is capable of and it did show that the United States was strong, but that doesn't mean we needed to destroy innocent lives just to prove our point.
i dont think that we should have used the atomic bomb because its such a terrible weapon and it killed many innocent people, using regular bombs and such would have worked just fine to get japan to surrender. it just doesnt seem right that we created such a horrible thing
i think the bomb was neccesary. it killed a lot of civilians but it also ended the war. i would rather that have happened then us invade japan and loos even more of our troops. it also showed the world its power and potential. after discovering the science of spliting the atom (thats how it works in case you didnt know) we have created many new things like nuklear power plants and nuclear powered vehicals such as ships and subs. a conventional ship would have to refule every couple of days whareas a nuclear ship has to refule every 100 years or so. the bomb might have been a little over bord but it ended the war and gave us new technology.
I believe it was necessary for America to drop the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, but i dont believe the second bomb needed to be dropped at all. I think it finally showed the Japanese military specifically who they were dealing with. The dropping of the second bomb was unnecessary and i feel like it was alomst a kick-them-while-their-down situation, and it was kind of unfair.
I think that we should have demonstrated its destructive power first on an unpopulated area and then later maybe on a populated area but only if the japanese refuse to surrender.
Nathan Lindgren
Justin Gibson
We both agree that dropping the bomb was necessary because it saved us so many bullets we would've spent a lot more money manufacturing bullets and war armor that it would've led to another economic downfall yes alot of innocent people died but they weren't American so technically they were they enemy and were just more casualties of war.
I dont think it was necessary to drop the bomb were we did. there were many civilian affected by it. There was other places where we could have droped it. We could have used other bombs to get the same effect with out the long term problems with radiation. We could have used it earlier where it could have ended the war sooner.
The bombs were not necessary since Japan was already giving up. 60 cities were already bombed, the US navy blocked the home islands and Soviet kept Japanese troops busy attacking them in Manchuria. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had little military and Japanese innocent civilians were the one`s that were sacrificed just so that US could flex muscles – to be the first country to use the nuclear bomb and to justify the expense of creating the bomb.
The bombs were not necessary since Japan was already giving up. 60 cities were already bombed, the US navy blocked the home islands and Soviet kept Japanese troops busy attacking them in Manchuria. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had little military and Japanese innocent civilians were the one`s that were sacrificed just so that US could flex muscles – to be the first country to use the nuclear bomb and to justify the expense of creating the bomb.
i think that we would have been fine either way personally, it was equally needed as it was unjustified, the attacked pearl harbor for no reason really...
This topic is a controversy, but i must state what i think. The bombs were somewhat necessary. One Japanese belief is that you take death over surrender. With that they would have fought us until every soldier was dead. With dropping the bombs it sent a message to them. The message told them that if you don't surrender, be prepared to sacrifice there whole country's people to not accept defeat. To say so the Japanese were smart to surrender then so no one else would die after the second bomb was droped.
i don't think it was necessary for them use the atomic bomb on hiroshima and nagasaki. too kill so many innocent people was not needed at all. Japan was really to end things and they should have just ended things there.
Post a Comment