Poll: Was It Wrong To Drop The Atomic Bombs In Japan?

[RN7]

Yeah probably seeing as the soldiers and civilians were told the americans were the most evil creatures on Earth, which is only 65% true, and would torture, rape, pillage enslave and destroy them while taking over Japan. they would have gone crazy with radicalism resulting in many more deaths than necessary. Now granted, the health issues afterwards...eh...

 

[Baradiel]

The atomic bomb was a necessary evil. The Japanese were zealously patriotic. A land offensive would have been devastating for both sides. Japan's military had been mostly destroyed, true, but there would still have been a very stubborn resistance to an invasion.

While the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings were terrible events, and there is evidence that they were chosen to examine the effects on a city and it's survivors, it still undoubtedly prevented more deaths.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

The Japanese were already on their way to a truce, and the Americans were more focused on showing off to Soviet to scare them off. To me it just seemed like the Americans were waving their dicks around.

 

[Slycne]

-The Japanese had enough of an air force to get to Pearl Harbor and do a lot of damage.

Your other points are fine, but that was a surprise attack and you need carriers to get your planes there. The various fighters and dive bombers used in the attack on Pearl Harbor have a maximum range of around 1,000 miles. It's ~4,000 from Japan to Hawaii.

As for me I don't think there is any better evidence neccisary than

I consider the Joint Proclamation a rehash of the Declaration at the Cairo Conference. As for the Government, it does not attach any important value to it at all. The only thing to do is just kill it with silence (mokusatsu). We will do nothing but press on to the bitter end to bring about a successful completion of the war.

Prime Minister Suzuki public response to terms offered to Japan on July 26, note the first bomb was dropped August 6th. Russian invaded and the second was dropped on 8-9th.

 

[Iron Mal]

Killing civilians in war is ALWAYS wrong, and despite all of the positive effects it had I will never argue it was a good thing.

Unfortuneatly the situation at hand meant that whether they dropped the bomb or not there would have been horrendous civillian casulties, the only difference would be the cause of death and the number of casulties on our side.

Dropping the bomb wasn't 'right' but it was nessercary.

 

[Sephychu]

Que?
This is not accurate, to my understanding.

Apparently it's true.

A bunch of really old japanese guys have said so in interviews.

Not to be almost disgustingly insensitive, but they would say that.

After the first bomb was dropped, three days were given to make peace agreements. The Japanese remained firm in their decision to continue the war.

 

[Daemascus]

Why do people always bring up the nukes drop on Japan and present them like they were the only time civilians got killed in a bombing campign? The fire bombing in germany was much worse.

 

[Manatee Slayer]

I hate to be that guy but I distinctly remember seeing a thread like this before.

My apologies, as you can see I'm new so I hope I get a bit of leeway.

Also, TheNamlessGuy is correct, the japanese were already thinking about signing a truce.

It just seems strange that everone is saying they would never surrender; they would fight to the last man and they hated Americans and yet shorty after the bombs they sign an unconditional surrender. Quite the jump in opinions.

 

[SteinFaust]

it was the only way to end the fight with them. the people were under strict orders to fight to the last person, and take as many americans as they could with them. hell, there was even a man who, under orders, fought until his CO returned...30 years later.
http://badassoftheweek.com/onoda.html

 

[loremazd]

There's no way to know if it was for the best or not. There's no comparison.

 

[Me55enger]

Saved a lot of lives, but it's caused a lot of health issues with everyone for years afterwards.
Plus, many of the generals advised against it when it was being decided.

I reckon if you tallied it up now, you'd find that more have been lost to date from two A-Bombs over two days than a land-based invasion of a resource starved country with the Morale of a British Somme soldier in 1916.

 

[JaredXE]

I say no. For many of the reasons listed above, but primarily for the most important reason: It scared the fuck out of every country in the world. Atomic weaponry HAD to be used on a civilian population at least once just to show why we should never use it. The effects had to be felt, and I am happy that nuclear weapons haven't been used since. Yeah, testing goes on, but when you have devastation in such a wide area, mutual destruction becomes a very real thing and that is a great deterent.

 

[reg42]

No, it wasn't.

The American's said

We're gonna drop this bomb on yo' ass and it's gonna really fuck your shit up, so surrender now

but Japan didn't do anything.
America dropped it and Japan got buggered up. Then America warned then that they would do it all again if they didn't surrender, and they still didn't. They got another bomb dropped on them. Then they surrendered. It was the fault of the stubborn Japanese emperor.
It was war. During war, you don't think of the other country, but your own.

 

[Dexiro]

I can't imagine dropping an atomic bomb ever being a good thing.

 

[Chrono180]

Dropping the bomb wasn't 'right' but it was nessercary.

This, SO much.I swear, far to many people fail to realize that sometimes, doing what is necessary is the opposite of what would be considered "right". I mean, if a nuke was hidden somewhere in a city, and the only way to find it was to torture the bomb's creator, that would be wrong, but it would also be necessary.

 

[L3m0n_L1m3]

No, because Truman got a 25 killstreak, and earned that nuke.

It seemed to be a better alternative than sending more troops over. Technically, you could argue that this also showed Russia that the US was willing to use the a-bomb if necessary as well. Which.... might've just added to the cold war.... but meh.

 

[Insanum]

The thing is, its all well and good saying "They didnt have any navy", but did the US know that at the time?

If they hadn't got any navy would they honestly[/I] broadcast that kind of information.

The way i see it, The bombs that dropped demoralised the japanese into surrendering. Killing civilians is always wrong, But then again, It saved countless lives.

Lets just say it may have been the lesser of two evils.

 

[JaredXE]

After the first bomb was dropped, three days were given to make peace agreements. The Japanese remained firm in their decision to continue the war.

They also couldn't believe that an entire city was wiped off the face of the earth. They had to check that out first. Nothing like that had ever been seen before, so of course High Command could be a bit sceptical about it, hence a delay in any kind of peace talks.