Should the atomic bombs been dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
- Thread starter Kaboose the Moose
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes, I think the atomic bombing of Japan was a well informed, and well made decision. In fact nuclear weapons are one of the major reasons why there are no wars between certain (nuclear) countries today, all because nuclear powers can say "If you take us down, your going down with us".
Back on topic, the alternatives to nuking Japan were neither tactically practical or would result in a high loss of life.
-A ground invasion need not be discussed, the loss of military and civilian life would be appalling.
-Heavy bombing of key targets would be very difficult or neigh on impossible. The reason why both bombs were able to reach their destination was because the Japanese believed the 3 planes heading towards the target cities were scouts, as bombing a city with 3 aircraft isn't seen as that great an idea.
-Japan had joined the war in the first place, they had been given the chance to surrender weeks before the first bomb. The US dropped the second bomb to indicate that they had a large stockpile (they did not, it would take several weeks at least to acquire another weapon).
There was a huge loss of civilian life too, it was not possible to selectively target areas of cities due to the blast radius and because the bombs had to be dropped from over 30,000ft (The Nagasaki bomb missed by over 1KM due to wind). This is how war goes though, and as far as I can see this saved many more lives than it took and paved the way for future peace.
Back on topic, the alternatives to nuking Japan were neither tactically practical or would result in a high loss of life.
-A ground invasion need not be discussed, the loss of military and civilian life would be appalling.
-Heavy bombing of key targets would be very difficult or neigh on impossible. The reason why both bombs were able to reach their destination was because the Japanese believed the 3 planes heading towards the target cities were scouts, as bombing a city with 3 aircraft isn't seen as that great an idea.
-Japan had joined the war in the first place, they had been given the chance to surrender weeks before the first bomb. The US dropped the second bomb to indicate that they had a large stockpile (they did not, it would take several weeks at least to acquire another weapon).
There was a huge loss of civilian life too, it was not possible to selectively target areas of cities due to the blast radius and because the bombs had to be dropped from over 30,000ft (The Nagasaki bomb missed by over 1KM due to wind). This is how war goes though, and as far as I can see this saved many more lives than it took and paved the way for future peace.
Yes, and I'm sure this has been said many times before, but it ended a war that could have potentially taken many millions of more lives.
Yes.
See: Nanking, China
For that atrocity alone I would have agreed with the bombing. let alone everything else.
See: Nanking, China
For that atrocity alone I would have agreed with the bombing. let alone everything else.
Been reading forum posts on here for a good whilst now and never felt the compulsion to sign up. Until now.
I whole heartily agree with Truman's decision to use the bomb. Japan wouldn't have surrended unless they were faced with such complete and powerful force. Even after both bombs were dropped some officers tried to overthrow the emperor so they could continue the fight.
I whole heartily agree with Truman's decision to use the bomb. Japan wouldn't have surrended unless they were faced with such complete and powerful force. Even after both bombs were dropped some officers tried to overthrow the emperor so they could continue the fight.
I just want to point something out right now, hindsight is 20-20. We now know that radiation causes cancer and other defects, we didn't know that at the time of the bombing or for several years afterwords. When we dropped it we thought it would work like a really big conventional weapon. Don't pull out "We knowingly hurt them for generations" because we didn't.
anyone who think's it shouldn't have been done should consider this: whould you be here if it hadn't happened?
the way i see it, it cause japan to pull out of WWII, which made it easier for the allies and more specifically the russians, to invade the reichstag.
if you would like any more information on germany 1918 to 1945 and WWII, let me know because i spent 2 years on both.
the way i see it, it cause japan to pull out of WWII, which made it easier for the allies and more specifically the russians, to invade the reichstag.
if you would like any more information on germany 1918 to 1945 and WWII, let me know because i spent 2 years on both.