CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:100
Arguments:64
Total Votes:112
Ended:02/19/14
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Period 6 US History Bergen (60)

Debate Creator

tbergen(65) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Period 6 US History Bergen

For Mr. Bergen's US History class.

Option 1: Make this a time for peace. Japan is defeated. Don't use the bomb.

Option 2: Act responsibly. Demonstate the power of the bomb. If Japan doesn't surrender, they are the immoral ones. We must lead by example.

Option 3: Push ahead to final victory. Fascism must end. Too many American lives have been lost. The bomb will save American lives.

 

Grading Scale:

A: Student has clear claim and provides facts and evidence in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student speaks almost exclusively from fact than from opinion. Student is effective at creating more debate with their counterclaim and rebuttals. Student consistently speaks with outside independent research. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.

B: Student has clear claim and provides facts and evidence in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student speaks more from fact than from opinion. Student is effective at creating more debate with their counterclaim and rebuttals. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.

C: Student has clear claim and provides opinion in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student speaks more from opinion than from facts. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.

F: Student has clear claim and provides only opinion in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.

Resources:

http://dbp.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Bombing_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

http://www.endusmilitarism.org/a-bombings-arguments_pro_and_con-wikipedia.html

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0803-26.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4724793.stm

Add New Argument
7 points

Option 2 Pro or Con add arguments here. Claims/Counter/Rebut

4 points

i belive that option 2 is best cuz it shows the US is serious and givin the enemy a chance to surender

selenaordonz(9) Clarified
4 points

'' The atomic bomb must be used as a fource to end the war and strangthen the peace'' quote sayed by president truemen

3 points

I also agree that option 2 is the best because the US is givng chances to the enemy

1 point

I agree if the Japanese sees that the U.S is serious maybe they will surrender and never bother the U.S again.

4 points

I support option 2, because if we demonstrate the bomb, it can prove were not going to surrender and it will also prove that we are really about what we say. I also think that it will scare the Japanese and force them to surrender and leave the U.S alone for good.

2 points

Life in the camps was hard. Internees had only been allowed to bring with then a few possessions. In many cases they had been given just 48 hours to evacuate their homes. Consequently they were easy prey for fortune hunters who offered them far less than the market prices for the goods they could not take with them. On February 19th 1942 Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066. Under the terms of the Order, some 120,000 people of Japanese descent living in the US were removed from their homes and placed in internment camps.

selenaordonz(9) Disputed
1 point

i agree an disagree cuz this is an example of failuer of leadership but at that time it was suspection of espinosh

2 points

There were 90,000 buildings in Hiroshima before the bomb was dropped; only 28,000 remained after the bombing. There were 1,780 nurses before-only 150 remained who were able to tend to the sick and dying.

1 point

if we present the bomb the enemy will surender without us even throwing the bomb or harming them. -blanca rose

1 point

My final option is two beacuse we should scared the japanese by he using Atomic bomb and if they were going to killed us we would of used the bond against them. Japanese didnt want to surrender and give up there Bushi there for they keep to fight for there bushi. If they gave up we wouldn't have 291,551 American solders died and over 2 million Japanese. If we wouldn't drop the bond more Americans would died because they had to go to Japan to fight instead we drop the bond on them. I know that innocent people died but we told them what we were doing to do but they still went with it............... :D

1 point

Students will explore major eventsoccurring at the end of World War II, including the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the forced relocation of Japanese Americans into internment camps, and America’s use of atomic weapons against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Students will explore primary sources, read poetry and a narrative, and discuss the US governments choices in depth while examining the affect on America, Japan, and the world community at large. In fact, Japanese Americans and other Asian Americans had long been characterized as a foreign "Yellow Peril" that was a threat to the United States. Prejudice against Japanese Americans, including laws preventing them from owning land, existed long before World War II. Even though Japanese Americans largely considered themselves loyal and even patriotic Americans, suspicions about their loyalties were pervasive.

1 point

I think that number 2 is the best choose because they'll be scared and know we don't play without actually killing them and their land RGIII

1 point

i support option 2 because we are giving them warning for they can stop fighting

1 point

Even before the outbreak of war in 1939, a group of American scientists–many of them refugees from fascist regimes in Europe–became concerned with nuclear weapons research being conducted in Nazi Germany. In 1940, the U.S. government began funding its own atomic weapons development program, which came under the joint responsibility of the Office of Scientific Research and Development and the War Department after the U.S. entry into World War II.

1 point

After World War II, most of Hiroshima would be rebuilt, though one destroyed section was set aside as a reminder of the effects of the atomic bomb. Each August 6, thousands of people gather at Peace Memorial Park to join in interfaith religious services commemorating the anniversary of the bombing.

1 point

In this first testing ground of the atomic bomb I have seen the most terrible and frightening desolation in four years of war. It makes a blitzed Pacific island seem like an Eden. The damage is far greater than photographs can show.

Wilfred Burchett

1 point

We had news this morning of another successful atomic bomb being dropped on Nagasaki. These two heavy blows have fallen in quick succession upon the Japanese and there will be quite a little space before we intend to drop another.

Henry L. Stimson

Kite626(714) Disputed
1 point

It's a con in my opinion. It's a fear tactic that has way too many disadvantages. Shooting radiation particles into the stratosphere for a display of fear..? That shortens the life expectancy of the human race as a whole. We could have simply manipulated them. We could have engineered fake atom bombs, and give them to them as an act of peace. If they try to use them (knowing the intent,) then blow them up. It's a win, win, possibly fool them into trust, or see if they are truly volatile.

0 points

My opinion on the war is #2 BECAUSE if we don't make Japan back down they will be a repercussion.

5 points

Option 1 Pro or Con add arguments here. Claims/Counter/Rebut

3 points

i think that option one is the best because we want peace

tbergen(65) Clarified
1 point

How so, please explain how it will make peace? Give some examples.

3 points

Option 1 is the best option because people want peace and they want less killing

2 points

I agree and i know killing is bad, but if its the only way we can prove were serious what else can we do?

gabbyabeyta(6) Disputed
1 point

I understand that, but if bombing the Japanese is the only way to prove were are serious, than what else can we do ?

blancaROSE(2) Disputed
1 point

yea, but what if they were planing something against us.....

SofiaLaguet(2) Disputed
1 point

The atomic bomd must be used as a force to end the war. Americans have willingly sacrificed their lives.

deerbruh(2) Disputed
1 point

No because we're already in a war and people killing each other already so it doesn't matter

3 points

The Japanese military forces, after being completely disarmed, should be permitted to return to their homes with the opportunity to lead a peaceful & productive live

2 points

The U.S. just want to have peace then the Japans start a war with U.S.

1 point

This is why this power was used to declare that all people of Japanese ancestry were excluded from the entire Pacific coast, including all of California and much of Oregon, Washington and Arizona, except for those in internment camps." Of 127,000 Japanese Americans living in the continental United States at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, 112,000 resided on the West Coast.

2 points

Option 1 is the option where humanity would show values and honor whilst making a great decision of causing no deaths.

2 points

i think that option one is the best because everyone wants peace

1 point

we have confferred and agree that japan shall be given an opportunity to end the war

1 point

Removing obstacles to japans surrender will produce a speedy end to the war and save thousands of Americans live

1 point

option 1 is trying to have peace but we should thimk about how

3 points

I support option 1 because it is the path that leads to peace without war.

selenaordonz(9) Disputed
1 point

no cu the japines would not surender and the war hade ben goin on for 4 years

ElizabethB(3) Disputed
1 point

It is the path that leads to peace without war but if we wouldnt of bombed them we would of been ruled by japan

3 points

i believe argument 1 is the best argument because war is never the answer or in this case killing more than 100,000s of Innocent people. the agonizing pain of seeing their skin burn to were you can see their insides is wrong.

gabbyabeyta(6) Disputed
2 points

but if bombing the Japanese is the only way to prove were serious what else can we do to make them listen ?

Kadrizzle(4) Disputed
1 point

maybe come up with an agreement/contract that would benefit both.

selenaordonz(9) Disputed
2 points

yes but the japines hade been killing us troops for 4 yearts so that stands ground for the bomb alos cuz japinese troops were not going to surender

gabbyabeyta(6) Disputed
1 point

but if bombing the Japanese is the only way to prove were serious what else can we do to make them listen ?

2 points

I'm with option 1 because i don't believe that we gained anything from bombing Japan

66,000 people were killed at Hiroshima out of a population of 255,000. 25% of the population was killed in a instant.

selenaordonz(9) Disputed
0 points

no cuz rember that japan was the one who bombed perl hearber and were not going to surender and caused tens of thousands of us troopd to die

Ariel-Price(3) Disputed
1 point

But more of them died against us even though we fought back what did that gain us? we went through a big war for like no reason

2 points

my options is 2 because to me it seems unfair for the to boom us and get away with it it is easier to warn them and tell them to surrender or the atomic boom will destroy there own country

2 points

i support option 1 because when U.S nuked japan they basically wipe out an entire generation of people

1 point

My opinion on the war is #2 BECAUSE if we don't make Japan back down they will be a repercussion.

1 point

Japan is so close to surrender that even a demonstration of the atomic bomb is not necessary to bring an end to town.

1 point

i support option 3 because of multiple reasons, one is it causes less casualties and will be a lot less money also the USA didn't wont the soviets to take land from the Japanese. also that a full-scale invasion of Japan would have cost 900,000 or 1,000,000 Allied lives, imagine the combined amount of causalities

1 point

little boy exploded instantly killing 80.000 to 140.000 people

0 points

Option 3 Pro or Con add arguments here. Claims/Counter/Rebut

1 point

We owe it to our troops to end the war as quickly and decisively as possible.

skywilliford(9) Disputed
1 point

Opponents of President Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb argue that racism played an important role in the decision; that had the bomb been ready in time it never would have been used against Germany.

skywilliford(9) Disputed
1 point

Supporters of President Truman’s decision to use atomic weapons against Japan tend to paint the decision as a difficult choice between two stark options—it was either American boys, or the bomb. Opponents of the bomb are adamant that there were other options available to the President, which at the very least should have been tried before resorting to the bomb. The most important alternative to both the bomb and the land invasion was to modify the demand for unconditional surrender and allow the Japanese to keep their emperor. Of course, he would have to be demoted to a powerless figurehead.

0 points

I'm with option 1 because i don't believe that we gained anything from bombing Japan

66,000 people were killed at Hiroshima out of a population of 255,000. 25% of the population was killed in a instant.

selenaordonz(9) Disputed
1 point

showing the power fo the bomb would be more human way to fource the japinese to surender cuz the japines didnt want to do a land invashion cuz not only would we have lost even more us troops enen more japinese would die cuz the practice bushido and would have killed them selves which would have made the situation even worese

thompson(2) Clarified
1 point

a full-scale invasion of Japan would have cost 900,000 or 1,000,000 american allies life that way more then the amount killed during the atomic bombing of japan...........ohhhh dissed :p

thompson(2) Disputed
1 point

a full-scale invasion of Japan would have cost 900,000 or 1,000,000 american allies life that way more then the amount killed during the atomic bombing of japan...........ohhhh dissed :p