CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I am really sorry to say this, but sort of. The Japanese believed very much that they needed to keep fighting, and there are indications that they would not give up. The last Japanese soldier to give up after WWII was in the 70s.
It seems like that is wrong because they didn't give up right after the first bomb. How long do you give a country to respond to a nuclear attack? How do we know that waiting any longer would not have led to an attack on our allies?
Maybe they should've thrown the second bomb first and then the first one if nessecary....
I'm kidding but it would be bettwer if they waited few days more, they have thrown both bombs in period of four days, also Japanese army wasn't powerful enough to deal much damage to US troops. I think that best scenario would been assassination of emperor Hirohito ( moral is decreased, they do not have leader .....)
The second bomb did cause them to give up, so maybe you are right, hehe.
I think the Japanese had a never give up attitude. It seems like further delay would have led them to believe that we didn't actually have another bomb to use. The nuclear bombs were preceded by firebombings and that didn't work. The Japanese didn't surrender for another 6 days after Nagasaki. It seemed very difficult to get them to give up.
Japan is all about honor. They really were against backing down. It was either war with them and lose many more lives, particularly for the U.S., or do this, simply ending the war. We did warn them before hand. "Surrender or DIE!" xD I don't think bombing both of the cities were needed, but doing what we did was the easiest and least 'violent' way to end the war.
This one is hard to call. The bombing of Hiroshima and the invasion of Manchuria by the USSR were almost on the same day, so we don't know for sure the bomb is what made Japan surrender.
To win? Yes, I think so. They had a do or die spirit and would not give up at all.
Also, and this may not be good justification but it is a reason. The U.S. wanted to test their newest weapon and who better than an enemy nation that won't admit defeat.
The war would have carried on had not those bombs took place. Even survivors of the bombing have stated that they understood the nescscity of the bombs as tragic as they were. Keep in mind that the Japanese government was willing to continue fighting the war after the first bomb. That shows how much effort it would have taken to end any other way.
The Japanese Government refused to surrender before the bombing. The Japanese were known to be relentlessly devoted to their country. Why sacrifice the lives of so many more Americans to achieve the same end goal? Sure, Japanese families were devastated, at the sake of both American and Japanese families being devastated.
yes and no but more yes it would have been another dday kind of invasion and the bombs ended the war quickly after the second one went off because they no longer had the materials to keep fighting after be destryoed the 2 cities it made it a lot less bloody then it probably would have been.... and if they had the bombs they would have completely wipped out america
Sigh...yes, I think was necessary. When I was first exposed to the incident, I was strongly against it, but after having done so much research, I think I've been compelled to switch sides. I mean, there are so many arguments on the pro side--the fact that the Japanese truly would not back down; the fact that either they or the Soviets would have nuked us first if they had the capacity; the fact that the war had gone on so long; and so on. I don't have the energy to go on now, but to sum it up, the answer is a definite yes, especially when morality is removed from the issue.
you are a true patriotic person and have my support on nuking people who think the usa isnt a great contry...... just dont set the nukes off in america
I agree with you, I don't think fighting and killing is really needed but in some cases there is a lesser of two evils.
Not a perfect scenario but take this one for example, a mugger is trying to steal from and kill you and your spouse, in that situation it's best for you to defend yourself, wouldn't you agree.
Nope, they could have let off a demonstration in the sea, but the Americans wanting to prove their manliness, they went ahead and tossed them on two major cities. And no it is not a revenge thing for Pearl harbor, far more people died in the atomic attacks, and Pearl harbor was a military base, and given the Americans were restricting the flow of products in to Japan, effectively starving them, I wouldn't say it was 'unprovoked' either. America did what they always do, showing off to the world in a macho way, shouting all the,
"Round 'em up, put 'em in a field and bomb the bastards!"
So America should have allowed the Japanese to continue their invasion of China and the Soviet Union? Ever heard of the Bataan Death March...or human experimentation, chemical warfare they were using in Southeast Asia before their resources were cut off by America. A lot happened before Pearl Harbor that led to the eventual bombing.
Are you kidding me, the Americans didn't bomb the Japanese because of what they did in china 15 odd years before! And did you completely ignore what I said about showing them a demonstration of the bomb?
Its the power of physics. In that case we use the sun's energy everyday. Also if you morally believe more people should die then that's your viewpoint.
You said use the power of the sun. We do that everyday in everyday life. Also we mortared and napalmed many more people and killed them then the two bombs combined. I studied this already. Atomic explosions is just physics. Its the power of physics.
Obviously humans use the power of the sun everyday. That's not my point. And you've failed to realize this.
My point is that humans have abused the power of the sun and have utilized it as destruction in its finest, on Japan, that's fucked up.
You're saying "after lengths of time there has been more destruction than the bombings of Japan"....who gives a shit, that is obvious.... what kind of example is that?
I have studied this as well and obviously you're wrong.
Abused? The bomb killed less people in total. We killed more in bombings and napalm strikes.
"You're saying "after lengths of time there has been more destruction than the bombings of Japan"....who gives a shit, that is obvious.... what kind of example is that?"
I never said that. Not once. Would you rather us engage in hand to hand combat and lose more lives? Sounds like it. Also I am only saying facts.
" As a result, Prime Minister Suzuki felt compelled to meet the Japanese press, to whom he reiterated his government's commitment to ignore the Allies' demands and fight on."
This is from wiki. Japan ignored our warnings.
" The Potsdam Declaration or the Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender is a statement that called for the Surrender of the Empire of Japanduring World War II. On July 26, 1945, United States President Harry S. Truman, United Kingdom Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and Chairman of the Nationalist Government of China Chiang Kai-shek issued the document, which outlined the terms of surrender for the Empire of Japan as agreed upon at the Potsdam Conference. This ultimatum stated that, if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction" although the document did not make any mention of atomic weapons."
Now it did not mention the atomic bombs so I give you that but when other countries are okay with this and give a chance for Japan to either surrender or fight on it is pretty fair. Also the bombs killed hundreds of thousands. Not millions. We would have lost millions if we had never dropped it. So you can choose which desicion is more acceptable in terms of war.
Japan was really against backing down. The only other option was full out war, which would have been even worse for both sides. We threatened and warned them that we were going to bomb them, but they wouldn't back down, so this was the outcome. Can you think of something we could have done instead?
I can understand that, but I just feel like there should have been a solution that was less dramatic than full out war, and less immoral than an atomic bomb.. I'm no expert on conflict and whatnot, so I can't really come up with any realistic solution that could have worked at the time. All I can say is that I wish so many innocent lives didn't have to be taken like that.
Yes, there 'should' not be war, there 'should' not be conflicts. But humans can't always understand one another, and we all have our wants. Some conflicts can't be resolved peacefully because of this simple fact. Yes, it's sad. But what can one do? D:
In my experience it doesn't really matter how much shit is getting talked, the person who throws the first punch is the one who started the fight, regardless of any provocation. In this instance it wasn't just taking a punch in a fistfight, though, it was the gruesome deaths of thousands of Americans in a surprise bombing run. Regardless of what the US was doing pre-Pearl Harbor, Japan was the one that escalated the US/Japan conflict to the point of death and destruction.
