No editorializing by me. I'm just interested in what people think.
2006-07-28 08:23:25 · 17 answers · asked by American citizen and taxpayer 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
is warfare justified?
2006-07-28 08:26:20 · answer #1 · answered by Affu Q 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Never was and never will be. Nuclear weapons kill civilians who have wronged no-one. It's a terrible, appalling thing to do and it could never, ever be justified.
ADDITION:
Someone said "Yes. We used them in WW2", or words to that effect. Was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified? No. The war was already won. Everybody knew that. Emperor Hirohito had drafted an unconditional surrender and the war would have been over less than a week after the date of the first bombing. The Japanese had been defeated. The only reason the bomb was dropped was to test its' effectiveness. Simple as that.
And your logic is spurious anyway. Just because it was done in the past, it doesn't mean it's justified wholesale thereafter. Would you justify the extermination of the Jews on the same precident? Or the burning of suspected witches? Think about what you're saying, dude.
2006-07-28 15:28:04 · answer #2 · answered by Entwined 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, when the loss of human life by dropping a nuclear weapon is less than that that would likely occur had it not been dropped then it is justifiable to do so. If the bombs had not been used in Japan to end the war I think I heard that the estimated casualties for an asault of the Japanese mainland would have been 5-10 times higher.
2006-07-28 15:28:42 · answer #3 · answered by nathanael_beal 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The issue of nuclear weapons have snowballed into a situation where it will be used eventually by some nation, and that will be the end of mankind. The earth will be so radioactive, it can no longer support life.
2006-07-28 15:28:40 · answer #4 · answered by WC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but we could have bombed several military installations in Japan rather than the cities. It's unfortunate that so many innocent people have to pay with their lives for the decisions of our leaders.
2006-07-28 15:28:07 · answer #5 · answered by drctrutops 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think its fine to use if the others really desearve it. For example in places like palistine, israel, iraq, iran, Korea, China. Places where people wont stop fihgting and are trying to kill as many people as possible. not to be racist but i think some places in africa should be atom bombed because of the genecide going on >.>
2006-07-28 15:26:15 · answer #6 · answered by Drew 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great question.
I suppose that in theory, it could be -- if the weapons were low-level nukes that were used on military targets, and if widespread destruction and death among noncombatants could be avoided.
In practice, though, I don't think that would be possible.
2006-07-28 15:46:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! civilians should never be targeted and that's all nuclear weapons are used for.
2006-07-28 15:26:10 · answer #8 · answered by bregweidd 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
probably not, but the middle east would be a lot quieter right now, if Israel had lobbed a 'clean' one 2 weeks ago into Palestine.
2006-07-28 15:27:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
When the weapons aren't used on us.
2006-07-28 15:26:09 · answer #10 · answered by jaded 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. We used them in WWII.
Love, Jack
2006-07-28 15:25:24 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋