Was the dropping of the two atomic bombs a war crime by USA?

Question

some of you need serious english lessons! damn

Answer 1

pearl harbor is well covered territory my brainwashed friend.. in fact it was a war crime. It was a crime against humanity. Forget the boarders for a moment and think outside the box (television)..
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ARTICLE5/
http://www.doug-long.com/
http://www.harpers.org/WarCrime.html

Answer 2

No, cause from what i believe, when the US drop the two atomic bombs in nagasaki and hiroshima at that time it was a war between america and japan. I think it showed really how powerful america can be if you make them really angry. If you think about it, pearl harbor was attacked by japanese air force in full force and i don't know if it is true or fake but if you watch the movie pearl harbor you can see that the japanese used bombs that can travel in water which is called torpedos and killed a lot of soldiers. So i think the dropping of the two atomic bombs by the US is not a war crime, they just wanna get even.

Answer 3

The answer is no however one little fact people always forget about the use of Atomic Bombs during the WW2 is this: they where initially intended to be dropped on German cities, initially Germany was perceived to be the biggest threat and the 'race' to develop the bomb was against them, Japan could have been beaten with conventional warfare but that would have cost many more American and Japaneses lives, it was the right decision then and still today it was the right decision.

Answer 4

Japan exploded their atomic bomb 6 days after Hiroshima.

On an island off the coast of Korea.

Planed a sub to atomic bomb San Francisco Bay August 17, 1945.

They had huge subs that carried bombers.

They would have atomic bombed all the west coast and inland to their range limits.

They planed a sub to atomic bomb Pearl Harbor.

Answer 5

We beat the Japanese to the Atomic Bomb by a few days; we made the point and it ended the war. If we had not used the bomb, the outcome could have been very different and we might not have the privilege of answering questions on Yahoo......

Answer 6

No, in fact it was more humane than trying to invade the main island of Japan. Estimates say up to 3 times as many Japanese would have lost thier lives and unknown thousands of Americans would have perished trying such an assault. As it was, the main war machinery plants at Nagasaki and Hiroshima finally convinced Japan to surrender.

Answer 7

NO! by doing so it saved possibly millions of lives. At the time the USA was drawing up plans to invade Japan. If that would have happened millions on both sides would have been killed. And besides, you do what you have to do to win a war. Use everything in your arsenal.

Answer 8

i dont think you can call anything in war a crime but check this out .... this is the thinking most of these people use and its wrong .... thet try to justify it by saying it saved american lives ... then why didnt we just nuke iraq and never invade losing thousands of lives? I think it is unethical throughout the eons of time backwards and forwards to ever use a weapon that would kill so many civilians just living their day to day lives ... but crime? its only a crime if you lose the war on any topic ... crime is ur point of view ... and crime relates to the countrys' morals ... so was it justifiable? not by the definition to save lives i think i established that, but morally and ethically i think we were very wrong to use nukes and would be in the furture also unless our very survival was at stake.

Answer 9

No , by dropping the first bomb Japan should have surrender,but chose not to ,by dropping the bombs actually saved lives, more people would have been killed in a Japan invasion by allied forces.

Answer 10

Better the Japanese than our guys. War is violent. How about our sailors that were murdered in Pearl Harbor? This is a question that a liberal asks.