America is the 1st country who used atomic bombs on CIVILIANS?

Question

fought war against Vietnam, Missiled Somalia, fighting in Afghanistan & Iraq, launching war against Iran & Jordan do you think that America did & still doing the right thing ? Could America's acts bring peace in the world or will fuel the fire
in the world?

Answer 1

You right about the nuclear weapons, it's good they and the rest of the world realised how dangerous they were and never used them again.

I wonder if other countries would have used them and if a war would have been fought with nukes if they weren't demonstrate on a population.

It's interesting to consider, not saying its right but it makes you think

You also have to realize that other countries go to war too, not just the US

Answer 2

The USA was the 1st country to use atomic bombs on Civilians, however any other country playing in the WWII would have done it as the government and even the scientists who invented the bomb were not aware of its full destructive power. The USA has also used or provided for use, chemical weapons and perhaps even biological ones... but does it make a difference if you kill with radiation, with knifes or with a bat??? Is the problem not more with how you justify who and how many you kill?? If indeed killing anyone at all is ever justified (this is for each to decide, and hopefully in the USA vote for…)

On to the second part of your question, the only way War will ever bring peace is when there is no one left to die... peaceful, but not quite the peace we want. One important thing for all the "America" lovers, the difference between a democracy and a tyranny or a terrorist state is that of accountability, so yes perhaps North Korea would also use the atomic bomb if or when they have it ready, but would you really like to live in America if their policies were like those of North Korea... Sadly enough accountability is not at its highest in the USA right now... if all of the USA citizens were to vote on the war against Iraq, or on staying now as the war is somewhat finished, will the outcome be yes, go to war?... would the military and their "leader" the president even care?... if the answer is they would not care, then the USA is behaving more like a rogue state and less like a democracy... and that is the real tragedy, as there have always been barbaric states, it is the democratic, peaceful, humanity respecting ones the ones that are rare. Those of us who have lived in the barbaric ones (Guatemala 36 years of internal war, and now 98% of all “everyday” murders go unpunished) we feel sorry for those who have lived in a somewhat acceptable democracy and could lose it from fear, which paradoxically is the objective of terrorism…to inflict fear, not merely to kill. The 911 people are dead… but the ones left behind are terrified…

It is not that I do not feel sorry for the dead of 911, I just sadly understand that their suffering has ended, but that of the ones left behind, has not. Here, when someone gets kidnapped and the ransom not properly paid… their death is not pretty, however it ends there for them, for the ones left behind the suffering from the fear of ever being in such a situation continues every day, and the kidnaper has gained yet more power. However, killing the first suspect is not really a solution and in turn will only make the kidnapers more vicious as they know leaving no witnesses is best.

Some will argue that by being the most vicious country the USA will be safe… think again. If it is justified to kill Afghans because they are supposedly terrorists, is it ok to kill all Latinos in the USA because some of them are delinquents? What about blacks, and Asian-American… When the outside enemy stops uniting the USA then the inside enemies will start to be created… and that is how the empire cracks.

For those who have some notion of history, Rome did not stop being the great empire because one country attacked it and won… the destruction actaully came from the inside.

Answer 3

So far we are the only country to use nuclear weapons in anger. It was the right thing to do at the time. If we had prosecuted the war on Japan using conventional forces it would have ended up killing more Japanese. It also would have meant the lives of thousands of Americans. They initiated the war against us with Pearl Harbor and we finished it with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Ask the South Vietnamese and the South Koreans how they felt about our involvement in their conflicts. Most welcomed us.

As to Afghanistan and Iraq, you can only poke the biggest dog on the block so many times before it gets up and bites you. The Taliban and Saddam both learned that to their detriment.

And Raul, yes the Roman empire did crumble from within. It happened after the Romans forsook the moral values of ther founders. It was accomplished not by Romans but by the mercenaries that Rome took in and welcomed as their own.

Answer 4

We may have been the first to use atomic bombs, but other countries like Italy used bombs in 1935 in Ethopia to gain control.
Were we supposed to just slap the hands of the people who attacked Pearl Harbor? We were running scared as a country, our homeland had never been attacked before in modern times. This was a lot more complicated that perhaps you realize. We may have dropped the first atomic bomb, but Canada was the country who designed it.

Coming out with generalized statements against the USA without realizing that war is a world wide event can raise much conflict. The effects, reasons, fears, etc around war are world wide.

I agree with the war on terrorism, but like you, not how its being handled.

There have been some cases where our presence was warranted and needed to protect the lives of others like in Kuwait.

Answer 5

Yep, we did. But consider these things before condemming the US for it's "final solution" for the war against Japan:

The atomic bombs dropped on Japan stopped the war instantly. Because of those 2 actions, countless lives were saved. True, many were lost, but consider that if those hadn't of been dropped, the Japanese would have fought on and on and on, thereby piling up not only civilian casualties, but military as well.

Also, think about the thousands if not millions of people killed by the Japanese during WWII. Their invasion of China as well as a large portion of Pacific islands didn't come with out casualties. Japan was just as guilty as the US. People die in war, it happens, the US just brought the killing to a whole new level, in order to prevent further killing.

Actually, those 2 instances where the bomb was put into use have prevented the world from sheer destruction so far. Think about it, what prevented the USSR from unleashing it's huge nuclear armory against the US? It's simple, humanity had seen the devastation caused by a single bomb and wasn't particularly fond of the idea of thousands of them flying around. The terror caused by those 2 bombs have prevented nuclear war thus far in a way.

So, I guess you can thank the US that the world isn't a giant burnt rock right now.

Oh, and also, it wasn't just on civilians, it was intended to cripple Japanese industry as well as scare the hell out of them. I guess it did it's job. :D

One last thing. I don't really think the US is starting to spark World War III. Have you heard what Iran and North Korea are doing? They've been busy little bees, developing and in Iran's case, producing nuclear weaponry! Oh noes! I guess the US sparking WWIII idea just got thrown out the window.

Answer 6

it is genuine we lost the moral extreme floor after use of the nukes on Japan, yet finding at what Truman confronted in 1945, i probably could've completed a similar element. to income the moral depravity of state subsidized genocide the place the dying ovens at Aushwitz/Birkenau have been topping out at 2,600 in keeping with day or 80,000 killed in keeping with month and the aerial bombardment of civilians is finding at diverse scales. The "very final answer" became the coverage of purely one u . s . a . over the final century, and it wasn't the U.S. My beef is with the multi-national company cartels that allowed it to take place, the desirable being IG Farben (now BASF, Bayer, between others). not purely did they finance Adolf, they offered him with Zyclon B for use interior the dying camps. the american edge of the corporate became not tried at Nuremburg, in spite of in the event that they have been in simple terms as culpable, bypass parent. the hearth bombing of Dresden by using the 8th Air rigidity and RAF Bomber Command, led to the destruction of 15 sq. kms alongside with 14,000 residences, 72 colleges, 22 hospitals, 18 church homes, etc. with a conservative estimate of around 30,000 civilians killed. on the time, the Germans used it as propaganda to recommend against following the Geneva conventions and to attack human beings's perception of the Allies declare to absolute ethical superiority. the militia claimed the railroad middle became a militia objective, which it became, altho it became up and working each and every week later. Feb 1945 became purely 3 months remote from might 1945 (end of the Euopean conflict), the effects of the conflict became not uncertain, so why bomb a 'cultural' medieval city of 600,000? The firebombing of Dresden and nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been conflict crimes, genocide additionally should comprise civilian victims of aerial bombardment. Even after saying this, i nevertheless do not think of the Allies have been on the brink of the moral depravity of the Nazis and their wholesale holocaust of the Euopean Jews. The bombing of civilians is a huge tragedy, none can deny. it is not lots this or the different means of growing to be conflict this is immoral or inhumane. what's immoral is conflict itself.

Answer 7

We saved an estimated 300,000 lives by using nukes on Japan. No one has ever managed to invade mainland Japan. The casualties from troupe battles would've been staggering on both sides. Also, we blanketed the areas with pamphlets telling the populous to flee the city to avoid being killed. Japanese officials would not allow them to leave.

We fought in Vietnam to help out France who owned South Vietnam. Fat load of good that did.

Peace isn't as important as justice and liberty.

Answer 8

There was a time when people had a healthy fear of the US and didnt want to mess with us.Now the pacifists have accomplished reducing our military and their capabilities throughout the years and now we are having to play catch up,and once in the war they want to tie the hands of our military and our parties bicker constantly about this president and our enemies hear it and play on it.Our enemies see our people attacking our soldiers doing their job and it just feeds them.People need to stfu and let our guys do what it takes to get it done.This fire has been brewing since the days of the achille loro and Jimmy peanut farmer carter. I say if things get worse in the middle east..just make it a hole in the ground cuz N korea is going to get ugly.Just my opinion.

Answer 9

>>America is the 1st country who used atomic bombs on CIVILIANS?<<

Yea baby! And we will do it again if necessary. The USA was also the first (and only) nation to put a man on the Moon. We are in a class of our own, the lesser nations of the world need to learn how to respect their betters (Americans) or else get smacked down!

Answer 10

cainisable067 is living in a dream world. Saddam did not "poke us with a stick", we GREENLIGHTED Saddam's invasion of Iraq (read about it...it is a fact of history) and then we betrayed Saddam by waging the first Iraq war against him. Saddam and the Agfghans were "our friends" in the middle east against "the evil communists". As for dropping the atomic bomb on Japan, it may have been the most economical thing for us to do at the time but we do have that blood on our hands. We were responsible for murdering hundreds of thouands of innocent human beings (men women and children) and we should AT LEAST recognize that before going around pointing fingers at other people who justify the killing of innocents. You are either FOR the killing of innocents or AGAINST the killing of innocents. I am against it and I think we should have fought them with man power no matter what it took.