make a difference??
hiroshima? thousnds killed in a milli-second? and people still suffering today?
or some deluded person who thinks that killing a few people will make a differnce?
my question is the morality?
2006-10-20 03:09:52 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
In war that is NO morality - just death and destruction - wish people could just learn to get along!@
2006-10-20 03:13:24 · answer #1 · answered by nswblue 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Its all in what you believe. What would have been the number of GI's killed had we made a beach landing in Japan?? Millions? How many Japanese would have died, from street to street fighting??? Millions?? They lost that many in the fire bombing of Tokyo so life has a low value to them during WW-ll.
First of all, America was attacked by them at Pearl Harbor. While the average Japanese person, knew little of America and only what the Emperor put out, still doesn't take away the responsibility of the attack.
If two atomic bombs save millions of American lives, well, its the price they pay for a government who attack a peaceful innocent people on Dec 7Th.
You can make a good argument in either case of yes drop the bomb, or no, don't drop the bomb. If you lost family at Pearl harbor, and a son or daughter were going in harms way for an invasion, dropping the bomb would have been an easy choice for the biggest majority of people.
2006-10-20 10:17:46 · answer #2 · answered by bigmikejones 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hiroshima has to be seen in context. Tokyo suffered more casualties from one conventional firebomb raid than Hiroshima suffered but few people are aware of that fact-if you want to question the morality look at the moral implications of strategic bombing during the war which killed over a million people. Was it a warcrime or a military necessity?
2006-10-20 10:13:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The actions of dropping a bomb indiscriminately and of shooting indiscriminately are mere variations in methodology, and the ethical denunciation of both is identical.
There are other questions of ethics involved, however - namely, the creation of the bomb and the gun, and of the institutional and calculated nature of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki nukes. It is one thing to shoot wildly and hit someone; it is another to gather together, plot and collectively decide to have that person executed.
2006-10-20 10:21:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who is openly threatening the use of the bomb in the International stage?
North Korea and Iran.
The USA only stated it would not standby if this happens.
It would be far better to address this question to these 2 governments, whatever their reasons.
2006-10-20 10:20:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bombs, guns, knives, and toenail clippers are NOT moral or immoral. Only the people who use them are. Murder is always immoral. Road construction almost NEVER is.
2006-10-20 10:14:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
isnt that Mass Murder!!. bragging about how bad the twin towers drop and how many poeple died... how about the invation of IRAQ? how many thousands of man, women and children died? With no obvios reasons? for fun and pleasure i guess.
2006-10-20 10:39:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. There's this saying: If you kill a person, you are murdering the entire humanity.
2006-10-20 10:13:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
war is not moral
2006-10-22 12:54:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
bombs are made to kill people. notice how i wrote people. bombs were not madeto kill one person.
2006-10-20 11:01:45 · answer #10 · answered by shanti_shen 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋