Was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified?

Question

We know for a fact that Japan killed more Chinese in Nangjing than the combined total killed by the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagisaki. We most of the people killed by the Japanese in China and other Asian coutries were civilians. We know that they gang raped Korean and Chinese women. Should the world really be apologists for Hiroshima?

Answer 1

YES, not only because of the atrocities the japanese people commited during war, but the fact that those 2 bombings saved well over 1 million allied lives because we did not have to invade. The japanese believe that in order to die with honor they must die for the emporor and the homeland, and thus, the allies would pretty much have to kill every japanese person in japan.

Answer 2

It was justified on many accounts, the Japanese would have carried on fighting to the last man, although thousands perished,Truman expected to loose half a million American lives in a conventional jungle war. The two bombs ended world war ll, both Truman and Churchill knew that this was the only way to end the war, the Japanese would never have surrendered by any conventional means, both leaders demanded unconditional surrender even though the Japanese had made several conditonal peace overtures. Even today the world benefits from those terrible events, they have never been used since, and consider this, just one of the nuclear bombs today has 1,400 times the destructive power of both those bombs put together.

Answer 3

During the war in the Pacific ,Japan had built several bunkers into mountains to hide in. When the U.S troops were moving closer to Japan it was certain the soldiers would cause a lot of U.S deaths trying to take over the island and more when Japan was taken.To end the war as soon as possible they decide to use the atomic bombs to end the war sooner. So the War Dept picked the cities that would cause the most dramatic outcome of the war.He didn't want to use them,but our soldiers were more important than theirs.No we should apologized we didn't start the war .Read the book called Fly boys,it tells what happened to some of our P.O.Ws.

Answer 4

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are justified in many ways, though the revenge angle is a little weak. The invasion of mainland Japan would have cost millions of lives. The Japanese civilians were being trained to fight our invasion force armed with gardening tools. The proud Japanese people would have let their entire country be destroyed by an invader before they surrendered, so we gave them the alternative of destroying their country without invading. They chose surrender, and I thank God for it.

Answer 5

Ted is totally right on this

The plan fro invading would have costed over 1 million lives easily,. and those were weak estimates based on the fact the civilian population may have been involved (e.g. look whats going on in iraq right now)

After the first 5 days of the invasion,. there were absolutly NO plans for the 1st Marine division,... why? It was almost a given they would be completly wiped out...

It was unfortunate,.. but it did in fact save lives and effectivly ended the war.

a little known fact is this,... there was a bombing run in Japan that actually casued more death than the atomic bomb,... it was becasue incindiary bombs were used,. and so all the paper houses went up like decks on cards and only the river effectily stopped the fire from spreading.... no controversy about that one though interestingly enough...

Answer 6

I think only the people involved, both on the japanese and american sides, can answer this correctly.

First you have to know that the japanese planned on resisting to the last woman and child. Their honor demanded this. This bitter fighting would have possibly cost more lives, on both sides, than both atom bombs.

Second, in the optics of prooving to japan that it was outgunned, the second bomb (on Nagasaki) WAS necessary. America had to proove that it could make other such bombs.

But it is quite normal also to apologise for using such an awful weapon, and for all the suffering it caused. I think those involved in the decision to use it, and in its manufacture, would wholehearthedly agree.

Answer 7

Absolutely Y E S!! It ended a really bloody war and the
bombs actually saved millions of lives, believe it or not!!!
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets. On the last question, absolutely N O, to apologizing for dropping the
bombs and ending the war.

Answer 8

Truman was told by the General Staff including Marshall and MacArthur amongst others, that it would cost an estimated 1 million American dead to invade the Japanese homeland to end the war, so yes, I believe it was justified in this respect as Japan surrendered shortly thereafter.

Answer 9

They killed civilians, they were the bad guys. Thats what bad guys do. Why the U.S. dropped it on civilians too is anyones guess, but it ended the war and probably saved more lives in the long run. I don't think it was right though, but where else could they have dropped it that would have ended the war. Sometimes you have to break the rules. Id have saved the other one for Berlin

Answer 10

Yes, these actions however, horrible, were justified to end
a terrible WW that most experts agree would have resulted in vastly greater human casualties had the war been prolonged.
Consider the alternatives as did the then sitting U.S. President, Harry S. Truman.