Yes. It was a way to prevent the deaths of millions. The Japanese were preparing to fight to the last man. Their women were training with naginatas to attack our soldiers on the streets when the US invasion came.
Even after the first nuke fell, the Japanese wanted to continue fighting to the death. It took a second nuke to change their minds.
In addition, the German-Japanese alliance was preparing to nuke American cities. We accidentally wrecked Japan's nuclear program so the Germans sent a U-boat towards Japan with their bomb materials and the scientists who could put them together. The Japanese had a submarine that could launch light bomber aircraft.
It was a race. Luckily, we won.
2007-02-05 10:49:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by speakeasy 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes, it was. Dropping those bombs ended the war. Were those specific targets necessary? That's a different question which will be questioned for years to come.
As terrible as the deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were, millions more (Japanese and Americans both) would have died in a full-scale invasion of Japan.
Don't forget that Hitler's scientists were working on the atomic bomb as well. So it really WAS a race- he wouldn't have hesitated for a second to use nuclear weapons on the Allied nations.
2007-02-05 19:02:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by C-Man 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Most people answering are saying yes, because it saved American soldiers, without looking at the fact that the water supply where the bombs were dropped is STILL messed up. People in general think of thier own country before they look at humanity as a whole. The hydrogen bombs were awful, Einstien said, after they were dropped, that if he could go back and start his life over, he would have chosen a different career. People that wern't even in the millitary were killed. I used to think people had heart, but damn...
2007-02-05 19:00:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by kangaroo Jesus Fish LaFrack 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I do not believe any war is neccesary. I believe that there are other ways of going about doing things but some people don't see it that way. With that said if a country is defending itself, and there is no other choice, then ok I guess. I believe strongly in world PEACE for all.
My view anyway
2007-02-05 18:58:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by missy 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Pres Truman and Prime Minister Churchill sent the message of warning to Soviet Union not to grab or interfere with Japan.But with exploding the bombs they opened new can of worms.It took 3 years for Eastern block to make their own Bomb and the World and human history changed for ever to come.
2007-02-05 18:55:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dr.O 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, for two reasons. One was to end the war, it probably saved about 2 millions lives, the Japanese were going to fight tooth and nail we would have lost 100,000 and we would have had to kill about 2 million of them. The second reason had to do with the Soviet Union, we needed to end the war in a hurry (so they didn't get a piece of Japan) but also to demonstrate the power of the bomb to them and our resolve to use it.
2007-02-05 18:51:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Yo it's Me 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Everyone who said yes is right. It was a terrible thing, and a difficult decision. But if the war had continued with an American invasion into Japan, millions more would have died.
2007-02-05 18:54:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by Sgt. Pepper 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
For the 143,692,435,395 times, yes. Even after both nukes there were still many in the Japanese military that wanted to fight to the death. Several even tried a kidnap attempt on the Emperor to stop the surrender speech from being aired.
2007-02-05 18:50:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by zombiefighter1988 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
Yeah, those women and children who melted NEVER should've attacked Pearl Harbor. We taught THEM a lesson.
2007-02-05 23:30:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, because it ended the war immediately, saving thousands of American lives.
2007-02-05 18:51:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋