Which is worse?

Question

In the U.S. history, there have been two important events that have taken place. The first one is the bombing of Pearl Harbor, when the Japanese sent bombing planes over and took control of Pearl Harbor. The second is the bombing of Hiroshima, Japan. What I want to know is...which do you think is worse? The fact that THEY came over HERE and destroyed US? Or the fact that WE went over THERE and destroyed THEM? And please include why...thanks very much!

Answer 1

they are both murderers, how could one be better than the other

Answer 2

Well,they didn't destroy us now,did they?And apparently,we didn't destroy them either.And the Japanese didn't take control of Pearl Harbor.They bombed it and left.

Now,both were immoral acts.Japan committed an unprovoked attack on the United States,killing what were essentially innocent victims.Even though the vast majority of casualties on December 7,1941 were military personnel,I say they were innocent in the sense that Japan mounted a preemptive strike against a nation at peace.


The nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also clearly immoral,in that hundreds of thousands of civilians were needlessly slaughtered.Japan was on its last legs,already a defeated nation.There was no need to kill innocent civilians.Oppenheimer(the lead scientist of the Manhattan Project)had lobbied for a demonstration explosion in an isolated area.He felt that,if the Japanese seen such a device in action,they would surrender,with no need of further death.Many Japanese politicians and military men said that more than likely would have been the case.

So,both were immoral.Many acts of war can be seen in that light.To call one more immoral than the other isn't for me to say.I am not an ethicist by any means.

Answer 3

They bombed Pearl Harbor, but they didn't take it over. They could have completely crushed the fleet at Pearl, but the Japanese admiral turned chicken and ran at the critical moment just like the Japanese navy did a surprising number of times.

Hiroshima was worse in the sense that civilians were the targets and there were more casualties. The policy of trying to defeat the enemy by bombing civilian targets was the big military strategic belief in the 1930's. It was initiated by the Germans at Guernica in Europe, and by the Japanese in China. The Allies were more effective at it. I know one WWII vet who firmly believes he is alive today thanks to the atomic bomb attacks. I can't condone attacks on civilians, but maybe it really did end the war.

Robert B - you're Canadian, right?

Answer 4

both were very bad acts on human lives but Pearl Harbor was not as much a surprise has the history books say. its sad to admit but its all about money. war is money. most of all wars are started on lies. just look at the war right now started with lies. take some time and watch these video's. learn from the truth.

Answer 5

US definitely !!

Because Bombing Hiroshima and NagaSaki caused more deaths than total deaths in WW2 on both sides ....and till now the peoples there are bron with abnormalities because of that nuclear radiations..So US has destroyed the generations in those places !!!

Answer 6

Read some history the Japanese never took control of pearl harbour. You (Americans) started it by using force to open their markets. It was admiral Perry If I remember correctly. Stop sticking your nose in other peoples faces and they may stop trying to kill you, you warmongering parasites.

Answer 7

there coming here was an aggressive take over act, we bombed to save thousands of Innocent American soldiers lives

Answer 8

Both were inexcusably, immoral....but the blame for both goes to the Globalists, who always use these kinds of events to further their agendas!!!!!