Were the Americans justified in using the atomic bomb against Japan sice Japan bombed Pearl Harbour?

Question

Japan bombed Pearl Harbour first,do u think were the Americans justified to take revenge?

Answer 1

Why do people keep asking this question?????

Look at it this way. We used it to end the worst war in history. Since then, because we used it, no other nation, or us, have used one in hostility. The World witnessed the use of an atomic weapon, much less powerful than the ones we have today, and because of that, it has become its own deterrent.

If we had not used one, we, or some other country would have. In Korea, or Europe , Vietnam, or somewhere. It had to be done.

Get over it!

Answer 2

Dropping the A-bombs on Japan was not about revenge. It was done in the hopes that Japan would surrender and the US would not have to invade and lose hundreds of thousands of troops in the process.

The Japanese were training every man, woman and child that could to fight against the invaders when the time came. Such an invasion would have decimated the Japanese population far beyond what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Answer 3

I just don't see how the war would have ended without the atomic bomb. And quite honestly, the US didn't have many other options. The Japanese leaders at the time were INSANE. Emperor Hirohito said was God. He called WWII a holy war they would fight for generations. And they didn't seem to have any trouble getting young men to sign up as Suicide Bombers (Kamikazes). I don't believe they were "about to give up" like other people are saying. And even if they did give up... it would most likely would not have been an Unconditional Surrender which included Hirohito admitting that he was not God. Without that, I think it's likely there would have been another war with Japan a few years later.

Answer 4

The atom bomb was not revenge for Pearl Harbor. It was a desperate effort to make Japan surrender so the war could end. By this time it was clear Japan could not win, but Japan's militaristic policy made them want to fight to the last man regardless. Military professionals were taught that they could not live with defeat. A perverted version of the samurai code mandated death rather than defeat.
If the allies had had to invade Japan, many more would have died, on both sides, than died in the bombings.
Only the second bomb on Nagasaki motivated the Japanese government to surrender. Many military officers killed their subordinates and themselves rather than live with defeat. The civilians, however, were eager for peace, and this was the beginning of a great relationship between the US and Japan.

Answer 5

It's true we lost the moral high ground after use of the nukes on Japan, but looking at what Truman faced in 1945, i probably would've done the same thing. To compare the moral depravity of state sponsored genocide where the death ovens at Aushwitz/Birkenau were topping out at 2,600 per day or 80,000 killed per month and the aerial bombardment of civilians is looking at different scales.

The "Final Solution" was the policy of only one country during the last century, and it wasn't the U.S. My beef is with the multi-national business cartels that allowed it to happen, the top being IG Farben (now BASF, Bayer, among others).

Not only did they finance Adolf, they supplied him with Zyclon B for use in the death camps. The American side of the company was not tried at Nuremburg, although they were just as culpable, go figure.

The fire bombing of Dresden by the 8th Air Force and RAF Bomber Command, caused the destruction of 15 square kms including 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 18 churches, etc. with a conservative estimate of around 30,000 civilians killed. At the time, the Germans used it as propaganda to advocate against following the Geneva conventions and to attack people's perception of the Allies claim to absolute moral superiority. The military claimed the railroad center was a military target, which it was, altho it was up and running a week later. Feb 1945 was only 3 months away from May 1945 (end of the Euopean war), the outcome of the war was not in doubt, so why bomb a 'cultural' medieval city of 600,000?

The firebombing of Dresden and nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes, genocide should also include civilian victims of aerial bombardment. Even after saying this, i still don't think the Allies were close to the moral depravity of the Nazis and their wholesale holocaust of the Euopean Jews.

The bombing of civilians is a great tragedy, none can deny. It is not so much this or the other means of making war that is immoral or inhumane. What is immoral is war itself. Once full-scale war has broken out it can never be humanized or civilized, and if one side attempted to do so it would be most likely to be defeated. That to me is the lesson of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Answer 6

Assuming it was done merely for revenge, no it was not justified. Taking into account that we still dont know all the details of what was going on, and that the Japanese were very resistent to surrender and it was seen as the option with the fewest casualities (total, not just US), yes it was justified. It is very sad and was a horrible thing to happen, but it would have been worse to continue the war and have more deaths on both sides just to avoid that.

Answer 7

The only necessary justification for dropping the atom bombs on Japan was that the Americans had it first.
Instead of revenge, it was used to remove any ambiguity as to whom would be victorious.

BEWARE!
There has never been a weapon developed that will not be used against man.

Answer 8

Pres Truman used the a bomb as a last resort. all other attempts to end the war with Japan were exhausted. of course, many believe what is done to them should hold some type of revenge, but i believe this was a total last resort for America to end the war with the Japanese.

Answer 9

It wasn't tit-for-tat.

The U.S. was not seeking revenge for Pearl Harbor when it dropped two atomic bombs on a tough and intractable foe, the U.S. was seeking an expedient end to the war and to save American and allied lives by avoiding an invasion of the Japanese home islands.

'Operation Downfall', the plan to invade Japan, was avoided thanks to the invention and use of atomic weapons.

Answer 10

There are few rules in war. You use what you have to win.

After the armistice, you can talk about new rules regards poison gas, atomic bombs, etc.

The winners make the rules. Such is war.