Was the World War 2 atomic bomb the correct solution?

Answer 1

There were no military reasons to bomb Japanese civilians.
USSR already entered the Far East battlefront, and effectively crushed Kwangtung Army and captured Kurile Islands in August 9 - 25.
As a result, Japan lost all resources and surrendered, facing a major attack from 2 sides: USSR could land on the Northern islands, USA on the Southern islands.

Answer 2

Here's a question to consider, what if the USA and her allies had invaded Japan and millions died. Years later after the war it comes out that the US had in its possession a weapon capable of ending the war without the invasion how would people react then? Millions vs thousands?

Personally I think the atomic bombs ended the war quickest, and with fewer loss of life then other options that were given.

Answer 3

It wasn't the correct solution, just the lesser of 2 evils. The US military tried it's newest bomb on civilians, to end the war to stop the carnage and get the Japanese to surrender. Using the bomb wasn't as bad as an Invasion of Japan but it was still bad and caused alot of suffering. At least the war did end finally after 50 million deaths.

Answer 4

I think so, they weren`t surrendering they were training their women to fight with farm tools.

More people died over a little island south of the main Islands Japan right before we began bombing them than died from the bomb in Hiroshima ( not counting lingering effects )

And I think the fact that we had to drop 2 before they surrendered also says something about their resolve.

The Japanese were doing some awful and brutal tests on people just as bad as what happened in Germany.

So I say it wouldn`t have been worth all the lives of our men our Grandfathers and Greatgrandfathers to take it from them any other way.

Answer 5

War is just another game
Tailor made for the insane
But make a threat of their annihilation
And nobody want's to play
If thats the only thing thats stopping war
Then thank God for the bomb!

Nuke Ya Nuke Ya

Answer 6

I think it's reasonable to say it saved lives on both sides. There was a pro-surrender faction in Japan at the time, and a let's all commit suicide faction. Given that the die-hards seemed to have had the upper hand since 1933 I don't think an invasion of Japan would have been pretty.

Answer 7

Well.....it did end the war. So I have to say yes.

But ask yourself this.........Was the Pearl Harbor bombing the correct solution?

Answer 8

In theory it ended the war as planned; and allowed the world to know the terror of nuclear weapons and to fear them. They would never have had the same effect of utter horror until one was used.

Without knowing how things would have turned out had they not been used though, no way of knowing.

Answer 9

yes,if that hadn't happened an invasion of Japan would have happened and mabye 5 times the number of casulties at D-Day would have happened

Answer 10

It sure beat the heck out of the estimated 1 million US casualties that were expected if we invaded Japan.

Nuking their whole country was better than losing even one more American life.