Why can the US drop nuclear bombs when it says others shouldn't have WMD?

Question

The US dropped a nuclear bomb on Japan and murdered thousands of civilians. Yet it condemns September 11 and countries who want WMD. They can't have it both ways. Hiroshima and September 11 are both terrorist attacks that sought to muder civilians. The US has no credibility.

If the US believes WMD are wrong then get ris of their own. But they will never do this as they love power and violence too much.

Perhaps the hijackers on September 11 thought their countries were being attacked after years of US attacks in the middle east. I oppose both the US military and Al Qaeda - both unjust and committed to violence. If you are attacked as the US was by Japan it does not make it alright to murder tens of thousands of civilians. Hi

Answer 1

When we dropped the bomb on Japan it was during a state of war. They started the war, we finished it, that's not a terrorist attack.
I'm sorry but you have no credibilty.

Answer 2

That's a tough question - and I assume that your question is rhetorical. The following paragraph is editorial in nature (opinions) and that's fine.

I agree ... the positions DO appear hypocritical. I am also going to assume that you will thoughtfully consider an opposing view.

My initial reply to your question was "I'm glad the cops have guns and the bad guys don't" - but then I remembered ... the bad guys DO have guns. And that's why we don't want too many WMD out there - chances are that if an established nation has them - the bad guys can get them ... Currently one big worry is that all of the nuclear weapons the former Soviet Union HAD are available to well funded groups like Al-Qaeda can get them. Right now I'm not too warm and fuzzy that Pakistan has "the bomb"

I WANT civilized countries (like the United States) with much to lose to have a military advantage over unstable countries

The truth is - there always has been a World Power. There will always be conflict. Given those two facts I cannot think of anyone other than the United States that would be a better World Power. Certainly not Al-Qaeda or any other Middle Eastern entity.

That's MY opinion why I think we should keep nuclear weapons and work diligently to keep other countries from building them. A little "Ugly American" perhaps - but it's MY opinion.

Your paragraph compared the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the 9/11/01 attacks. The bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were awful acts of war where over 200,000 people died and an estimated additional 200,000 were affected for life. This was an act of declared war between two entities. On July 26, 1945 Harry Truman issued the Potsdam Declaration (basically a warning) which was ignored.

Most military and political historians credit these awful bombings as ending a more awful war. Japan attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor - without warning and without provocation.

The attack of a civilian target was a desperate act - but those were desperate times. That attack ended a declared war. The US knew who the enemy was (Japan - who by the way had attacked us without provocation) we told them exactly what to do to prevent the attacks. They ignored the Potsdam Declaration and Truman made a difficult decision that ended a war.

That's not what happened on 9/11/2001

Al-Qaeda attacked the United States. The tough thing here is that Al-Qaeda is not a country. It's tough to defend a country from a religion. I don't think our response was well designed - but I don't know what would have been better. So why DID Al-Qaeda attack us? I don't recognize that the United States has provoked Al-Qaeda. It was VERY clear that Japan provoked the United States.

I don't acknowledge the two acts of war as the same. The bombing of Japan were a defensive act, while the attacks of 9/11/01 were a provocation
.

Answer 3

Personally, while I find the dropping of the bomb to be a sad and horrific and unfortunate event, I believe it was necessary and that it did in fact save many lives, both American and Japanese.

I'm inclined to believe that the Japanese would indeed have fought on as they had prepared, and that a "safe demonstration" would not have been sufficient to convince anyone to lay down their weapons. I'm amazed by the ideas expressed as "cold facts" by people like you who seem to have their heads in the sand (or perhaps elsewhere...). Do you honestly think Hiroshima was a "defenseless population?" Do you feel the same way about the attack on Pearl Harbor? How about the World Trade Center?

And I've never read anywhere that the Japanese were eager to surrender. Quite the opposite, I think they believed that surrendering was shameful. And it was no "mistaken belief" that the Nazi's were trying to develop nuclear weapons; the "reality" is that they just weren't successful.

Are you implying that we should have stopped the Manhattan Project as soon as the Germans were forced to stop because the war was going poorly for them? The "reality" was also that the Japanese were STILL working on weapons of mass destruction, although their failures in working with the atom had forced them in different directions.

Let's be honest - you're thoughts are naiive, ill-informed, and overly idealistic.

We'll always be against rogues, dictators, and assorted loonies who want WMD's, whether they be Hitler, Hirohito or Azhinsbahad..what's his name....and we'll act pre-emptively to stop them.

Answer 4

Obvious Troll Rant "Question"!!

You obviously have no idea why the TWO bombs were dropped, on Japan:

1. it was done to force Japan to accept unconditional surrender and end the war, thus saving the Allied Forces an estimated 5 million casualties if they had to make a conventional landing on the Japanese, both targets were legitimate War targets being production centers for the Japanese war effort.Less people died in the nuclear attacks than were killed by the conventional bombing of Tokyo previously.

2. A war by the way, which the Japanese started and in which Japanese occupation troops murdered and raped there way through China, Burma, Indo-China, Philippines, Indonesia, Borneo, as well as proving America by its undeclared war, when attacking Pear Harbor.Not to mention their inhuman treatment of civilian populations of the occupied countries as well as the brutal treatment and slave labor inflicted on Prisoners of War.

3. You obviously take and twist history to suit yourself, which is not a very intelligent thing to do.

Answer 5

There is quite a difference between a declared war, such as there was between Japan and the US in WWII, and a terrorist attack. Both targets in Japan had military/industrial value and the bombs were dropped in hopes to end the war (BTW, far more civilians died at the hands of conventional bombing in WWII - by both sides).

Do not try to compare the cowardly attacks of September 11. Hijacking civilian airliners? Give me a break.

Answer 6

What? Japan attacked us! We saved hundreds of thousands of lives dropping the bomb. I can't believe you would even write something like this. Thank God the bomb was dropped, you may be speaking Japanese.

My father and many other fathers and grandfathers are alive today because of that bomb. You have no idea what it was like for these men, the fear, the stark reality that they may have to run through the waters of the China sea and be ripped apart by a bunch of Japense soldiers.

If the truth be known, if it were me, I would have nuked all of the middle east the day after 9/11.

How dare you...

Answer 7

Ya, except those 50 f'n years in between moron. Oh ya, and WW2 was going on, so that was a war bombing. Sept.11 was not during a war, there was no declared enemy or transparancy of intent. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were done for two reasons. Pearl Harbor revenge and to warn the Russians that we meant business. The Japanese did stuff just as bad to the other countries around them and many of those countries still hate them to this day. Read up on the Rape of Nanking. It's probably in one of those 'useless' history books you use to keep your 6ft bong steady. Loser.

Answer 8

Nice rant. The civilized world signed a nuclear non-profileration treaty a long time before 9/11; the UN and the WORLD wanted the spread of nukes stopped.

Hiroshima and 9/11 haven't the slightest relationship to each other in the real world.

Answer 9

indeed, the two atomic bombs dropped were horrific.

terrorist - NO, we were attacked at Pearl Harbor in a sneak attack, and we were defending ourselves against the "Imperialist" Japanese Army

WWII analysts have stated that perhaps 1,000,000 lives on BOTH sides would have been lost - had an assault on the
Main Island of Japan been undertaken.

Several battles in the Pacific show the tenacity of the Japanese fighters, and how they went down to the last man.

Your question lacks knowledge.

Get rid of ours?
Tell the local cop on the beat to drop his weapons if he believes that guns are bad - then only criminals will carry guns.

Same with nukes - other countries will only fear -
if we are packing (but - we have reduced the arsenal!)

Answer 10

The US is not a monster!

The US is a giant with a big responsiblity and credibility!

Nuclear is not the answer but the last resort if there are no other options!

I wont vote for you if run for a president! You are acting agressively like the terrorist! maybe you are one of them???