[Debate] USA and the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

[minamoto]

Yes i don't care about those 129,000 people.

Did japan care about those who they killed? Ok.
Search up


Operation : blossom at night

Japan tried to sneak in and get whole ameirca sick .

War is discussting but i don't care japan got 129k dead.

Wanne team up with discusting nazi? Good for them they got nuked

then why are you reading japanese Manga Naruto?

 

[Ōkami]

then why are you reading japanese Manga Naruto?

Those are unrelated.

 

[Mohamed Nabil]

the Japanese army would've probably done the same to the U.S and the allies if they had nuclear bombs, besides the Japanese army made many massacres on the Chinese civilians without any mercy!

anything's justified in wars! especially if it's a world war.

 

[sasukesworld]

it wasn´t necesarry but USA is not really to blame. (they should drop one of Germany instead 2 on Japan)

And no that has nothing to do with cold war.

First time I disagree on something political with you.

OT: No, it wasn't the right thing to do. On the other hand every war America was involved in was a false flag, and yet nobody cares.
America has murderd so many innocent people, worst country ever. U_U

All hail Putin.

 

[ultraChalk]

Nope. It's not right to target civilians in a war.

 

[Angelic.]

murricah! fascinating how things changed and we're buddies now lol

 

[Tennis Robot]

It was right in the opinions of the people who made the decision. And perhaps it was the best thing to do. It could be argued that the decimation caused by those bombs is the reason why no one else has dared to use them since then. If we assume that that is the case, then it is natural to wonder if it will happen again in the nearish future as people who bore witness to the bombings in Japan become more scarce (and eventually die out completely).

Ultimately, I was not there, so I cannot say whether it was right or not. However, I believe that it could easily have been avoided and that I personally would do anything to prevent something like that from happening.

 

[Multiply]

It was the lesser of two evils depending on your perspective.

- Send in thousands of Americans to die to stop a country that is all that is defeated but insists on fighting because of pride?
- Drop a bomb that will devastate the enemy and shock them into submission?

Of course it's horrible that so many people died, but that's war.

 

[BlacLord™]

i-----------> .

nearly,129,000 people died ,after USA dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945...


-"Potsdam Declaration" stated that if Japan do not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction."..(correct me if i'm wrong plz)..

My Question is: was bombing japan with atomic bombs the right Decision?....was it even necessary to use atomic bombs to achieve Victory in favor of usa??


-don't you think that Bombing japan with atomic Bombs has something to do with the cold war between U.R.S.S and USA,rather then forcing japan to surrender???

It was not the right decision.

Japan was at the end of their tether and had little steam left anyway. The bombings were nothing more than an excuse to use new toys on the U.S's part, quite dismissive really. The effects are still going on today... and really, there is quite an eery feeling to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's like a never ending sense of darkness only fought by the positive spirits of the people living there now.

All in all, Japan was ready to surrender anyway... With the blockades that were in place and the fact that they had run out of anything on land... They had little more to give.

Bombing them like they did would be like Sasuke using Indra's Arrow against Part 1 Konohamaru.

The Cold War was influenced by the bombings. Stalin saw the results and sought the same power, whilst Truman had the power and could have possibly sought destruction with his new found power.

 

[wanderingcactus]

They didnt attack those just for the death count.

They wanted to force japan to lose if they dont surrender

 

[Multiply]

It was not the right decision.

Japan was at the end of their tether and had little steam left anyway. The bombings were nothing more than an excuse to use new toys on the U.S's part, quite dismissive really. The effects are still going on today... and really, there is quite an eery feeling to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's like a never ending sense of darkness only fought by the positive spirits of the people living there now.

All in all, Japan was ready to surrender anyway... With the blockades that were in place and the fact that they had run out of anything on land... They had little more to give.

Bombing them like they did would be like Sasuke using Indra's Arrow against Part 1 Konohamaru.

The Cold War was influenced by the bombings. Stalin saw the results and sought the same power, whilst Truman had the power and could have possibly sought destruction with his new found power.

Yeah, they're on their last leg so throw thousands of american lives into Japan to end the war? They would not have given up, and that much was apparent.

End it by saving american lives or end it by losing american lives? That was the choice, and they made the right one in terms of war.

 

[Agent Phrank]

Going on a tangent:
---------

While the Cold War officially began 1947, you can't disregard the events that led to high tensions between the Americans and Soviets who had only recently been allied during WW2. One of the key factors was definitely the predecessor to the Nuclear Arms race.

According to Chikov, "Perseus" (alias) was a high-level scientist who worked at the White Sands Missile Range and the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. He supposedly came aboard the Manhattan Project over a year before any of the other known spies, and the secrets he provided helped give the Soviets a head start in developing their own nuclear program.

You must be registered for see links

--
"He was the one who met courier Lona Cohen in Albuquerque in August 1945
and handed her papers with a diagram of the plutonium bomb, which she,
supposedly stuffing in a Kleenex box, carried back to Yatskov in New York."
----
"Without a copy they probably
could not have produced an atomic bomb in Stalin's time and he would not
have encouraged Kim Il Sung to start the Korean War."
-------------------
The spy who retrieved the documents related to Nuclear bomb testing is known as "Perseus" and to this day remains unidentified.

During the Yalta and Potsdam conferences (1945), there was no mention of nuclear capabilities or of the Manhattan project (1942-46) between the US and Soviets. I wonder why? Ultimately, it was a collaboration with U.S, Canada, and U.K only.

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

------------
And lastly, the "absolute pacifist" Albert Einstein sending this letter to FDR insisting on funding labs and programs to utilize the newly discovered phenomena of nuclear fission.

"This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable -- though much less certain -- that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed."

He also encouraged to seek new sources of Uranium (since there was scant in the U.S) such as in Canada and the Belgian Congo (which, not surprisingly were under British dominion at the time)
"The United States has only very poor [illegible] of uranium in moderate quantities. There is some good ore in Canada and the former Czechoslovakia, while the most important source of Uranium is Belgian Congo."

You must be registered for see links

regarding the use of nuclear bombs after Nagasaki and Hiroshima:
"had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing."
==

and Surprise! the sneaky soviets blew their first A-bomb on Aug 29, 1949

You must be registered for see links

 

[minamoto]

Going on a tangent:
---------

While the Cold War officially began 1947, you can't disregard the events that led to high tensions between the Americans and Soviets who had only recently been allied during WW2. One of the key factors was definitely the predecessor to the Nuclear Arms race.

According to Chikov, "Perseus" (alias) was a high-level scientist who worked at the White Sands Missile Range and the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. He supposedly came aboard the Manhattan Project over a year before any of the other known spies, and the secrets he provided helped give the Soviets a head start in developing their own nuclear program.

You must be registered for see links

--
"He was the one who met courier Lona Cohen in Albuquerque in August 1945
and handed her papers with a diagram of the plutonium bomb, which she,
supposedly stuffing in a Kleenex box, carried back to Yatskov in New York."
----
"Without a copy they probably
could not have produced an atomic bomb in Stalin's time and he would not
have encouraged Kim Il Sung to start the Korean War."
-------------------
The spy who retrieved the documents related to Nuclear bomb testing is known as "Perseus" and to this day remains unidentified.

During the Yalta and Potsdam conferences (1945), there was no mention of nuclear capabilities or of the Manhattan project (1942-46) between the US and Soviets. I wonder why? Ultimately, it was a collaboration with U.S, Canada, and U.K only.

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

------------
And lastly, the "absolute pacifist" Albert Einstein sending this letter to FDR insisting on funding labs and programs to utilize the newly discovered phenomena of nuclear fission.

"This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable -- though much less certain -- that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed."

He also encouraged to seek new sources of Uranium (since there was scant in the U.S) such as in Canada and the Belgian Congo (which, not surprisingly were under British dominion at the time)
"The United States has only very poor [illegible] of uranium in moderate quantities. There is some good ore in Canada and the former Czechoslovakia, while the most important source of Uranium is Belgian Congo."

You must be registered for see links

regarding the use of nuclear bombs after Nagasaki and Hiroshima:
"had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing."
==

and Surprise! the sneaky soviets blew their first A-bomb on Aug 29, 1949

You must be registered for see links

could you plz sum it up.....especially the last part?

 

[BlacLord™]

Yeah, they're on their last leg so throw thousands of american lives into Japan to end the war? They would not have given up, and that much was apparent.

End it by saving american lives or end it by losing american lives? That was the choice, and they made the right one in terms of war.

Sending anyone in is just conjecture on your part; I never even mentioned that.

If they had left them be, they would've given up. The Japanese were/are anything but stupid and were going to surrender anyway. You can't fight if you don't have anything left to fight with - and the blockades effectively proved that.

They were literally on the verge of surrendering when they dropped the pair... Truman destroyed innocent lives without a single thread of necessity. Unless you want to call playing with your latest toy a necessity.

To think that anybody doesn't have a breaking point is foolish.

 

[WalksInShadows]

i don't like the idea of civilians getting killed military conflicts, but i really can't think of a better course of action where civilians wouldn't have ended up dead anyway. With The Razor being arguably worse than Hitler and having the emperor sharing the former's ideology to w/e extent, they were bound to make ordinary ppl get involved like Hitler mandated the Hitler Youth to do.

 

[Ripple Hole]

**** Japan, it was in an effort to end that war quicker, may I remind you who began it?
Anything goes in war, and in a situation where you're either gonna lose more of your lives(US),
over some crap you didn't even spark, or cost them thousands of lives, you're gonna pick the latter.

The message of "Don't **** with US" got carried very well, I guess.

 

[Bronze]

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was for two reasons: to test the capability of the atomic bomb and to intimidate the Soviet Union. If Americans are taught that they were to force the Japanese to surrender, then I truly feel sorry for the propaganda and brainwashing.

Yes, US is convicted of terrorism and war crimes against the Japanese citizens but also post-WW2.

 

[Multiply]

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was for two reasons: to test the capability of the atomic bomb and to intimidate the Soviet Union. If Americans are taught that they were to force the Japanese to surrender, then I truly feel sorry for the propaganda and brainwashing.

Yes, US is convicted of terrorism and war crimes against the Japanese citizens but also post-WW2.

How is it stupid to say to force the Japanese to surrender? No one genuinely believes that's the only reason, but to say it isn't one of the reasons is down right stupid.

 

[minamoto]

**** Japan, it was in an effort to end that war quicker, may I remind you who began it?
Anything goes in war, and in a situation where you're either gonna lose more of your lives(US),
over some crap you didn't even spark, or cost them thousands of lives, you're gonna pick the latter.

The message of "Don't **** with US" got carried very well, I guess.

if usa was in japanese stead ,your opinion wouldn't be the same..right?

 

[HiddenSound]

A) The war against Japan would've dragged on much longer had the U.S. not dropped the bombs, the Japanese military high command were very stubborn/fanatical. Either way (through atomic bombs or a very long mainland battle and occupation) the Japanese civilians would've greatly suffered, that's war.
B) It was something of a threat to the USSR