Should the United States have dropped the atomic bomb on japan?
368740
Yes.  While the tremendous loss of life from the bomb and its after-effects is indeed tragic, several things need to be taken into consideration.  Firstly, the U.S. had no idea they would be condemning the next generation of children.  We've all seen the footage of the testing of the atomic in the desert.  Do you think they would have been standing so close if they knew they would probably get Leukemia?  The next thing to consider is that over 100,000 Americans died trying to take Guadalcanal, how many would have died trying to take Mainland Japan?  At least twice that number, maybe more?  And what of the Japanese?  Would they, the nation that brought the Kamikaze fighter, have surrendered?  Eventually yes, but not until they had lost at least twice as many the 60,000 plus people the bombs killed.  It is within reason to say that at least 500,000 to 1,000,000 Americans and Japanese would have had to die to end WWII with conventional warfare.  Knowing that, the trade of 60,000 lives for at least 500,000 seems reasonable.\n\nTo the person who thinks that dropping the bomb was more of a terrorist act than 9/11, you have a lot of growing up to do.
819896
After allied forces had pushed the Japanese back to their mainland, they still refused to quit fighting.\n\nRefusing to surrender gave Harry Truman (assumed the war time presidency at Roosevelt's death) two choices. Either invade Japan on the ground at the cost of thousands upon thousands of Americans and Japanese lives or drop a bomb and kill thousands of Japanese. \n\nI have a tendency to think Truman already made the decision to drop the bomb but, don't think he thought he would need two!\n\nThe reality: A horrible destiny for a proud people that were lead by a vicious war machine and a  misguided emperor. Thousands of Japanese and their off spring affected for years after.\n\nWas it necessary?
405764
If the ivasion of Normandy failed and if Germany didn't invade the USSR, then Germany would have held onto Europe until the Allied victory over Japan.  The question at that point is whether Germany would have been able to develop the atomic bomb prior the US being able to use its atomic weapons on Germany.  This may have been possible.\n\nAfter the US dropped the second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, the US didn't have a third bomb that was ready for use.  And I believe Germany was about one or two years away from developing their own atomic bomb.\n\nAnother key element is that Germany would need long range bombers that could reach the US East Coast.  If Germany had this and the bomb, then Germany may have had enough leverage to sue for peace with the US.\n\nIn such an event, Europe would have remained German occupied.  The cold war would have had 3 players:  US, USSR and Germany.  Mutually assured destruction would have resulted in a German Europe being intact until today.\n\nThe unified German/European state would be perhaps the largest economy, with the US coming in second and Japan third.  The fall of the USSR would have occurred earlier since it would have had to spend even more on its military to cope with 2 competing superpowers.  The US would be less influential, as its economy would be tapped to fund a contined cold war with strategic weapons until today.\n\nThe Middle East would again be the flashpoint.  The need for oil would force both the US and Germany to colonize the Middle East.  The US/Vietnam War and the Afghanistan/USSR War would have been avoided since both the US and USSR would not have wasted their resources on those territories.  Conflicts between superpowers would have been funneled towards the Middle East as the super powers' militaries would have more quickly depleted oil supplies and forced them to claim their stakes in the Middle East.\n\nWorld War 3 would have been fought in the Middle East using 1980s technology.  The superpowers would have refrained from using nuclear weapons which would have rendered the oil fields useless.  A stalemate would eventually be declared and different areas of the Middle East would be occupied with demilitarized zones.  The three territories would be owned by the US, Germany and a Russian and Chinese alliance.\n\nThe world as a whole would have less wealth.  Much more money would have been spent fighting wars.  Our lives would be consumed with the "enemy".
131639
The US tried very hard to avoid this war and for a long time it ignored all the help requests that came from Europe. \nLikely for all the world, Japan attacked the US at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7 1941 (http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/PearlHar )  and by that forced the US the join the war.\n\nIf Japan would not have done that, it is safe to assume that Germany would have win this war and got enough time to build an atom bomb. That would have influence all the world, imagine a Nazi regime with such a weapon.\n\nBTW- kingjoey66- Albert Einstein tried to warn the US government about the intense German efforts to develop the atom bomb but was almost arrested for that. Einstein was not involved with the atomic bomb development at all. His only (and major) contribution to the development is to show that such energy exists in any material.
720060
No.  Although the Atomic bomb caused massive casualties it did not wipe out the entire population.  There were still people, cats, dogs and other animals.
1058611
When we dropped the bombs on Japan we were saving many american and even some Japanese lives by ending the war with them.  If we had invaded Japan the casualties on both sides would have been enormous....by dropping the bombs we got them to surrender within a week and we didn't loose any men.
529150
The Armageddon is the one that holds the nuke. America is one of them, and we are the only Nation to use the weapon. What makes you think it hasn't already started when America nuked Japan? There is a 1000 years of suffering afterward. I think it happened back then myself. Nobody knows if we are supposed to live in a Garden of Eden, or struggle with wars and Capitalism. Think about it and read what is said in Mathew from Jesus.
674029
Absolutely NO, the war is over.\n\nEDIT: Not even Iran, there is no reason whatsoever to EVER use an atomic bomb.
1047848
I think only the US on Japan. Really they nuked Japan as a trial purpose. They could have used MUCH weaker weapons and still had a good effect. But, they decided to use the best they had. ALSO, Japan had already surrendered before the Bomb.\n\nThe US is in complete control. No one else can really even INVENT nuclear warefare without the agreement of the US. Look.. if they even SUSPECT you have weapons of mass distruction... you get invaded... \n\nReally... if you try to invent nuclear warefare without the US's permission... then they will nuke you before you even have anything solid invented.
1151891
~America is the only nation on earth to have ever dropped a nuke, and we want to keep it that way.  Although we might lend one to the Jews if the ragheads get out of hand.\n\nKill for peace.  It's the American way.
794207
During WWII, the Japs knew the US military was bigger and badder then theirs. They tried to destroy the Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor to take the US Navy out of the equation to make the playing field more even. However, many of the Jap military leaders thought bombing the Pacific fleet was a bad idea. They thought of the bombing as simply awakening a sleeping giant. Turns out, they were right.
253071
the ethical issues of the atomic bomb aside, the japanese military was quite prepared to fight to the last man, woman, and child in a US-led invasion of japan.  the loss of life on both sides would have been horrific and much greater than that caused by the atomic bombs.  the sheer magnitude of their destruction was basically a huge wake-up slap to the japanese military and forced them to admit that they could not win the war.
525662
No. At the moment, Japan is the underdog, with Koizumi panting and yapping at Bush's ankles!! \n\nIf it had been Japan that dropped the bombs, on America, it would be Bush panting and yapping at Koizumi's ankles!!\n\nBut seriously, of COURSE things would be different - you know that a man is only a 'war criminal' if he's on the losing side, so a few Americans might have been convicted, but no Japanese.\n\nAs for whether the Japanese would have been any more (or less) sadistic, cruel & manipulative to the Americans than the Americans have been to Japan - we'll NEVER know!
307203
Christians did not drop atom bombs on the Japanese. Americans dropped atom bombs on the Japanese. It is an important distinction, and should be clear.\n   As the "poor" Japanese attacked our country without provocation at Pearl Harbor, I feel rather less sympathy than I might, although no nation should be subject to the terrors of nuclear war.
284683
It was the first Japanese city that the US a-bombed.
143423
In the case of the United States dropping an atomic bomb on Japan, there was a World War going on with Japan using military power to take over countries all over the world.  The United States was a non-participant in these events until it was attacked by Japan at Pearl Harbor, thereby declaring war on the United States and opening itself up to attack by United States forces.\n\nJapan had declared that there would be no surrender and it had begun arming all of its civilians to resist invasion.  The estimated death toll from a direct assault on the main island of Japan was in the millions based on extrapolation of the death toll from the capture of Okinawa.\n\nAs for North Korea, there has yet to be a declared war between North Korea and the United States and while there are scattered conflicts occurring throughout the world, there is definately not a war of the scale of World War II currently happening.\n\nThe decision to drop two atomic bombs on Japan was calculated to end one conflict, the one with Japan.  There was never any belief that these events would bring an end to all the war in the world. History has shown that there will always be another power to step in and fill the void when another power is removed or collapses. If Korea did follow your suggestion to attack the United States with nuclear weapons and was successful in toppling the United States, that would merely create a vaccuum for the next power to step into.\n\nIf your plan follows the same path as post World War II, that would merely place North Korea in the position of being the world's superpower and having them "bully" their way around the world, eventually leading to someone from another nation, perhaps a South American country, to post a similar question, this time being "North Koreans say, NK nuked US to end the war. Is it acceptable, Argentina nuke NK to end the war in the world?"
626945
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed with ATOMIC weapons, the first (and so far only) time such atomic/nuclear weapons have ever been used in warfare.\n\nOh...  Japanese aggressions.\n\nWell-- instead, let's focus on the AMERICAN ones, huh?