The Justification of Bombing Japan During WWII
by To end WWII in 1945, the United States dropped two nuclear bombs, one on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, the other on the city of Nagasaki. The United States was justified in dropping the bombs.
Dropping the bombs resulted in fewer deaths than if the United States would have invaded the island. Years after the war, Secretary of State James Byrnes claimed that “500,000 American lives would have been lost” if the United States had invaded Japan. So many people would have died because the Japanese fought to the death because of the samurai code.
Also, the government was training the citizens to fight, therefore the United States army would have had to fight every Japanese citizen. The bombing resulted in only 110,000-210,000 people killed. Therefore, the United States was justified because it killed fewer people than an invasion would have.
One counter argument is that the United States was not justified in bombing because the Japanese were going to surrender before the bombs were dropped. Although Japan was willing to surrender, it would have been a conditional surrender. They would have kept the government, and Japan would have stayed unoccupied. If the United States had agreed, they would have lost millions of dollars fighting the war and gained nothing. Therefore, the United States was justified in the nuclear bombing, and ending the war, even though the Japanese were willing to surrender.
Although the nuclear bombs killed more civilians than an invasion would have, it was justified because it ended World War II quickly. During the war, civilians were dying throughout Japan at a rate of about 200,000 per month. The submarine blockade and the United States Army Air Forces’s mining operation, Operation Starvation, had effectively cut off Japan’s imports.
Historian Daikichi Irokawa once stated, “Immediately after the defeat, some estimated that 10 million people were likely to starve to death,”. Also, firebombing had killed well over 100,000 people in Japan since February of 1945. Therefore, the nuclear bombing was justified because it ended the war quickly which saved millions from starvation and firebombing.
Although the nuclear bombs killed many Japanese civilians, and the Japanese were willing to surrender with conditions, dropping the bombs saved many American and Japanese lives.
Liked it
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Post Comment123456789
On October 26, 2007 at 9:10 am
yeah.
Miho
On January 7, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Pack of lies
Nick Hughes
On January 24, 2008 at 12:30 pm
A fairly weak answer, with mild arguments raised but with no real evidence to back it up. Also, the writing style is very poor. All arguments also have been lifted from the wikipedia page, but is less detailed.
Bill B
On April 16, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Everything stated in that argument is true. The answer is not at all a pack of lies. The American military had planned out the invasion of Japan and were ready to do it if they didnt surrender.And if America invaded, millions would of died.And i know that because EVERY military person agrees on that fact. So… yes.. no matter how you look at it, more lives were saved and the war ended quicker. They “were trying to surrender” doesnt mean anything. They DIDNT surrender..period.
John M.
On April 16, 2008 at 11:37 pm
I am researching this topic for my highschool paper and i discovered that even after the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the Japanese diplomats were still in discussion about surrendering. Hiroshima was a shot to the head, Nagasaki was the nail in the coffin. I agree with Bill, you don’t try to surrender, if the Japanese were really trying to surrender, wouldn’t they have surrendered?
Andrew
On May 4, 2008 at 5:26 am
Bill and John are true patriots, I will always give my beloved country benefit of the dout.
Disgusted
On May 23, 2008 at 10:08 am
We should be ashamed of ourselves. Two million Japanese killed in WWII by the allies. Mostly civilians. Firebombing large cities with no regard for targeting military installations. And then after nearly everyone has been killed in the major cities, why not drop a couple of nukes to finish them off?
Silence
On May 25, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I agree with Andrew :3
da trufe
On June 8, 2008 at 9:43 pm
we wur justified obviously we wuldnt hav dun it if we didint look into da prouz nd conz…
sam
On June 10, 2008 at 1:58 am
actually, in interviews with the pilots and people on the planes they did not really look at the pros and con; they merely looked at thier own benefits. I believe that people arguing put more thought into it than the actual pilots.
Also, the bomb was made for Hitler. They used Japan as gunea pigs.
John
On July 3, 2008 at 1:06 am
Ah, I see that the liberals are putting up another PMS attack.
John
On July 3, 2008 at 1:08 am
The liberals have no arguments. They are all MOOT. Their anti-American attitude is sickening, yes, but their stupidity is really astounding.
anonymous
On October 9, 2008 at 8:24 pm
FOR THE PU**Y LIBERALS: Go get a history book and read it about the progress of the atomic bomb, and your dates and times. The US never attacked Japan, just embargo of goods, oil, etc. We had every right to bomb them, for the hate we had for them at the time was extremely high. Someone knew someone who was killed at Pearl Harbor, so don’t never ever say there was no justification. We had the right idea about rounding up people and putting them in camps, we need to start doing that today with the pu**y anti-war protesters.
Mitchell
On October 29, 2008 at 9:34 pm
btw, no im not an liberal. im merely a student who has learnt through sites and books, which seem reliable enough to me. lol
Mitchell.. again :P
On October 29, 2008 at 9:39 pm
oh and to reply to John. M
hmm.. if i remember right, the japanese wanted to assure that their emporers position would remain intact. the americans were planning on charging the emporer on war crimes and to punish him, which they didnt want.
the japanese were extremely loyal to their emporer, and would not give up until the americans “unconditional surrender” would change so that they could keep their emporer.. i think thats how it was..
(agreed with sam btw)
sorry bout the repetitive comments, just some comments i missed that i wanna reply too xD!
Mitchell
On November 21, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Oh great. my earlier message was DELETED. sorry was i RIGHT or something?
Whoever did it knows im right..
*tired and pissed now*
I wonder how many other messages were deleted?..
....
On November 22, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Pathetic…how can the killing of thousands of people be justified! its ridiculous even if it was for revenge, or to avoid further loss of American lives….its still not the RIGHT thing to do! I lived in Japan for a year and they are by far the nicest people i have ever met.
Mitchell
On December 7, 2008 at 5:58 am
..and then the Americans helped japan rebuild, so that they wouldn’t “fall” to communism..
good point!
dude i see what ur sayin, but no, the russians wouldnt have taken it, this only put pressure on America, not Japan..
wait now ive confused myself.. but i know this didnt have that much of an impact on it YES i have thought about it >_>
The russians came in like a couple of days before the war ended, this is what provoked the second bomb, since America didn’t want them having a say in the peace treaties.. but communism spreading.. im not sure actually.. nah ill look up about it
and yeah the fire bombings were just as bad as the atomic bomb.. they would kill more i think..
germanot
On December 8, 2008 at 11:56 pm
My message got deleted too… so much for interpreting the facts. I guess it’s just easier to ignore the oppositions argument when its right, rather than learn something and maybe change your view.
Wetzel
On December 12, 2008 at 10:49 am
i honestly believe we had every right to do what we did and more. they started the fight by bombing our people, not just killing our men and women that were soldiers but also many civilians. If it had been up to me i would have nuked the whole nation. But thats just me.
decker
On January 17, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Japan had received what would seem to have been overwhelming shocks. Yet, after two atomic bombings, massive conventional bombings, and the Soviet invasion, the Japanese government still refused to surrender.
The Potsdam Proclamation had called for “Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers” (U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 2, pg. 1475). On the 13th, the Supreme Council For the Direction of the War (known as the “Big 6″) met to address the Potsdam Proclamation’s call for surrender. Three members of the Big 6 favored immediate surrender; but the other three – (War Minister Anami, Army Chief of Staff Umezu, and Navy Chief of Staff Toyoda – adamantly refused. The meeting adjourned in a deadlock, with no decision to surrender (Butow, pg. 200-202).
Later that day the Japanese Cabinet met. It was only this body – not the Big 6, not even the Emperor – that could rule as to whether Japan would surrender. And a unanimous decision was required (Butow, pg. 176-177, 208(43n)). But again War Minister Anami led the opponents of surrender, resulting in a vote of 12 in favor of surrender, 3 against, and 1 undecided. The key concern for the Japanese military was loss of honor, not Japan’s destruction. Having failed to reach a decision to surrender, the Cabinet adjourned (Sigal, pg. 265-267).
UK_Wilko
On April 6, 2009 at 8:07 am
I wonder how many “Liberals” would be disgusted if they were dropped on Berlin & Munich instead?
Lets not forget the truly awful things that innocent civilians were subjeted to by both the Germans & The Japanese. Check your history books or ask your grandparents, i’m sure they’ll have no problem with the bombing whatsoever!
heyo
On April 14, 2009 at 4:48 am
for anyone who says that the Japanese attacked American civilians I don’t recall them doing that. From what I know, I’m pretty sure that they only attacked military institutions like pearl harbor because one of Americas most powerful fleets were stationed there. If any civilians were killed it was probably an accident. They needed to get rid of the fleet because they were the only things standing in the way of their conquering of Asia. And even though that sounds bad it was war. Plus the Americans had cut off their supplies meaning they had to do something. America was the first to interfere by threatening japan with retalliation if they didn’t stop their military campaign. Honestly, they didn’t do anything when Hitler was showing signs of power so why interfere when it’s the japanese who are doing it? America was supposed to be neutral but they were clearly showing a bias against the Japanese. All I’m saying is that America had just as much to do with japan hostility as japan did. And by the way, has anyone heard the term two wrongs don’t make a right? It’s common sense.
.
On April 17, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Whats done is done, we can no longer justify our past actions, whether they were good or bad. But we should never forget the events that scar our history, they helped make us who we are, but they are not what we are. If you live in the United States try taking a second to stop and think about what this country represents! What we fight for! and the people we fight for! the US is a place where free people can live in peace(obviously not totally) and I will die before I see my countrymen(no matter their origin) have their freedom threatened.
You talk of how the Japanese only targeted our military, killing thousands of our sailors and soldiers. But in reality those men who died at Pearl are the same innocent civilians as you and myself. What makes you a military target? clearly those men only became a target when they bonded together with others to fight for and protect our freedom. Would you fight for your freedom? If yes then would we not all be a military target? the only difference between myself and someone in our military is that they are trained, but I promise that when it comes down to it we would fight alongside each other for the same reasons.
Keep in mind we are not the only “innocent civilians” in the world that would fight for their country. The Japanese would have done the same thing as well. It is a tragedy that so many “innocent” Japanese had to die, not because they weren’t “military,” but because they never had a chance to stand up for themselves.
so answer me one question, first put yourselves in the shoes of someone there and tell me, what would you have done?
micke
On May 3, 2009 at 12:14 pm
just out of wondering… where did you get your sources. This is great information and i wanted to know where you got this info from.
hi
On May 4, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Japan was not so innocent as many people say they were. No one in war is a bad or good guy. For those who believe that Japan wasn’t as dirty as the Americans for bombing them, should look up Unit 731 and read about what they were planning to do.
Steve
On May 11, 2009 at 12:41 pm
You’re a brain-washed little twerp. There is no dispute that the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima were completely and totally unnecessary acts against a nation that was crying to surrender long before the incident.
Learn your history. You shame your nation.
Passerby
On January 11, 2010 at 10:41 pm
I am actually of Japanese Descent, and still agreed with the necessity of the bombing. I am actually doing this for my project in high school. I have done a lot of research, but for this particular answer, the answer here is quite shallow, and not detailed enough. But America is truly justified since they were pushed into forcing to drop the Atomic Bomb. But a few things first:
Japan was NOT a guinea pig for the bomb. It had already been tested numerous times in the desert.
Japan was in turmoil during the World War. Many high-ranked military leaders were against continuing, but Military Dictator Tojo refused to settle for unconditional surrender, and feverishly hoped to continue the war.
Even though the civilians were all for the war, they didn\’t know what was happening, if they were losing or winning the war.
Okay, now, Harry Truman, the president at the time, was under a lot of pressure. On one side, he had the American Public about to erupt from anger due to televised reports about Japanese cruelty in their POW camps. On the other, he had the invasion (yes, it is true) of Japan to worry about. The military had already planned an invasion of Japan, which would prove extremely costly to both sides. It would cost millions of dollars to mobilize an invasion (even larger than the D-day invasion) and even more costly by losing thousands of American and Japanese lives. So, it was either losing more troops on both sides, or killing millions of the enemy\’s civilians. It was an incredible moral decision, but I can understand Truman\’s intent. But there are arguments that can comprimise this statement, such as the US wanting to show off their nuclear power, and also force Stalin into submission with this show of massive destruction. But the bombing was NOT necessary for reasons as childish such as Japan being cruel to American troops, so we should return the favor. That is simply unfair, as how innocent Japanese civilians in the USA were treated terribly! My grandparents were sent to internment camps, where many ill-treated Japanese civilians died from harsh conditions. So dont go around saying that Japan deserved it.
David
On March 29, 2010 at 10:19 pm
More people were saved from dying because of the bombings. If an invasion commenced, many lives and a lot of money would be lost. The Japanese could have avoided it, but they chose to go to war. They attacked Pearl Harbor without warning and killed thousands. If they chose a more peaceful path all of the death and destruction could have been avoided. The true reason it was justified is because more lives would be saved and the suffering the Japanese faced while at war with the U.S. could finally end. It is better to cut out the cancer ( the war ) before it spreads.
Cody
On May 10, 2010 at 10:42 pm
What about the Millions of Chinese that the Japanese Raped and Murdered in the Asian Holocaust? But we don’t want to bring that up now do we. America was 100% right in doing what we we did. If I was a commander and looking at possible casualties 1-3 million verses 200,000 I take the 200,000 every time. Not to mention the fact that Japan had time to surrender in between the first bombing and the second one.
marissa
On December 8, 2010 at 5:01 pm
American fight for the money, that\\\’s all. No freedom, no need to help others. Is money that move this country. That is why they call the aircraft Necessary Evil. Is the best description, it was evil, but it was necessary. So far the actions are done by the American government, they will always come clean. Se the case of the Wikileaks founder, this just reminds me how the Muslim extremist were trying to kill the guy that wrote Satanic Versus.. Is the same thing. It is so bad what they have done, that they don\\\’t wanted out with the excuse that will hurt the soldiers.. yeah.. like we are idiots. Shame on you!
marissa
On December 8, 2010 at 5:01 pm
American fight for the money, that\\\\\\\’s all. No freedom, no need to help others. Is money that move this country. That is why they call the aircraft Necessary Evil. Is the best description, it was evil, but it was necessary. So far the actions are done by the American government, they will always come clean. Se the case of the Wikileaks founder, this just reminds me how the Muslim extremist were trying to kill the guy that wrote Satanic Versus.. Is the same thing. It is so bad what they have done, that they don\\\\\\\’t wanted out with the excuse that will hurt the soldiers.. yeah.. like we are idiots. Shame on you!
amanda
On January 24, 2011 at 7:34 pm
The sad irony is that the terms Japan wanted to surrender by ended up being the same as the ones put into place after the war.
Riam
On February 22, 2011 at 5:50 pm
Jesus Christ. The hate being spewed here makes me feel sick. I am ashamed of my species.
Lauren Bauman
On April 28, 2011 at 3:54 pm
i like popsickles
lauren bauman
On April 28, 2011 at 4:02 pm
im just really stupid and ignorant