was the atomic bomb really necessary?...

[R_A_M_R_O_D]

It was either a nuclear bomb or the US and allied forces would have had to bomb the hell of out of Japan for a few years till they're will was broken.

Nuclear bomb sped up the process.

that's why i said tossup and didn't come to a definitive answer. when there are so many factors involved you will never come to an answer..its like debating abortion

[jmonty]

in a biography of general macarthur [amercan caesar] the author claims the japanese were willing to surrender prior to hiroshima/nagasaki if the US let them keep their emperor, which ended up happening anyways.

i'm of the opinion that it was necessary, but only because it kept the soviets in line, to a certain extent.

[Jester78]

pearl harbor was a bad idea

**** happens

[jmonty]

It was either a nuclear bomb or the US and allied forces would have had to bomb the hell of out of Japan for a few years till they're will was broken.

Nuclear bomb sped up the process.

hiroshima and nagasaki were about the only cities that weren't firebombed to the ground, and were being saved until the decision about the a-bomb was made.

[STFUandTRAIN]

How about it happened. Lets work on avoiding that **** from happening again.

[LVpump]

Maybe we should have sent them flowers and asked if they wanted to meet for a lunch date?

[mjnmj]

you seem to think there were options since your the one asking the question.

list them and we can debate them instead of asking an open ended question as such.

[RallySport]

Absolutely 100% necessary. Anyone who says no is a f*cking idiot.

They were NOT going to surrender until every single person on their island was dead, including children. If they didn't drop the bomb, millions more would be dead. But maybe im just biased since my grandfather (RIP) was told he'd be in the invasion force to take the main island of Japan if the bombs weren't dropped.

Also, if we didnt know the horrors from dropping the bomb (be thankful it was a sane country who dropped it) someone else would have eventually dropped one with potentially worse results.

[matiemcgee123]

Yes. Seen this topic 1000 of times. Yes YES YES YES YES.

100 times over. Anyone who thinks differently is less than 29 IQ

[DimondLight]

either the atomic bomb or have many times that number die in an invasion...I think I'll go with plan A

[Vinsanity15]

hmm good question, would've been awesome to watch in color. But did you guys hear some guy named Elvis is supposed to be on TV tonight?

[oneandonlydwt]

hiroshima and nagasaki were about the only cities that weren't firebombed to the ground, and were being saved until the decision about the a-bomb was made.

the firebombs were devestating and designed to destroy japanese morale both military and civies... if they didn't use the a-bomb the incindiaries would have done the job. my granpa lost 2 brothers fighting and surely would have lost another as he was prepping for another island invaision. a-bomb for ftw..

oddly enough my other grandpa was a "downwinder" in southern ut and has some health problems.

[ziggy5121]

Necessary to win the war? No.
Necessary to save tens of thousands of american lives? Yes.

[kratosbrah]

Hell fukin yeah they were necessary, and they were ****ing awesome too. The bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a bit too small though, America should have dropped a nuke the size of the Tsar Bomb on Japan, woulda FUKED EM UP SO FUKIN BAD.. DAMN that would've been awesome.

[BrbBowflexing]

Necessary? Necessary??

Is it necessary that I drink my own urine?? NO! but it's sterile and I like the taste.

[TotalGymFreak]

ITT:

Soon to be redneck american's arguing for the atomic bombs that killed more civilians than actual japanese soldiers even though a conventional invasion of Japan with superior equipment and support would somehow lead to more american casualties even though they entered the war 2 years later and still suffered more losses than britain and Japan was going to surrender anyway seeing as the Germans already got beat back to Berlin and surrendered leaving Japan without it's strongest ally and backed into a corner

[ilikesmonies]

yes

/thread

[AllProQB]

The argument basically was should our troops die from invading japan (who would fight to the very last man on home soil) or should a bunch of their citizens die. Yes they were innocent but this was the most cost efficient way to end the war.

[ilicet51]

No, to put it simply, it's easily the most evil decision in history.

[JeremyMaclin]

did the US really need to drop the atomic bombs in japan?.
was it really necessary?

war is fought on effectiveness and efficiency
not necessity

ITT:

Soon to be redneck american's arguing for the atomic bombs that killed more civilians than actual japanese soldiers even though a conventional invasion of Japan with superior equipment and support would somehow lead to more american casualties even though they entered the war 2 years later and still suffered more losses than britain and Japan was going to surrender anyway seeing as the Germans already got beat back to Berlin and surrendered leaving Japan without it's strongest ally and backed into a corner

1 American life > entire Japanese population

u mad breh?

[ricanmuscle]

Fkk yeah: Why do you think half the world is scurred of us?

[DimondLight]

No, to put it simply, it's easily the most evil decision in history.

lol wut

[kratosbrah]

No, to put it simply, it's easily the most evil decision in history.

You should read up about Nanking massacre..

[BrbBowflexing]

No, to put it simply, it's easily the most evil decision in history.

lol

[cs212]

ITT:

Soon to be redneck american's arguing for the atomic bombs that killed more civilians than actual japanese soldiers even though a conventional invasion of Japan with superior equipment and support would somehow lead to more american casualties even though they entered the war 2 years later and still suffered more losses than britain and Japan was going to surrender anyway seeing as the Germans already got beat back to Berlin and surrendered leaving Japan without it's strongest ally and backed into a corner

Do they teach you this **** in school?

lmao. Japan was not going to surrender. German and Japanese forces never really fought together.

Japan caused shenanigans in Asia, Germany caused shenanigans in Europe.

Civilians were killing themselves or being raped by japanese soldiers.

[MillerDecaXC]

first one was, 2nd one was absolutely unnecessary... /thread

[mjnmj]

No, to put it simply, it's easily the most evil decision in history.

well.. i think a lot of intelligent people sat around thinking of the consequences either way... and made a decision. It wasn't like things were all puppies and flowers at the time. They did what they thought best for our country.

[ilicet51]

You should read up about Nanking massacre..

As if I'm unaware? 200,000 v. a total of 500,000 up to this point. (Birth defects, initial blast, fall-out, etc.)

[MillerDecaXC]

ITT:

Soon to be redneck american's arguing for the atomic bombs that killed more civilians than actual japanese soldiers even though a conventional invasion of Japan with superior equipment and support would somehow lead to more american casualties even though they entered the war 2 years later and still suffered more losses than britain and Japan was going to surrender anyway seeing as the Germans already got beat back to Berlin and surrendered leaving Japan without it's strongest ally and backed into a corner

LOL wut? pearl harbor? they started it? also, kamikaze soldiers... they were killing themselves anyway, fuk it.

and if you knew anything about Japanese culture, (still the same today) you would know that they would never have surrendered until they were wiped out... which was gonna happen either way, so why not save 200,000 US lives?

[kratosbrah]

As if I'm unaware? 200,000 v. a total of 500,000 up to this point. (Birth defects, initial blast, fall-out, etc.)

The after effects of a nuclear bomb weren't really well studied or known, General MacArthur during the Korean war wanted to drop 10-15 nuclear bombs on China and then invade, not knowing that radiation would've killed Americans. In the 40s-50s they really didn't know too much about all of the after effects of a nuke.

And realize this, if Japan had the nukes before us, they would've dropped em on America. All out war isn't based off of whats right or wrong, morals and ethics, war is based off of WINNING. You do whatever it takes to win, raping, killing, destroying, anything to win. The smartest, most ruthless, most aggressive win.