Thread: Atomic Bomb: Good or Bad?

Ah yes, but then the question becomes "was it actually necessary?"

I hate the idea of us dropping those bombs, especially since they apparently almost cheated me out of my wonderful Japanese professor, who lived in the city they were trying to bomb (even though they missed both times).

I don't believe that wars should ever involve citizens in the way those bombs involved them. When you watch movies like Grave of the Fireflies and Barefoot Gen, you see just how bad the after effects were. My own personal opinion is that the US used the bombs to show off our potential power. I mean, the southern half of the Shikoku region is almost uninhabitied. If they had to drop it, why didn't they pick a less populated area? Japan may be crowded, but there are plenty of very rural areas.

The A-bomb was a mistake, and should never have been used.

Also:

Originally Posted by jaam0927

the basic idea was to show Japan what would an Atomic bomb do... but they realiced that Japan wouldn surrender so there was no choice left that to use it....

That's not a good reason, and there's always another opinion.

Originally Posted by LittleHobbit13

Ah yes, but then the question becomes "was it actually necessary?"

I hate the idea of us dropping those bombs, especially since they apparently almost cheated me out of my wonderful Japanese professor, who lived in the city they were trying to bomb (even though they missed both times).

I don't believe that wars should ever involve citizens in the way those bombs involved them. When you watch movies like Grave of the Fireflies and Barefoot Gen, you see just how bad the after effects were. My own personal opinion is that the US used the bombs to show off our potential power. I mean, the southern half of the Shikoku region is almost uninhabitied. If they had to drop it, why didn't they pick a less populated area? Japan may be crowded, but there are plenty of very rural areas.

The A-bomb was a mistake, and should never have been used.

Also:
That's not a good reason, and there's always another opinion.

I mean that the idea was to take some Japanese officials to an Atomic bomb test in a deserted area... and with that the japanese would get scared and surrender(in fact for me that was a really good idea, I dont know why didnt they use that)
and for the citizens... until what point should the citizenst be let out of the war..... in some towns after the japanese army have retreated..... the citizens still kept fighting.....

I don't think trading lives of some people for others is very justifiable so no I don't agree with the atomic bomb..

The Atom Bomb was never right to use as those were innocent lives lost. Soldiers died because they expected to die for their country. But it is because the US that families who survived the attack now suffer and their relatives, descendants suffer the after effects. Had it been on a militiary base, we might have accepted it because it was on soldiers.

Ok lets look at this myself and some other person has a fight and it is going to last a long time because neither him nor me is willing to admit defeat now do i kick him in the Crown jules and walk away the victor or do i keep on fighting.
The crown jules is my target and that is the same that Truman thought and he walk away the victor right and out of that alot of good things spread forth Yes alot of inocent ppl died but there is always inocent ppl that dies doesn't matter what the war is all about.

So yeah a person in charge of a country has make a decision and that is what was chosen.Quick ending.

i think it a bad thing because the atomic bomb killed thousands of people in world war 2, but i stopped the world war and USA won for the atomic bomb.

Next time USA shouldn't use the atomic bomb, but it's a waste of money and it takes a long time to make.

YES! it finished off the japanese and many less american lives were lost. sure it killed a lot a japanese, but i'd rather be alive than dead anyday.