Thread: Atomic Bomb: Good or Bad?

We were asked the very same question in my history class, it seems that the americans wanted to "test" there weapon on a heavily populated area so that why they set it off over hiroshima and nagasaki the government was trying to end the war the scientists were conducting tests. So i would say it was wrong to use the weapon on those cities but if the weapon wasnt used the war would probably continued for a long time and many of the countries that are free today may be part of japan.

short answers :

No the weapon shouldnt have been used on civilians

Yes the weapon should have been used to end the war

Can't we all just get along? lol. I mean humans are humans and we should not have to drop an A-Bomb on another set of humans to get them to stop the madness...but if that is the method which would reduce the number of people killed overall in the confortation then that is what should be done. The problem is that the after effects of the weapon, years of radiation contamination (and it isn't like Japan is that big an area anyway), can be worse then the direct result of the ending of a mass of lives. Just my thoughts.

If you think about it tha atomic bomb has given man the ability to blow themselves off the face of the earth....if the atomic bomb was never created we would not have already learned how to use nuclear bombs...but it was created and now we can destroy the world 100 times over.

Originally Posted by jaam0927

and dont take this the wrong way but u sound like civilian lifes r more important than soldiers lifes...

Well, this sentence makes it sound as though you think soldiers' lives are more important that civilian lives.

The point I was trying to make, is that soldiers chose to join the military, knowing that they could die. By using something like the A-bomb, you're attacking and killing civilians that never made that choice.

Without it, we wouldn't have MGS... I'm just kidding! OMG! I really am! I'm sorry! I DIDN'T MEAN TO OFFEND!!!

..... (even though the MGS series rocked the casbah)


...

...

Abu Dhabi says:
At the time where it happened... according to America's perspective, they didn't have much of an option.


I say:
..... also, don't forget that the ones who dropped the bomb committed suicide... the pilots had no idea they were holding that thing... just to say.

Originally Posted by LittleHobbit13

Well, this sentence makes it sound as though you think soldiers' lives are more important that civilian lives.

The point I was trying to make, is that soldiers chose to join the military, knowing that they could die. By using something like the A-bomb, you're attacking and killing civilians that never made that choice.

oh crap I forgort in the US u can choose to join the army... cuz in other countries its obligatory...
I was just trying to say that both are equaly important
here is an aproximate on the deaths during WW II:
military deaths/civilian deaths
US= 405000 / 2000
Great Britain= 271000 / 60600
Germany= 2850000 / 2300000
France= 210700 / 173300
USSR= 14500000 / 7000000
Poland= 850000 / 5778000
Italy= 279800 / 9300
China= 1324000 / 10000000
Japan= 1506000 / 300000

ok lets say the atomic bomb wasnt used, it would have reduced Japans cilivian deaths by like 200000, but that would have meant and increase in US, USSR and Great Britain military deaths, and practically the extermination of Japan's army(cuz they were figthing till the end).. which is a hell lot of more HUMAN lifes lost... and I guess during a war thats what u try to do reduce the HUMAN deaths.. which means military and civilian deaths together.....

Fair enough, but I still stand by my opinion that it shouldn't have been used.