Dropping atomic bombs in uninhabited islands in Japan enough to show how horrible they were.?
but why America dropped in residantial areas was to perform experiments of how they damage living person's body. Am I wrong?
- Anonymous8 months ago
Maybe it's past news reflecting this answer, but wasn't nuclear warfare in this case utilized the "shock and awe" of such impact such a weapon can have in any war? Fear of who's going to understand such first. Nuclear warfare's impact to conflicts. Why are you not wondering why it took two nukes to get it done?
- 8 months ago
IT WAS TO END THE WAR THAT JAPAN STARTED WHEN THEY ATTACKED US ON A SUNDAY MORNING.
WE should have dropped a few more and completely wiped them out and took over the islands as spoils of war like they were trying to do everywhere they went in and invaded.
WE SHOULD have killed 10 of them for every American, Filipino, and any other Pacific islander chinese, etc, that they killed.
THEY STARTED THE WAR not us.
besides.. THE GOOOKS MURDERED MY GRANDFATHER AT PERALHARBOR... TELL ME WHY SHOULD I FORGIVE THEM FOR BEING SNEEKY AND ATTACKING AND STARTING A WAR ON A SUNDAY MORNING...
- Weasel McWeaselLv 78 months ago
it has been well documented, (and asked and answered countless times here) that the bombs were dropped , to stave off an even longer, prolonged, drawn out war, which would have decimated a generation on both sides, and perhaps dragged on for years more. literally fighting to the last man, if something decisive wasn't done.
Japan indeed kept swearing to fight to the LAST man. Even after the first one was dropped.......they did NOT surrender.....and so we used a second, to prove we had many more. Realizing they had no such counter measure........they would have faced utter annilhation if they did not immediately surrender.
and never forget........THEY started it, by bombing Pearl Harbor.
so don't cry, just because that sleeping dog you so viciously kicked............got up and chewed your butt off. And they were no angels before that...........their own war crimes throughout Asia, are legendary.........and sadistically BRUTAL.
- 8 months ago
wow my answers are already here
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- TedExLv 78 months ago
There was a side benefit to the bombing of these cities.
Shortly after WWII ended, the cold war began.
The Soviet Union had the bomb and threatened to nuke the United States. But they didn't . They knew we had he bomb, they knew how devastating the bomb was, and they also knew the United States would not hesitate to use it.
- USAFisnumber1Lv 78 months ago
We wanted to end the war. If we had dropped them on uninhabited islands they may have just thought we loaded it up with explosives. The way we did it, they saw ONE airplane drop ONE bomb. They saw it twice and knew we could keep doing it. They had ample opportunity to surrender before we dropped them and chose not to do it.
- MAD MAXLv 78 months ago
I'm building a Time Machine all bytches complaining about how America was cruel in dropping 2 A Bomb's will have their choice of fighting in 1 of 2 places!
Guadalcanal with the 1st Marine Division.
Okinawa with the U.S. Army's 7th ID.
- W.T. DoorLv 78 months ago
@ shiraz6537 You are very confused.
First, the Japanese Army murdered more people in Nanking over six weeks using rifles & bayonets than were killed in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, so you can stop with the faux-pious whining. Other war crimes were a hallmark of imperial Japan.
Second, had Japan not been forced to surrender through the use of the atomic bombs then an invasion would have been necessary. The USA estimated at least a million American casualties and more than 10 million Japanese casualties would have resulted from an invasion. The fighting would have also devastated Japan, likely making the islands at least short-term uninhabitable.
There was significant sentiment in the west for the dissolution of Japan.http://thinkexist.com/quotation/before_we-re_done_...
A "demonstration" would not have prompted Japan to surrender.
Had the USA incurred a million casualties invading the Japanese islands then I believe the Japan of today would not be inhabited by Japanese people.
- 8 months ago
The bomb was a devastating weapon, but, even so, it still took 2 cities to get the Japanese to surrender. Dropping it on an uninhabited area would not have worked. this was a nation who had vowed to fight to the last man. where soldiers - and civilians - would commit suicide rather than surrender. The decision to surrender could only come from the very top of the military/monarchy
The Japanese top brass had put some feelers out to Russia about a gradual surrender but it would have been a long drawn out affair and - apart from the fact that thousands of people were dying every day, it would have handed a large area over to communist control.
you are not just wrong, you are drawing simplistic, one sided opinions with little knowledge and a great deal of hindsight
- 8 months ago
They were dropped on military and industrial targets. The civilian casualties were incidental. Inexcusable, but incidental. That being said, the Japanese have no right to complain about the weapons being used, since they have yet to formally apologize or even acknowledge all of the war crimes they committed during the conflict (they've apologized for some, but even those apologies took nearly 70 years to get). They still feign indignation when anybody mentions the atrocities they committed. If they don't outright deny it, their attitude is, "Well, we apologized a few years ago, so what's the problem?"
I'm sorry it took the reality of nuclear destruction to make the Emperor see some sense, but it's not like he didn't have ample opportunities to sue for peace beforehand. You don't start fights with others and then complain when they soundly beat you, as though you're the one who was aggrieved.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Comfor...