1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
katen-ka-za [31]
2 years ago
9

Was the united state correct 1945 when it became the first nation to use atomic weapons against japan to end world war 2 or was

it morally and ethically a wrong decision?????????
History
2 answers:
Dominik [7]2 years ago
8 0

Answer:

It was a morally wrong decision to drop the atomic bombs.

Explanation:

This is a heavily debated opinion-based question where you can go both ways. In my personal opinion, I personally argue that it was morally wrong for the US to use atomic weapons on Japan. Below is my reasoning.

1. Japan had already expressed the desire to surrender previous to the dropping of the atomic bombs, meaning that they were not a military necessity.

Prior to the dropping of the atomic bombs, Japan had already expressed the desire to surrender under the single condition that their emperor would not be harmed. (This was mainly due to cultural reasons that made the emperor a particularly important figure) Instead of accepting, the United States instead decided to fight for unconditional surrender. While they did achieve that in the end, they ended up not harming the emperor anyway, meaning that they could have just accepted Japan's surrender in my personal opinion. Moreover, this desire disproves the argument that the decision to drop the bomb was a military necessity and many contribute Japan's surrender more so to the Soviet invasion of Manchuria which meant Japan now had to fight a two-front war.

2. Atomic weapons are a form of indiscriminite killing.

Atomic weapons don't have eyes. They can't tell the difference between the military and civilians. Thousands of women and children were killed that had no involvement in the war. It is a war crime to intentionally target civilians, so why would atomic weapons be ethically acceptable? While the US did drop leaflets to warn civilians prior to the attacks, this act is not enough, and it cannot be expected for millions to flee thier homes.

3. The government may have been considering diplomatic reasons rather than solely ending the war.

If the US was really after a speedy end to the end of the war, there could have been many other ways to go about it. They could have continued to firebomb cities or accept conditional surrender. Some have argued that the diplomatic effects that came with it such as scaring the Soviets and proving US dominance were also in policymakers' minds. If the US had not been victorious in World War II, several important members of the government would have likely been tried as war criminals.

The Counter Argument:

Of course, there is also a qualified opposing view when it comes to this. It is perfectly valid to argue that the bomb was necessary for ending the war: as it is impossible to know the "what ifs" had history not happened the way it did. It is undeniable that the atomic bomb likely saved thousands of American lives if the war would have continued, and the war did ultimately come to an end a couple of days after the atomic bombs. There also is not enough evidence as to what exactly was the reason the Japanese unconditionally surrendered: it could have been Manchuria or the atomic bomb, both, or even other reasons entirely. Lastly, the general public did approve of the bombings at the time.

In recent years, the public have slowly become more critical of the bombings, although it remains a weighted moral debate.

Note: These are my personal views and this does explicitly represent the views of anyone else. Please let me know if you have any questions :)

Ksenya-84 [330]2 years ago
8 0

Answer:

i was morally and ethically a wrong decision

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Which state created "the first modern state police agency" in 1829?
AleksAgata [21]
The correct answer of the given question above about the first modern state police agency would be option A. PENNSYLVANNIA. The state that created the first modern state police agency in 1829 is Pennsylvannia. Hope this answer helps. Thank you for posting your question. 
3 0
3 years ago
During the late 1800's, the theories of Social Darwinism were often used to justfy the efforts of
adelina 88 [10]

could be wrong but i believe the answer is the theories of Social Darwinism were often used to justify the efforts of certain political, social, or economic views.

7 0
3 years ago
What was the diaspora
IrinaVladis [17]
The diaspora was the dispersion of jews among the gentiles after the babylonain Exile
8 0
3 years ago
What does the number "29" on the state of Florida represent?
murzikaleks [220]

Answer:

Explanation:

The answer is B

5 0
3 years ago
What sonar device let morse code messages be sent underwater from a submarine in 1915?
svet-max [94.6K]
The name of the device is the <span>Fessenden oscillator. It was made to allow submarines to communicate through Morse code. This way they could avoid communication being intercepted.</span>
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • In which decade did Parliament pass a law banning slavery in Britain and all of its colonies?
    15·1 answer
  • Why did the Dutch settle in New Netherlands? A. They were seeking religious freedom. B. They wanted to expand their empire. C. T
    13·2 answers
  • What is it please help !!!
    6·2 answers
  • What kind of government did the United States have before federalism?
    14·1 answer
  • Which of the following is not a priest
    8·1 answer
  • Why dose Mr. Wakatsuki burn the Japanese flag ?
    7·2 answers
  • Please help meeeeeeeee
    9·2 answers
  • Why did many archaeologists give up on exploring the KVS tomb?
    12·1 answer
  • The phrase slave know as little of their ages as horses know of theirs is an example of
    12·2 answers
  • What enabled the cities of Harappa<br>and Mohenjo Daro to flourish for<br>hundreds of years?​
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!