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
VLD [36.1K]
3 years ago
8

One of the most controversial turning points in history was the decision made by U.S president Harry S. Thurman to use atomic we

apons on japan the lone remaining Axis power at the conclusion of world war 11 in your opinion was the decision to drop atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a military necessity? If not was It justifiable for a reason other than military necessity ?
History
2 answers:
Lelechka [254]3 years ago
8 0
Yes this was necessary because the Japanese had showed they would not surrender even if it meant full lose of military soldiers. Other justifiable reasons would be that the U.S. had already lost many lives to the war and it would not a good move to keep sending soldiers in to lose their lives when they could just drop the atomic bomb.
irina [24]3 years ago
5 0
Dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not a military necessity because from other reports, the Japanese were about to surrender anyway. It was justifiable because we were scared and we acted because we were threatened.
You might be interested in
What was the Iron Curtain?
Reika [66]

Answer:

b. It was the Communist nations of Eastern Europe.

Explanation:

it separated the communist nations, but it was just a name not a physial thing.

3 0
3 years ago
Perjuangan apa yg dialami oleh pangeran diponegoro
muminat
<span>What struggle experienced by prince Diponegoro? is that what you said?</span>
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The war Asoka fought with the Kingdom of Kalinga resulted in
mina [271]
B. <span>his acceptance of Buddhism </span>
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The ancient power structures fortified into independent units of strength were called _
NikAS [45]

Answer:

Hi myself Shrushtee

Explanation:

The ancient power structures fortified into independent units of strength were called: fortresses city-states barracks assemblies. The ancient power structures fortified into independent units of strength were called city-states.

please mark me as brainleist

7 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why does james madison argue fo rthe separation for powers in the federalist papers
Anon25 [30]
I don't know if you still need this but the answer is: To avoid an absolute, oppressive government.
4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Did state chartering of banks in early america make deposits secure
    14·1 answer
  • In the late 1800s, where did most European immigrants live in the United States?
    10·1 answer
  • The term due process appears in which two constitutional amendments
    9·1 answer
  • In the ancient kingdom of mali and in the roman republic an important feature of life was the development of
    6·1 answer
  • One of the major hardships faced by the confederacy during the war was
    6·1 answer
  • The gold that miners in the Sahel traded for salt was _____.
    5·2 answers
  • What is a good organizing topic for the post–Civil War era?
    7·1 answer
  • Smallpox weakened the Aztec and Inca Empires
    8·1 answer
  • What effected Jimmy carter's presidency
    7·1 answer
  • Which regions did charlemagne but not rule
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!