• well,alot of people died. some innocent,some some not..but i guess if it werent for us bombing small children in thier sleep...obama wouln't be in office and making EVERYBODY wet themselves...
  • It's not cruel. Filipinos were so abused by the japanese so they need to defend themselves. It is more cruel for the war officers if they don't defend their land.
  • Well shit... yeah but I have family that died in Pearl Harbor... bring it on...
  • It was cruel but necessary...We had to show our strength in order to convince the communist aggressor's that attacking the U.S. Pearl harbor to be more specific would not go unnoticed...If we had not done so, who knows what the world would look like today...
  • Welcome to war.
  • At the time, the Japanese military was abusing everyone they came into contact with. Civilians and military alike. They were warned, pleaded to, by many nations to stop. They chose not to. Are their civilians more precious than the Chinese civilians? Or the Filipinos? Australians? Americans? Burmese? Indonesian?
  • Many historians believe that there would have been far more Japanese civilian deaths if the US had not bombed Hiroshima since all of Japan would have had to be taken. As it was the Japanese surrendered shortly after the bombing. So perhaps 'cruel to be kind'.
  • Yes and no. To me, it was obviously awful (war crime.. completely illegal - I could list the reasons). A real tragedy. However, I believe more people died in Japan before Hiroshima under conventional warfare than they did because of the bomb. If the bomb had been used from the outset, lives would potentially have been saved, because no rational actor would have continued the war after that. Just as Japan didn't. Also, while you may be able to find some prudent justification for Hiroshima. I think that is impossible for Nagasaki. What should have happened, was a bomb dropped by the US - showing its capabilities - on an unpopulated area first. Allowing Japan the opportunity to conceed.
  • Yes, only because it was and is the most heinous of weapons so far devised by mankind. 70,000-100,000 men, WOMEN, and CHILDREN incinerated in a few seconds. The horror, the horror!!!!
  • Curiously, the US choose Nagasagi, Japans most Christian city (Roman Catholic). A cruel joke.
  • sure was never a great idea. the japanese did a lot of their own damage too though with pearl harbour and the australian invasion. so many innocent people died on both sides with those tradegies. two wrongs never make a right.
  • Yes it was, but it needed to be done, and it worked. :-)
  • Was the firebombing of German cities a cruel act? Were the Brits or Americans more cruel than the German's who bombed and fired V-2's on London and other cities? The bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed some one hundred thousand They ended the war. If the bombs had not existed and it had been necessary to assault and invade the mainland, the number of people who would have died is incalculable. The Japanese civilians were prepared to die to the last survivor. No it was not a cruel act. It actually saved millions of lives. It forced the Emperor to declare the end of hostilities, as no victory was possible. Without this, it is unknown how long the war might have continued.
  • Upwards of 70 million people were killed consequent to cruel acts of Japan and Germany during World War II...SEVENTY MILLION! Germany had already surrendered several months before the dropping of the A-Bombs...but Japan still refused, even after being warned of the power of this new weapon. We dropped the first bomb and called upon the Japanese government to surrender again. They well knew its capabilities and STILL refused. We waited three days before dropping the second bomb. We saved many Americans lives, and Japanese lives, as well, by not having to invade. It was the Japanese government that was cruel to its own people! Only after dropping the second bomb, did Japan finally...FINALLY...surrender, and that evil war came to its end. Then, the United States went about re-building both Japan, Germany and most of Eurpope that had been destroyed...unlike any victorious nation in history. If that's cruel, I must be missing something. +5
  • Cruel to the future of the entire world because it showed the effectiveness of nuclear warfare. Now look at the problems THAT has caused. The world will never be disarmed and nuclear attacks will always be a threat.
  • Yes yes it was. But if they don't like our answer, they shouldn't have asked the question.
  • I am glad your father got to go home instead.
  • All you are trying to do is downplay the Nazi Regime, because you are a socialist who wishes to disassimilate socialism from any past evils associated with it. Nazi's are socialists, Communists are Socialists, N. Korea is Socialist, Hugo Chavez is a Socialist, CUBA is Socialist and people in those places can't wait to get away from it.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy