Was it immoral to drop atomic bombs on Japan?

Christian Post ^ | 08/08/2020 | Richard Land

[kiryandil]

No.

Next question.

[Gysmo]

Nope.

[SaxxonWoods]

It was very moral. Saved many lives on both sides.

[airborne]

They started it and treated all non-Japanese as inferior.

War is hell.

Don't start nothin'- won't be nothin'!

[EnglishOnly]

Japan attacked us without warning.

The Atomic Bomb was our right to defend American Lives.

It did what it was suppose to do.

Screw with the Bull and you get the horn.

End of Story.
Good call President Truman.

[SkyDancer]

Nope, esp. the one dropped on Nagasaki which is where the torpedo’s were built that were used at Pearl Harbor. Karma.

[fso301]

[HangnJudge]

No
Ask the Chinese...
https://www.history.com/topics/japan/nanjing-massacre

[Tai_Chung]

No, but it was immoral from the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor considering we were not at war and the Japanese were talking peace.

[Alberta's Child]

Bump for later. These articles are usually simplistic, childish, and predicated on assumptions that don’t stand up to factual analysis or middle-school logic. This article was pretty much what I expected in that regard.

[joe fonebone]

I don’t care what all these words say.... My FIL was a first lieutenant on a ship headed for Japan.... He was to be in the first wave in the invasion... Then the bombs were dropped.... My ex wife and my children would not exist if not for the bombombs.. I cannot be convinced otherwise

[BluH2o]

I have a signed copy of the Paul Tibbets's Enola Gay book. Met him at an air show at Lunken airport in Cincinnati, Ohio. His book signing was well attended this was 9-11-04, he died a few years later. Every year around the anniversary of Hiroshima he would get a great deal of attention from the press asking questions along the line of did he have any regrets or second thoughts about dropping the first atomic bomb? He never waivered once in his response which was no, explaining that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought the war to an end quickly. Many more lives were saved than taken by ending the war abruptly.

[alloysteel]

The reason the bombs were available to be dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, was because they were not ready in time to drop them on Berlin.

After the two were dropped on Japan, the US had pretty much shot their wad for their nuclear arsenal. There was not enough material to make more for a while, at least several months.

[Renegade]

Nope!

[freedumb2003]

Did not need to read the article.

You can write a million words and the answer is always the same:

No.

[PAR35]

Nuking the two Japanese cities saved more Japanese lives than it did Americans. And also saved more Japs from living under a Stalinist dictatorship.

I did watch an interesting video last night about British plans to nuke Japan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XX9ptCNpik

[right way right]

No.
Every year with this crap....

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

Oh please God, not this now. Don’t tell me: Now we must pay reparations to Japan.

[trublu]

Only if you think it’s ok to sacrifice another 100k American soldiers and POWs. And besides, we didn’t nuke Tokyo.