You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.
Mr. Sturr's Atomic Bomb Debate
Mr. Sturr's Atomic Bomb Debate -- U.S. History
Option 1: Make this a time for peace. Japan is defeated. Don't use the bomb.
Option 2: Act responsibly. Demonstate the power of the bomb. If Japan doesn't surrender, they are the immoral ones. We must lead by example.
Option 3: Push ahead to final victory. Fascism must end. Too many American lives have been lost. The bomb will save American lives.
Grading Scale:
A: Student has clear claim and provides facts and evidence in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student speaks almost exclusively from fact than from opinion. Student is effective at creating more debate with their counterclaim and rebuttals. Student consistently speaks with outside independent research. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.
B: Student has clear claim and provides facts and evidence in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student speaks more from fact than from opinion. Student is effective at creating more debate with their counterclaim and rebuttals. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.
C: Student has clear claim and provides opinion in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student speaks more from opinion than from facts. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.
F: Student has clear claim and provides only opinion in counterclaims and rebuttals. Student tone and language is appropriate and respectful.
i disagree with Blanca because if the USA bombs japan then you have other country's fearing there lives and wanting to have their own bomb for example the Soviets had their own bomb in 1949 and others were working on their own.
but other country's like the CCCP/USSR would have eventually came across weapon of mass destruction anyway so i think we helped them find a way to make one sooner than they would've have but the bomb was the only way to stop a war like this.
true, but what happened to the many people in Hawaii that were caught in the middle of pearl harbor that didn't deserve to be treated badly ? they had no conscience when they provided an act of war that was completely unexpected. so due to that the bomb was justified because like it said in page 1 of option 3 packet "this is not a time for guilty conscience"
I agree with him because they shouldn't kill the innocent people because they didn't do any type of harm to us Americans
according to combined British and American report , "although individual Japanese are willingly to sacrifice them selves in the nation as a whole is not predisposed toward national suicide."
many would have never surrendered due to there Bushido code and would have left America with slight war causalities when we could have just ended it with not one military personal getting harmed
If Japan's militarist officials have not given up their insane war by now. A atomic bomb will not convince them to surrender. The Japanese are hard headed and will fight for what they believe is right! Peace don't always settle arguments, sometime is takes two country's to lose people to see the wrong and what they should of have done.
Why create peace if they would probably had done something in secret for example they would make a secret plan to fight back without us being prepared for whatever comes our way
The atomic bomb was not necessary only a demonstration of what the atomic bomb could would of made Japan give up since they would know they had no chance to stop it. Memorandum from the Committee of Social and Political Implications states "In the past science has been able to provide also new methods of protection against new weapon's of aggression it made possible, but it cannot promise such promise such efficient protection against the destructive use of nuclear power."
I agree, but killing is not always the best choice! Yes at the time its the only one we saw, but no body actually sat down and discussed this with one an other.
I say it was a great idea to bomb the Japanese because it makes them surrender without many deaths of Americans. Americans in Japan were being tortured in Japan by starvation and Americans wanted to end the war without alot of Americans dead, but the Japanese said they will fight to the death and do suicide mission to keep their emperor in the same position, it would be easier to bomb them.
The bombing of japan was unessescary because if the US was able to demonstrate the devastation of the atomic bomb, the power will make japan and the world know the strength of the bomb, making japan surrender due to the warning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i disagree with you due the the fact that scaring them leaves complications like the possibility of them striking us when were least expecting or the many casualties we might face sending our troops into an unpredictable country
The responsibility for a new ERA we should demonstrate a bomb near one of their island and say we have another one and you know the distraction now so you should surrender. " Ever since I have been in touch with this program I have had a feeling that before the bomb is actually use against Japan that Japan should have some preliminary warning for say 2 or 3 days in advance of use."
(source: Memorandum from Undersecretary of the Navy Ralph Brad, June 27,1945)
why would they be intimidated ? dropping it on a deserted island is a sign of weakness ! it shows great hesitation in the power we as a military hold, it also prevents the great trouble we would go through having to sending millions in japan to assure there surrender because like it said in the option 3 packet, "using the atomic bomb on Japanese cities helps prevent further American causalities" and thats exactly what it did. not one more American had to die for the war they had started.
Just because they killed does not mean we need to scoop down to their level and do worse than we do! We are proving to them that we are monsters and you just gave them what they wanted
I am not in your class but i personally agree with option #3 because it is the most effective and concise way to win the war. Also it shows the world what we will do to fascism if we find it.
i dissagre with you, because the japanese could still keep fighting and they wouldnt give up because the bushido code states that they will not surrender and rather die
The atomic bombing of Japan was necessary because that will take the us to a final victory because that will stop many other counties to continue war. Based on the article Historical Record, President Roosevel said "No compromise can end this conflict.... only total victory can reward the champions of tolerance and decency and freedom and faith."
What good will that do, there will be many people killed and they're not even involved with this situation of the conflict between the U.S and the Japanese
This is true, for example, thousands of Korean workers (who were taken from Korea to build the Japanese war machine) died in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
i think it was kinda of good thing they were helping to build weapons of mastdetruction so we did what we had to do to stop them from hurting any more Americans
exactly us bombing them not only ended the war but took away there source of military production !! this isnt a argument through text based evidence but through common sense, those workers were apart of the weapons that helped killed many americans. although they were forced to work for them it was a loose end that got tooken care of
Where is your text based evidence? You can't prove that they will continue war after the bombing? Based on the Report of the Scientific Panel to the Interim Committee, "We can propose no technical demonstration likely to bring an end to the war; we see no acceptable alternative to direct military use".
i disagree its showing weakness they killed alot of Americans and were tring to be friends after they realize they are done for. Forexample its like tring to be friends with man who slept with ur wife.
why waste a perfectly good bomb on land no one is at ? thats not what it was built for, and the united states has won many wars without hesitation and have done what it takes to protect the many people in OUR country .... it also prevents anymore attacks such as pearl harbor.
I agree with this as it says "The United States should demonstrate the power of the atomic bomb to the world by staging an explosion on a deserted island in the Pacific"
For example, in the packet " Option 2: Responsibility For A New Era - From the Historical Record" in paragraph 7 its states, " The bomb is actually used against Japan that Japan should have some preliminary warning for say two or three days in advance of use" because the bomb should be a warning before it being actually bombed on a Japan and give them a certain amount of time to surrender with out killing lives or any type of conditions.
option1: I disagree with you the reason is because by you guys showing the atomic bomb on the japanese its just not going to help them surrender its just going to start a war. "Japanese are willing to sacrifice themselves in the service of the nation, we dounbt that the nation as whole is prediposed toward national sucide".
but through out history much peace has been brought, but does that peace ever last ? i have not heard one piece of history were to militias sub due to peace and it last very long, so to end this we did the right thing by bombing them because like it said in option 3 'victory over fascism and militarism has not been achieved through hesitation"
Droping the atomic bomb on japan was the only effective way to end the war. The japanese are fearless diehards who will stop at nothing, they were crashing there fighter planes into our ships to try to sink us they only care to win the war no matter what the cost.
The quickest way to end the war was to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, which is what made it necessary. As President Roosevelt had stated, "No compromise can end [this] conflict... Only total victory can reward the champions of tolerance and decency and freedom and faith." Or like in the best selling book, Until They Eat Stones, said,
"[The Japanese] will continue the war until every man-perhaps every women and child- lies face downward on the battlefield..."
I choose option 1 because there should just be peace with all people and just deactivate the atomic bomb to stop the disease from spreading to the people around them, which can cause life and birth defects for the long term of their life's.
I agree with your claim because if their is no need to use the atomic bomb then you shouldn't use it. Notes taken at a meeting of the Interim Committee state "The neutron effect of the explosion would be dangerous to life for a radius of at least two-thirds of a mile."
I choose option 1 because there should just be peace with all people and just deactivate the atomic bomb to stop the disease from spreading to the people around them, which can cause life and birth defects for the long term of their life's.
according to president Truman,(japan) "she has against her not only the Anglo Americans forces but the rising forces of china and the ominous threat of Russia."
I disagree because not all the time will there be peace if both side can see eye to eye! How can peace come people that only see anger and try to fight? "Immediate use of the bomb convinced the world of its horror and prevented future use and nuclear stock plies were for larger." The danger the bombs brought scared a lot of citizens in both countries knowing the damage! People feared the greatly.
if the US sends American soldiers to japan then 1.5 million people will die ,but if we bomb japan then those lives will be saved.americans wanted to end the war with minimal lossof american lives
i disagee with its because i the article also states that ''the best atmosphere for achievement of an international agreement could be achieved if america could say to the world, ''you see that sort of weapon we we had but did not use.''
I disagree because Japan brought the war to American shores, and U.S. leaders insisted that they were fighting to repel aggression, preserve freedom, and champion the dignity and rights of the individual.
I agree because that's why we took the bomb on a desserted Island so that the Japan can know how bad the bomb is and how serioous we are about ending the war.
Okay let's say we test the Little Boy. Now we just wasted billions of dollars we spent to make it. & wha tif it doesn't stop the Japs? Even if we show what we are capable of doesn't mean it'll scare them. Maybe it could of caused them to try something bigger?
But we have the best sciensists that descovered the secret in using the atomic bomb therefore we're the only ones who know the secret behing the pwerful weapon. "In the past science has been able to provide also new methods of protection against new weapons of aggresion it made possible."
the world in its present state of moral advancement compared with its technical development would be eventually at the mercy of such a weapon. stated by Henry Stimson to president Trumen
But how about all the innocent people they are killing in our country? Do we have to forget them? According to the Army Air Force publication in July 1945, "The entire population of Japan is a proper military target.... THERE ARE NO CIVILIANS IN JAPAN. We are making war and making making it in the all-out fashion which saves Americans lives, shortens the agony which War is, ans seeks to bring about an enduring peace.
Thats'w why we can scare them so Japan can stop doing what their doing to our Country because they know that we are serious about the use of the atomic bomb and how bad it can effect their Country. From the historical Record in the Memorandum, also know as the Franck Report, "The Neutron effect of the explosion would be dangerous to life for a radius of at least two-thirds of a mile."
Why should you prevent them and make the war worst? According to the Interim Committee, "If a bomb were exploded in Japan with previous notice, the Japanese air power is still adequate to give serious interference.... The operation would be far from routine. If during the final adjustment of the bomb the Japanese defenders should attack. a faulty move might easily result in some kind of failure.
i agree because then this would scare them ! and we wouldnt spend all this money on making the bombs and killing soooo many people when they can just surrender.
The Japanese wouldnt have hesitated to hurt the Americans so why should we worry about them? They had many Americans being tortchured in Japan, the war needed to end before the Soviet Union came after us.
like it says in the option 3 packet "using atomic bomb against and enemy city is the only way to deliver the correct message" and it not only delivers the message to the Japanese but to the rest of the world that we will take no hesitation to do whatever it takes to bring a victorious outcome and win wars.
I agree with Lexi because even though they might be killing our innocent people, we will kill twic as more with the atomic bomb that will be released if they don't surrender and they continue to try and fight.
The atomic bombing was necessary because japan would never surender unless forced too and the atomic bomb did it's job by scaring japan into surrendering.
I disagree with this because in The Potsdam Declaration it states "[We] have conferred & agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end this war." I believe that by this they mean that we should give them a look of what we have & that will make them realize that we have much greater power & they will surrender & this will end the war.
the radiotion of the bomb would spread multiple miles. this would cause the japanese to quit because of the long term affects happening to the civilians
The Atomic bombing was necessary because they gave chances to Japan and Japan didn't want to surrender so that's why they did what they had to do so Japan could surrender.
The atomic bomb was Necessary because it showed the Japanese that we are capable of doing what was Needed to be done. Also because it showed that we are Not afraid of anything.
Not only that we are not afraid,but we don't want to kill innocent people that had nothing to do with this that's why we are giving them the options to surrender or just bomb them
but how is that showing leadership or responsibility? the visual effect of an atomic bombing would be tremendous, stated in my article by Dr. Oppenheimer.
i agree with Manny due to the fact that it was a surprise attack that caused unexpected causalities. and for that specific reason the atomic bomb is justified because like it said in option 3 packet "it is far to late for negotiations"
how would we scare them? For example demonstrating the atomic bomb wont make Japan surrended but it will make them more angry and try to make atomic bombs too.
'' our leadership in the war and in the development of this weapon has placed a certain moral responsibility upon us which we cannot shirk without very serious responsibility for any disaster to civilization which it would further.''
In all honesty there should be no reason for bombing, we need to find a way for there to be peace between countries without causing pain.This is because it has been said that had the united States allowed the Japanese to keep their emperor the Japanese would have surrendered much earlier, as early as June 1945 when the Japanese offered a conditional Russian and Italian intermediaries? Also that if the emperor kept this position the Japanese would surrender which no bomb needed.
For example, in the paragraph "Option 2: Take Responsibility for a New Era" it stated, "The atomic bomb must be used as a force to end war and strengthen the peace." because of this the bomb will end the war, yet create peace.
i desagree with this because no matter how much lives we save we still need to show them that we are serious about using the atomic bomb to end the war without killing the innocents
Another example would be from the paragraph "Option 2: Take Responsibility for a New Era" it says, "By demonstrating the atomic bomb, we can begin the process of constructing a post war based on peace and respect for human rights."
our leadership in the war and in the development of this weapon has placed a certain moral responsibility upon us which we cannot shrink without very serious responsibility for any disaster to civilization which it would further. - Henry Stimson to president Truman
option 1: Its better just to not scared the japenese and just try to make peace with them and try to get to an agreement with them, so that both countries will be satisfied with what they want.
I support this because nothing really good comes out of war. Yeah one team has the satisfaction of winning with what they want but it could affect other people "Tragic bombing has already rendered million homeless"
But if we dont do anything about the soilders then they are not going to give up and keep fighting.But if we scare them into surrendering we could win And save the innocent people.
The only way Japanese are going to surrender is if they get what they want. TBE: This may include a constitutional monarch under the present dynasty if the eace loving nations can be convinced of the genuine determination of such a government to follow policys of peace".
i disagree with that because the U.S didn't use it yet they only scared them but if it comes to the point where they aren't compromising with us then they will use it and it will be based off japans actions.
in my defiance we only warned them and it's based off there actions for the U.S to fight back and ricks life's when they could had just listen to the U.S
Even though you only warned them they want to keep there country and if the u.s wants to bomb the japenese its just going to destroy some cities. So its going to cost the us money. TBE "Sea blokade and cumlative davestating wought by strategic bombing which has destroyed from 25 to 50 percent of the built up area."
okay but if they want to keep their country they would just give up knowing that they're not going to win, and yeah it will cost the U.S money but it Also cause japan to lose incense and not do their job on protecting them.TBE: Frank Report-->America could say to the world"You see that sort of weapon we had but did not use."
I disagree Rosa because if the Japenese doesnt get what they want they will still fight against the u.s. TBE: "Japenese are willing to scarifice themselves in the service of the nation".
this time should be spent making peace because the Japanese are close to surrendering and it's wrong to cause harm on civilians who haven't done anything.
"japan has no allies. Her navy is nearly destroyed and she is vulnerable to a surface and underwater blockade which can deprive her of sufficient food and supplies for her population" -Henry Stimson
I disagree with your claim because they shouldn't dis activate atomic bombs because if a country bombs another country with bombs they have nothing to protect them with.
According to the secretary of war Henry Stimson, he said, "It is extremely probable hat the future may see at time when such a weapon may be constructed in secret and used suddenly with devastating power by willful nation or group against an unsuspecting nation..."
the atomic bomb was unnecessary because if the Japanese would have saw that they didn't have a chance against the U.S. but the Japanese decided to keep on attacking the U.S.
"The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as our objectives have been accomplished there has been established a peacefully inclined, responsible government of a character representative of the Japanese people."(from assistant secretary of state Joseph)
the attomic bombing wouldn't have been nessesary because the Japanese would probably prefer national survival, even through surrender, to virtual extinction.
the attomic bombing wouldn't have been nessesary because the Japanese would probably prefer national survival, even through surrender, to virtual extinction
Millions Oh People Are Homeless That Had Been Destroyed. 25 To 50 &#xOf; The Built-up Area Of Japan's Most Important Cities. (Option 1 , Report From Combined British-Americans)
The United States should bomb the Japanese so they could just get it over with and win the war. " No compromise can end conflict.... only total victory can reward the champions of tolerance and decency and freedom and faith."
Paola and David the Japanese would've surrendered if you try to do something to their Emperor. TBE: "To avoid these conditions, if possible, and, in any event ,to ensure the survival of the institution of the Emperor, the Japanese might well be willing to withdraw from all the territory they have seized."
Japanese As A Nation Have A Strong Concept Of National Survival Regardless Of The fate Of Individuals. (Option 1, Report From Combined British-Americans)
my final opinion is option 1:Make this a time for peace because if we throw a bomb at the Japanese they will get mad and the war will still continue to go on but if we talk it out with the Japanese then their will be no more war.
The bombing shouldn't be necessary because of all or the innocent civilian casualties and the collateral damage of the Japanese & American forces. The damage an and destruction would be tremendous to the target and the surrounding area;Therefore it should be used as safety per-caution/last resort for war.
i believe that the atomic bombs use was justified in the fact that we ended the war as well as stating our dominance as a country to the rest of the world.
The Atomic Bomb was necessary on the attack of Japan because their attack of Pearl Harbor and also because they refused to surrender.
For example, "This Atomic Bomb attack upon Japan will be used as a force to strengthen peace " secondary source. Also another example 'It is probable that the future may see a time when such a weapon may be constructed in secret and used suddenly...with devastating power by a willful nation or a group against an unsuspected nation."
we can always make the Japanese back down with a demonstration of an atomic bomb in a deserted place to prove all the damages that can be caused. "The atomic bomb must be used as a force to end the war and strengthen the peace" (Ending the war against Japan). The U.S wants to end war!!
The United States should push ahead to final victory because the Japanese started the war by bombing pearl harbor and we should end it bye scaring them with the weapons that we have
"We can propose no technical demonstration likely to bring an end to the war;we see no acceptable alternative to direct military use"(Report of the Scientific panel to the Interim Committe,June 1945)
"As the defenders of democracy and freedom,we must remain strong and confident in our convictions."(Ending the war Aginst Japan Science,Morality,and the Atomic Bomb)
Not only are we taking responsibility for the wrong that we have done. Are are not judging the Japanese, we are looking at the wrongs on both sides! "Bring the war to an end through a demonstration of the atomic bomb will save the lives of thousands of American troops without lowering our international stature." We may not of have started the was but because we fought back it started the war!
If the U.S drops the atomic bomb on the Japanese, the U.S will damage and kill all innocent people that caused no crime. Instead the U.S can make a treaty with the Japanese in order for them to surrender. "The neutron effect of the explosion would be dangerous to life for a radius of at least two- thirds of a mile" (notes taken at a meeting of the Interim committee, May 31,1945).
My opinion on this debate is that it's better to show what the atomic bomb is capable to do than kill Innocent people who haven't done anything to America when it's also wrong to destroy their homeland and everything they've worked for. Mamorandum from Undersecretary of the Navy Ralph Bard states "Before the bomb is actually used against Japan, Japan should have some premilimary warning."
Take responsibility for a new era because both option 1 and option 2 are not suitable to put a stop to the war.The atomic bomb must be used as a force to end the war and strengthen the peace.
I disagree because when dropping the atomic bomb there can be consequences against the innocent Japan people that have committed no crime, and all children that have no blame for what other Japan people have caused!!
Only demonstrating the atomic bomb will truly make japan surrender. for example bringing the war to an end through a demonstration of the atomic bomb will save thousands of American troops without lowering our international structure.
I disagree because the Japanese wouldn't stop fighting if we didn't put a stop to the war for example "Any other method to secure peace will likely result in huge number of Americans casualties,as the Japanese army and even its citizens will continue to fight barbarically,with the aim of killing as many Americans as possible before they themselves are killed"(Ending the War,Against Japan:Science,Morality,and the Atomic Bomb)So their for killing them before they can get to us would save more Americans
Opinion: it is better to show what the atomic bomb can do than kill innocent people who haven't done anything to america and destroy their homeland when it isn't fair.
"Before the bomb is actually used against Japan that should have some preliminary warning."
I say that no matter how much lives we save we still need to show that we are serious about using the atomic bomb to end the war without killing the innocents
i choice option 1 because there should there just be peace with all people and just deactivate Atomic bombs to stop the disease from spreading to the people around where the bomb landed. I personally think that if we do not exclude a constitutional monarch under her[Japan] present dynasty, it would substantially add to the chance of acceptance. (President Truman)
The performance of the Atomic Bomb will cause the world to be a better place because it'll cause countries to want to stay to themselves causing countries not to go to war because the fear of the Atomic bomb will cause other countries not want to fight back .
For example, "Japan has no allies .Her navy is nearly destroyed and she is vulnerable to a surface and underwater blockage which can deprive her of sufficient and supplies for her population
I agree and to add the japanese held americans prisoners of war in Japan starving them to death. Some had even been tortured and others exectued publicaly.
I disagree with your claim because were defending our country and citizens , because if the Japanese think its justified to bomb Pearl Harbor they'll think its okay to invade the U.S. So the U.S needs to fight back so the Japanese will know what they did wasn't moral and because protecting our country.
For example, "Our leadership in the war and in the development of this weapon has placed a certain moral responsibility which we can no shrink." (Henry stimson)
I disagree with you because you r saying that you want revenge back against the Japan, but have you thought about the consequences? The children? what effects will occur?? for example Dr. Oppenheimer said, " that the visual effect of an atomic bombing would be tremendous." This atomic bomb is huge!!! And a lot of damage can happen to all the Japanese people that have committed no crime, but to take care of their families.
Good point, Reina. We have a sheet that details the exact costs of the Manhattan Project and each bomb. Use it to find the text-based-evidence to prove it.
i disagree with you because if they were willing to start Pearl Harbor for no reason knowing that our military is most advance than the Japanese were ignorant enough to start a war with the U.S.
For example, "The occupying forces of the allies shall be withdrawn from Japan..."
