History they teach in schools is wrong

And you can tell by how different high school history books are if you compare books from various countries right now in 2021

I find it f***ed up that they didn’t even target military installations or royal buildings they just let em drop on civilian areas. All those innocent people dead for what

They could’ve asked them to chill out

informative tiktok here vm.tiktok.com/ZMexTN5b2

changed my stance

I now dont think the us should have dropped the bombs

I can see why they did, and it did work for them, but that's the pragmatic side. On the moral side, nah

I suppose you could make the argument that a japan with Soviet influence would have been worse for the world in the long run if uoure an anti communist, but we are then entering hypothetical

japan shouldnt have bombed us dafuq

yes we should because they bombed us first

Would like to know what people from countries that were ruled by imperial japan think about this

Only americans think dropping literal nukes on civilians is ever justifiable dine

What could Japan have done instead of attacking Pearl Harbor? People are forgetting the US was provoked to join the war, that's what Japan wanted so that's what they got

Literally everything. You cant justify the use of nuclear weapons and everyone involved in the bombing will burn in hell.

Bombing militar bases =/= nuking civilians

the japanese attacked us unjustifiably and killed civilians. are you okay with the japanese killing civilians out of nowhere?

japan attacked us out of nowhere and killed civilians the fact you are defending an attack against your own people is despicable

Im not american, and how are you comparing bombing a military base to using the only nukes humanity has ever used to kill people who had nothing to do with the war? It was unnecessary, if they wanted to retaliate they should've gone eye for an eye bombing japanese military bases

so is it okay for japan to randomly bomb a military base in your country?

If you attack and kill american soldiers and civilians we 100% have the right to attack you back 🤷‍♂️

bombing civilian targets was seen as a legitimate strategy in ww2 and was carried out by both sides so i dont know why ppl wanna focus on the us so much for dropping nukes. was it f***ed up yeah but war itself is f***ed up, and if any other country developed nukes during the war and had the opportunity to use them best believed they would have used them too. if you wanna focus on casualties and destruction you're better off focusing on the firebombing of tokyo which killed more people than any other singular bombing event in ww2.

Never have high expectations of people in here but defending nuking civilians is a new level.

"Hurr durr well eye for an eye!"

You have the brain of a literal child.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't the only cities bombed during the war. The US destroyed almost all the major Japanese cities, reduced their industries to rubble, and had killed almost almost half a million civillians already at that point. By the time that the US bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima, they were literally running out of cities to bomb. The nukes weren't weren't much more destructive than the average air raid, hell you could argue they were less destructive in some ways because the damage isn't as spread out. They already knew the US was fine bombing civillians and they knew what nukes were. They didn't surrender the day of Hiroshima, they didn't surrender the day of Nagasaki. But nobody in the Supreme Council thought they could still win the war by Summer 1945, their focus was trying to end it in a way that didn't leave them signing an unconditional surrender. They wanted to keep their system of government, and maybe keep some of their overseas territories.

They had two options:

1. Convince neutral Russia to mediate a peace treaty with the Rationale that neither of them would allow the other to have too much influence in Japan, and in that way they could keep some Autonomy

2. Inflict enough casualties on an American invasion that the US would give them a better surrender deal.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima didn't close either of these options. They barely talked about them between the days of the bombing and the surrender. The Supreme Council was still talking about getting Stalin involved on August 8th. What threw everything out the window was Russia declaring war on Japan the next day then reaching Hokkaido. Japanese intelligence services didn't think the Americans would invade the mainland for months, and they definetely didn't think Russia be there in a couple days. So not only had they lost their options but now they're on a timer.

The decision to claim that Japan surrendered because of Hiroshima/Nagasaki just served way more political narratives than "Japan surrendered because it couldn't fight both the US and Russia."

So no, the US didn't "need" to slaughter a quarter million civillians. Nobody ever needs to. @op

In both cases civilians weren't the ones making that decision, how dense are you.
And don't bother replying if those are the kind of arguments you gonna use, go debate your mum.

Necessary evil

Japanese would've never surrendered if it wasn't for the atomic bombs

Read a book

Read a book about what? What could've happened?

The reality is that we dropped the bombs and they surrendered which ended the war 👍

Read up on what the Japanese Imperial Army did to the Chinese. Japan back then was ruthless