Why was the dropping of the atomic bomb good?

Answer 1

This act is still in debate to this very day. Some people in the world said it had to be done while others considered it over-kill. Marcy Had the US NOT used the atomic bombs, it would have had to "pound" the mainland of Japan almost to extinction. The Japanese military command [primarily the army] was rabid about fighting to the "very end." They had the "ear" and trust of the Emperor, AND by years of carefully controlled Propaganda, had almost all of the civilian population also whipped into such a war frenzy that had the Allies invaded the mainland, they would have had to fight the people to the death, inch by inch, foot by foot across the entire island system. The people [men, women, and many of the children] were prepared to fight any "invaders" using anything at hand [garden tools, tool handles, stones, etc, etc.]. The bloodshed, death, and maiming would have been unbelievably inhumane. It has been suggested that in JUST "preparing" the Japanese mainland for an invasion, would have required weeks, possibly months, of around the clock heavy aerial bombing resulting in the deaths of millions of civilians, and millions more maimed. Then, an invasion itself would result in millions more Japanese casualties. On the Allied side, estimates of casualties from an invasion range from a million or two at "best case," with possibly several million at worst case. There appears to be only ONE good result of the use of the atomic bombs to facillitate the earliest surrender of Japan, and that is that the action resulted in the prevention of MULTIPLE millions of civilian AND military casualties [deaths and maimings], AT THE COST OF ONLY A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND CASUALTIES. Although this is horrorendously stomach turning to any civilized person, but on the other hand, was probably the most humane option.j3h.

Answer 2

At the end of World War II, few questioned Truman's decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Most Americans accepted the obvious reasoning: the atomic bombings brought the war to a more timely end. They did not have a problem with over one hundred thousand of the enemy being killed. After all, the Japanese attacked America, and not the other way around. In later years, however, many have begun to question the conventional wisdom of "Truman was saving lives," putting forth theories of their own. However, when one examines the issue with great attention to the results of the atomic bombings and compares these results with possible alternatives to using said bombs, the line between truth and fiction begins to clear. Truman's decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan was for the purpose of saving lives and ending the war quickly in order to prevent a disastrous land invasion.

Answer 3

It doesn't matter if you blow something as little as a hand grenade or something big like a nuclear bomb, it's not a good thing. Now, remember that the US was attacked in it's Hawaiian coast. So, there is the point. Some people stated that Japan has lost the war already but President Truman stated that the weapon will end the war and save people. It was more a revenge thing.

Answer 4

The expectation of the blast brought good results in casualties and maybe it might mean what you thing is good.

Answer 5

It ended the war and collapse Japan's means of making war.

Answer 6

Because it ended WWII.

Answer 7

No one has used it recently.

Answer 8

It brought an end to the war with Japan.