0
What else can I help you with?
What three natural rights did Locke argue that all people possess?
To be born free, equal and independent.
What was W E B DuBois Exhibit of American Negroes?
To fight the racist idea that Africans were primitive
How has the church bombing in Birmingham affected the US today?
We argue about black and whites
Should the US be praised or criticized by history for the drastic measures it used to end world war 2?
The United States' use of drastic measures, including atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, has sparked significant debate among historians. While some argue these actions were necessary to expedite Japan's surrender and ultimately save lives by avoiding a protracted invasion, others criticize the moral implications and the devastating humanitarian consequences. Ultimately, history may reflect a complex view, recognizing the dilemma of wartime decisions while also condemning the unprecedented destruction caused. The legacy of these actions continues to influence discussions on military ethics and international relations.
What was the purpose of du bois's exhibition of American negroes?
To argue against negative ideas.
Why do people still argue about the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan?
Some say that Truman wanted to send a message to the Soviet Union - Apex
What do many people still argue about the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan in 1945?
The attacks ended the war, but killed many civilians and alarmed the Soviet Union. ~ apex
Why did people still argue the decision to drop atomic bombs on japan in 1945?
People continue to argue the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan in 1945 due to ethical concerns about the immense civilian casualties and suffering it caused. Critics argue that Japan was already on the verge of surrender, suggesting that the bombings were unnecessary for achieving victory. Additionally, the long-term effects of radiation and the precedent set for nuclear warfare raise moral questions about the justification of such actions. These debates reflect broader discussions about wartime ethics and the consequences of using weapons of mass destruction.
Should Truman have used the atomic bomb to end the war?
The decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan has been widely debated. Proponents argue it was necessary to end World War II swiftly and save lives by avoiding a potentially devastating invasion of Japan. Critics contend that the bombings caused unnecessary suffering and that Japan was already on the verge of surrender. Ultimately, the justification for its use hinges on weighing the immediate military objectives against the ethical implications of such a devastating weapon.
What country does bonsai originate from?
The general opinion is that it originated in Japan although some people argue it started in China then Japan.
Was the use of the atomic bomb justifiable at the time it was dropped in world war 2?
Some people think it was, others argue that it was not.
Was the atomic bomb justified and needed to end world war 2?
The justification for using the atomic bomb to end World War II remains a contentious debate. Proponents argue that it was necessary to hasten Japan's surrender and avoid a costly invasion, potentially saving countless lives on both sides. Critics contend that Japan was already on the verge of surrender and that the bombings caused unnecessary civilian suffering. Ultimately, the decision reflects the complex interplay of military strategy, ethics, and the geopolitical landscape of the time.
What occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan in 1945?
That's the easiest question ever... Of course the Atomic bombs were dropped, ending the war with Japan. But some argue the second bomb wasn't needed. America didn't give Japan a chance to surrender after the first bomb, because the second was dropped within days of the first.
How did historians judge Truman's this decision?
Historians have offered varied interpretations of President Truman's decision to use atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Some argue it was a necessary action to swiftly end World War II and save lives by avoiding a costly invasion of Japan. Others criticize it as an unnecessary display of power that caused immense civilian suffering and set a troubling precedent for nuclear warfare. Overall, the decision remains a contentious topic, reflecting broader debates about military ethics and the nature of wartime leadership.
According to J. Samuel Walker what was the consensus among scholars regarding the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan?
According to J. Samuel Walker, the consensus among scholars is that the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan was not necessary to secure a swift end to World War II. Many historians argue that Japan was already on the verge of surrender and that other factors, such as the Soviet Union's entry into the war against Japan, would have led to Japan's capitulation without the use of atomic weapons. Walker emphasizes the ongoing debate about the moral implications and strategic decisions surrounding the bombings. Overall, there is a growing recognition that the bomb's use was more about demonstrating power than achieving military necessity.
Who argue against the use of the atomic bombs state that?
Millions will die and the earth will be destroyed.
Those who argue against the use of the atomic bombs state that?
Millions will die and the earth will be destroyed.
