User talk:Lubeeeeeeee

U.S. Should not have dropped Atomic bombs
THE UNITED STATES SHOULD NOT HAVE DROPPED ATOMIC BOMBS ON JAPAN AT THE END OF WWII.

Prop: A1: The U.S. did not need to resort to such destructive measures to win the war. Reasoning: Looking at the historical evidence, the U.S. was winning the war already. The U.S. did not need to use nuclear warfare – killing more than a hundred thousand people and wrecking the environment – to bring the war to an end. Evidence: The atomic bombs were not just over the top they were completely unnecessary. According to the ny times united States intelligence had long predicted that when the Soviet Union entered the war (planned for early August 1945), Japan would collapse. President Truman's misplaced diaries (discovered in 1978) record his agreement with this judgment. Truman's diary also confirms that he knew Japan was trying desperately to get out of the war by opening a negotiating channel through Moscow. Even the official strategic bombing survey concluded shortly after World War II that the atomic bombs were unnecessary: Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. Truman's advisers told him that surrender was likely if the United States let it be known Japan could keep its Emperor, a clarification the President told several top officials he had no fundamental objections to. According to the LA Times Japan was ready to surrender, bomb or no bomb, and President Truman's decision to destroy the two cities with nukes was more about showing off American power than bringing the war to a close. According to bbc The development of the bomb cost billions of dollars, and American leaders wanted to justify the expense. They wanted to demonstrate to the Japanese that they faced overwhelmingly superior forces. They also wanted their new rivals, the Soviet Union, to see their powerful new weapon in action. This is not a reason to bomb two cities and kill 300,000 people. We can see how ready Japan was to surrender and how unnecessary it was to bomb japan. Truman was aware of how desperate they were and still decided to drop the bombs. Truman claims that it would have cost more to invade japan but an invitation wasn't even necessary and he knew it. he used that to justify a power move.

A2: Dropping the A-bombs caused too much collateral damage. Reasoning: The use of atomic weapons decimated the environment, causing effects that will last centuries.. Evidence: Number of people killed after the war as the effects continued Environmental effects.

A3: The U.S. decision set a bad precedent for the rest of the world, as it raced to develop nuclear weapons to compete. Reasoning: We can’t moralize to nations who want to develop or use them. Breaking rules of war Evidence:

Opp A1: Drastic measures were needed to force Japan to surrender. Reasoning: 'The atomic bomb was a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war.' said Minister Hisatsune Sakomizu, Japanese chief cabinet secretary during World War Two and a member of the peace faction in the Japanese government.Hisatsune Sakomizu accepted that dropping the bomb was necessary as he believed the war was already lost and Japan would suffer by letting it continue.

Evidence: Number of Americans killed in WW2 total Number of genocides by Japan (in Asia); POW deaths Number of US soldiers that died in Pacific theatre in the war Casualties of Iwo Jima and Okinawa that were the immediate precedent to the decisions Estimate Truman had of expected casualties from a mainland assault

A2: The U.S. use of atomic bombs in World War II has deterred the use of nuclear weapons ever since. Reasoning: Without the use of nuclear weapons on Japan, no one would know the complete effects of nuclear warfare, and we might not be here today. Not used again since Evidence: Cold war: U.S. dropped bombs just as it started; deterred Soviets throughout the war Judge, there are at least seven countries besides the US that have been confirmed to have nuclear weapons. How many of those countries have ever used those weapons? NONE. Have led to international consensus on disarmament and containment

or

Hook: “The atomic bomb was a golden opportunity given by Heaven for Japan to end the war,” said Minister Hisatsune Sakomizu, Japanese chief cabinet secretary during WWII. He accepted that dropping the bomb was necessary, as he believed the war was already lost and Japan would suffer by letting it continue. Reasoning: By 1945, the U.S. had pushed back Japanese forces to the main islands of Japan, but the war still lingered. It was argued the war could last months or years longer, if the U.S. was to carry out a land invasion, and many more lives would be lost. In August 1945, the U.S. used the 1st atomic bomb against Hiroshima and the 2nd against Nagasaki 3 days later. The efficiency of these two bombings caused Japan to surrender shortly. As a result, many historians agree that the use of atomic bombs was necessary and justified to end World War II quickly, a positive because it ended the war that had killed TENS OF MILLIONS of people so far over the previous 5 years. A1: Dropping the atomic bomb meant fewer lives were lost. Reasoning: judge, Japan was nowhere close to surrendering. No matter how many of their soldiers and civilians were killed, they continued with their “no surrender” policy. The Japanese soldiers fought ruthlessly with no mind for the consequences. Dropping the atomic bomb forced them to surrender because there was nothing left for them to fight for. Many less soldiers on both sides were killed or wounded than if the U.S. had executed a ground invasion. Evidence:

(Atlantic) During a post-atomic bomb interrogation, a well-informed Japanese officer informed physicist Karl T Compton that during a land invasion, "We would have kept on fighting until all Japanese were killed, but we would not have been defeated," by which he meant that they would not have been disgraced by surrender. (The New Yorker) More than 100,000 people died during the firebombing of Tokyo in March 1945 than during the atomic bombing of Hiroshima- The fire bombing would have continued if not for the atomic bombs.

In the battle of Okinawa, 12,520 Americans were killed and 110,000 Japanese soldiers were killed. Up to 150,000 Okinawa citizens were also killed.The Battle of Iwo Jima lasted for five weeks. Almost all of the 21,000 Japanese soldiers on the island were killed, as were almost 7,000 US Marines. (history.com) Acc to the BBC, both Japanese prisoners and civilians were told to fight until they were killed or committed suicide. In the last, desperate months of the war, American troops advancing on Saipan saw mothers clutching their babies hurling themselves over the cliffs rather than be taken prisoner. Not only were there virtually no survivors of the 30,000 strong Japanese garrison on Saipan, two out of every three civilians - some 22,000 in all - also died. President Truman said, “Despite their heavy losses at Okinawa and the firebombing of Tokyo, the Japanese refused to surrender. The firebombing of Tokyo was one of the most terrible things that ever happened, and they didn't surrender after that, although Tokyo was almost completely destroyed.”

A2: Japan’s conduct called for drastic measures. Reasoning: Under the rule of Emperor Hirohito (hee-ro-hee-to), Japan was breaking the rules of war and the treaties they created and signed themselves, such as the Hague convention. They held innocent citizens of all nationalities in POW camps, intentionally organized the Rape of Nanking, and attempted to create biological warfare. Judge, Japan had been a bad actor throughout the war and continued to be one as the U.S. closed in on its mainland. You cannot focus on Japanese casualties without taking the big picture of their conduct into account! It was a bad regime that failed to honor the human rights of others and its own citizens. President Truman was fully justified in choosing to take the most expeditious route to regime change.

Evidence: According to a study about Japanese war crimes, Japanese air forces conducted chemical and biological attacks during the 2nd Sino-Japanese War and World War II, although the use of such weapons were prohibited by Japan’s own treaties, which banned "poison or poisoned weapons" in warfare. (University of Hawaii), 300,000 Korean and Chinese women died in the Rape of Nanking by Japan. In the Unit 731 Experimental Facilities, the Japanese experimented with chemical and biological warfare on humans, killing a total of 250,000 men, women, and children. Most of them were Chinese, South East Asian, Russian and Allied prisoners. During the Sook Ching Massacre in Singapore, Japan slaughtered 100,000 innocent people. (Time Magazine) Of the 27,000 Americans taken prisoner by the Japanese, a shocking 40% died in POW camps.

A3: The U.S. use of atomic bombs in World War II has deterred the use of nuclear weapons ever since. Reasoning: A Harvard Professor said he believed the massive destruction, contamination and humanitarian suffering from the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had an even broader impact by successfully deterring warring nations from using them again for nearly 75 years. "The world became aware of the terrible consequences and that was very significant. It is remarkable that in the 70 years since Hiroshima, nuclear weapons have never been used again,"  The development of nuclear weapons by other countries has created a natural balance, protecting countries from using them against each other, as evidenced by the last 75 years. Smaller nuclear weapons can be used conservatively today, without jeopardizing world safety. Evidence: (Britannica) In the decades since 1945, governments have negotiated arms control agreements such as the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty of 1963 and the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1968 to protect the world from nuclear destruction. (USA Today) Mutually Assured Destruction was a policy developed during the Kennedy administration in the 1960s in which both the U.S. and Soviet Union would be deterred from starting a nuclear war because of the knowledge that each side would be destroyed by the other. (The New Yorker) Smaller nuclear weapons can be used conservatively today, without jeopardizing world safety. The U.S. and other militaries have developed low-yield, “tactical” nuclear weapons that can be aimed at military targets, minimizing civilian casualties and limiting the scale of a nuclear war. ∭∭∭ℂ