Are you sure you want to delete this answer? Yes Sorry, something has gone wrong.
I believe that the bombings were necessary for an American victory and the alternative would have been worse in the end. I trust that everyone reading this understands the event in question and that no definitions need to be posted.
Main points Round 3: I am eager to start this debate and look forward to a challenger. Report this Argument Con I would actually like to define some words, but because you said no, I will concede to that. Clear cut facts need to be laid out and that is how I believe the round should be looked at, which is whoever provides the best argument through facts.
On top of that, the Neg side must show that its alternative would have been better in the end based on specific factors.
I look towards debating this topic and I wish you the best of luck. In the next round, I will lay out my case once my opponent has done so, and in the third round, we may argue each others case. Report this Argument Pro I regret that you did not get to define what you wanted but appreciate that you respected the initial request.
I also am thankful for the chance to engage in this debate.
Downfall was an American plan to invade and occupy Japan. This invasion would have been long, expensive and bloody for both the United States and the Empire of Japan.
The plans, planned ahead to January ofsix months later than the war actually lasted August, This extension of the war would have expended countless resources for both sides.
Example of resources planned: The Assault Force, 5th Fleet, had 26 carriers, plus 8 detached from Strike force for the invasion period, 13 slow battleships, 20 cruisers, DD, DE, and support ships for a total of warships.
Troops and their equipment were to come from the Philippines and Marianas in 1, transports. All combat troops were from the Pacific theater ; none redeployed from Europe. Kamikazes -- 2, army planes and 2, navy planes. Baku - suicide missile carried by a bomber.
Mini-subs, each with 2 torpedoes, were building. Fleet submarines -- rearm the 57 remaining that had been dedicated to re supply of outposts. Kaiten - suicide torpedoes with a 20 mile range. Shinyo - suicide motorboats.- The Atomic Bomb Controversy August 6, the atomic bomb was first used in combat as it was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan.
The raw explosive power of the weapon was displayed. Within a few days, another bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, Japan.
On August 6, , an American bomber dropped one atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima, Japan. Fanatically resisting Japanese still did not surrender.
|Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia||Here is a summary of arguments on both sides: Why the bomb was needed or justified:|
|Debate Argument: Dropping the Atomic bomb on hiroshima and nagasaki was wrong. | regardbouddhiste.com||Are you sure you want to delete this answer?|
On August 9, a second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. Jan 01, · I need to do an essay on the arguments for and against the atomic bomb. I already have some for against, but I am having trouble finding some in favor of the regardbouddhiste.com: Resolved.
The dropping of the atomic bomb was a reasonable reaction to the atrocities, including the bombing of Pearl Harbor, committed by Japan to many countries. A man named Marine Corporal E.C Nightingale was on the USS Arizona when the Japanese attacked.
Dropping the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima Words | 5 Pages Dropping of the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima With the closing of the Second World War at hand, Harry S.
Truman represented the United States in Potsdam Germany to decide the fate of a post war world. The dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan was thus perpetuated for the wrong reasons according to the Revisionists. (Ferrell, ) However, as has been highlighted, the atomic bombs were initially constructed to counter a possible growing German/Nazi threat.