The Lack of Time Between the 2nd Bomb Dropped on Nagasaki Was Against International Humanitarian Law

At its core IHL represents a balance between military necessity and humanitarian considerations in the context of conflict. Humanity, represents conflict to alleviate suffering and save lives, and to treat humanely and respectfully each individual. Military necessity is the justification of measures necessary to achieve a military goal. VIEWPOINT: The atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima AND Nagasaki were unnecessary for victory in World War II and were used primarily as a tool to impress and contain the Russians. World War II was characterized in technological warfare. The two bombs dropped were unnecessary and gratuitous displays of atomic power. They were not the only military option available to the Americans. The Japanese army already defeated, and US was waiting for Russia to declare war on Japan. General Dwight D. Eisenhower, who repeatedly was against using the atomic bomb because he knew that the Japanese were close to surrender and that it was unnecessary and excessive. After the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on 6 August, the Americans displayed inhuman impatience by not waiting longer to drop the second device, which was delivered on Nagasaki three days later. More than one hundred thousand Japanese perished, and thousands more were injured or poisoned with radiation. Argument 1: Use of the Bomb was Illegal In September 1938, the League of Nations, "under the recognized principles of international law," issued an unanimous resolution outlawing the intentional bombing of civilian populations, with special emphasis against bombing military objectives from the air. "Any attack on legitimate military objectives must be carried out in such a way that civilian populations in the neighborhood are not bombed through negligence." "The use of chemical or bacterial methods in the conduct of war is contrary to international law." In other words, a special category of illegal weapons had been recognized, a category today called Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) While all the bombs used at Pearl Harbor combined was equal to 3,533 pounds the two atomic bombs combined (Little Boy and Fat Man) were 20,500 pounds which is equal to SIX times greater than Pearl Harbor bombs. That just goes to show how much power these two bombs have. The ratio for the death toll was 90:1, that means for every 1 American dying in the Pearl Harbor attack, 90 Japanese died in the atomic bomb droppings. International Humanitarian Law (IHL), also known as the laws of war and the law of armed conflict, is the legal framework applicable to situations of armed conflict and occupation. As a set of rules and principles it aims, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. Fundamental to IHL are the following two principles: 1). The protection of persons who are not, or are no longer, participating in hostilities; and 2). The right of parties to an armed conflict to choose methods and means of warfare is not unlimited. Principle number two states that means of welfare is not unlimited. That means that certain methods, such as dropping atomic bombs, is uncalled for and unnecessary because the citizens of Nagasaki and Hiroshima could not have fended for themselves and did not know of an impending attack like this. Which is against IHL Law. As a said in earlier in my speech, the U.S did this horrific event only to impress the Russians and gain "friendship" with them. There were other military options available to Americans at the time. The two atomic bombs dropped were SIX times heavier and more powerful than the bombs used at Pearl Harbor. This proves that the bombings were excessive and unnecessary. Summarizing my argument up, it states that the bomb was illegal. The League of Nations stated, "The use of chemical or bacterial methods in the conduct of war is contrary to international law." In other words, a special category of illegal weapons had been recognized, a category today called Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Definition of WMD's: Weapons that can produce devastating results when delivered in a single strike. They include nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Section 921, the part that defines WMDs as destructive devices is where the law gets interesting. For purpose of a WMD, a destructive device is defined as a (i) bomb, (ii) grenade, (iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, (iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, (v) mine, or (vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses; or, any type of weapon (other than a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter. So the evidence above just goes to show that the bomb was illegal to International Humanitarian Law. With that I'm ready for my opponent to post his speech. Thank you