The use of Atomic bombs on Japan was justified.

"B: Let the Russians Handle It" Russian intervening would've resulted in even more causalities from both atomic bombs combined. "C: Bomb Japan Into Submission" Bombing Japan into submission takes time. They weren't willing to accept the surrender terms offered to them even after one atomic bomb how much bombing, deaths, suffering would the government have tolerated before accepting the Potsdam Declaration? The issue is Japan was willing to surrender but not willing to accept the Potsdam Declaration, they actually wanted to negotiate surrender terms after being responsible for such heinous acts. Let's look at the situation with a metaphor: Let's just say a serial killer goes on a killing spree murdering dozens of people just to rob them of their wallet. The serial killer is surrounded by law enforcement but still poses a threat as they have hostages (the Japanese people.) Law enforcement lays out surrender terms but the serial killer denies trying to hold out a siege to obtain a more favorable surrender term. If the siege continues hostages are bound to die but the serial killer only saw the hostages as expendable objects to obtain his goal. Law enforcement decides to shoot the serial killer in the arm (atomic bomb), even then the serial killer refuses to surrender and tries to use his other arm to retrieve his weapon. He is then shot in the other arm and finally surrenders. That is the situation the Japanese government was in. Japan was willing to surrender but not on the terms laid out to them therefore making their desire of surrender irrelevant. It would be like wanting to sign a contract but not actually signing it. I have provided proof of japan unwilling to surrender: "After the Hiroshima attack, a faction of Japan"s supreme war council favored acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration, but the majority resisted unconditional surrender. On August 8, Japan"s desperate situation took another turn for the worse when the USSR declared war against Japan. The next day, Soviet forces attacked in Manchuria, rapidly overwhelming Japanese positions there, and a second U.S. atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese coastal city of Nagasaki. Just before midnight on August 9, Japanese Emperor Hirohito convened the supreme war council. After a long, emotional debate, he backed a proposal by Prime Minister Suzuki in which Japan would accept the Potsdam Declaration "with the understanding that said Declaration does not compromise any demand that prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as the sovereign ruler." The council obeyed Hirohito"s acceptance of peace, and on August 10 the message was relayed to the United States." As shown above the war council was unwilling to surrender, if Emperor Hirohito was so bent on surrender why didn't he intervene the supreme war council about surrendering after Hiroshima? Why did he wait till Nagasaki to intervene? My issue is if Japan's plans were so far-fetched why were they so willing to commit war crimes to test their biological warfare capabilities? Just to test their biological and chemical warfare capabilities unit 731 caused the following deaths "During the war, the Japanese Imperial Army used biological weapons developed and manufactured by Unit 731's laboratory in Harbin throughout China, killing or injuring an estimated 300,000 people." Their activties included "2.1Vivisection 2.2Germ warfare attacks 2.3Frostbite testing 2.4Syphilis 2.5Rape and forced pregnancy 2.6Weapon testing" on humans. "Thousands of men, women and children interred at prisoner of war camps, including U.S. POWs,[ were subjected to vivisection, often without anesthesia and usually ending with the death of the victim. Vivisections were performed on prisoners after infecting them with various diseases." If their idea was so far fetched why were they committing these atrocities? Think about it, if you were responsible for these atrocities and many others would you actually try to negotiate for favorable terms of surrenders? Actually the mastermind behind Pearl harbor himself believed in the following "Despite worsening Japanese-American relations (especially in light of Japan"s alliance with Germany and Italy), Yamamoto initially opposed war with the U.S., mostly out of fear that a prolonged conflict would go badly for Japan. But once the government of Prime Minister Tojo Hideki decided on war, Yamamoto argued that only a surprise attack aimed at crippling U.S. naval forces in the Pacific had any hope of victory. He also predicted that if war with America lasted more than one year, Japan would lose." He himself was against war with the US. He also said the following ""I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."" ""If we are ordered to do it," Yamamoto had answered, "then I can guarantee to put up a tough fight for the first six months, but I have absolutely no confidence as to what would happen if it went on for two or three years."" "It is inherently false. Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in a wrong-headed attempt to prevent the US from joining the war, not to encourage it." Think about it, if I was to sucker punch your kid how would you respond? Do you truly think you wouldn't respond to that? "Japan saw the US as weak and believed one decisive strike would keep the US uninvolved. Japan"s attack on the naval base was in no way designed to pull the US into the conflict." If they saw the US as weak they ignored the facts and the capabilities the US had. " Japan"s attack on the naval base was in no way designed to pull the US into the conflict." I can say I want to rob my neighbors at gunpoint and take their home from them, does that mean I can say I have no intention of hurting them? Parts of the Japanese government may have believed that but the mastermind of Pearl Harbor did not. "To overturn my arguments, my opponent must demonstrate that Japan would not have surrendered without the atomic bombs, " I have never stated Japan would not have surrendered without the atomic bomb(s), that's not what our argument is about either. Instead I've provided proof above that Japan was irrational, arrogant and unwilling to accept the Potsdam Declaration without being forced to by drastic measures. I've proven why the Atomic bomb was justified as alternatives would've prolonged the war causing even more causalities. I stand by my justification as the Atomic bomb helped prevent further and more bloodshed. Source: http://www.history.com... http://www.unit731.org... http://www.outsidethebeltway.com... http://www.history.com...