the atomic bombings of japan were morally justifiable

The pro stated quote on quote "con acts as if we can't value an american life over a japanese. " The fact is simple-We can't. The fact that the pro would say this, shows that the pro has no regard for anyone other countries lives other than his/her own (American). The complete and utter disregard for human rights shown in this sentence shocks and amazes us as it is a clear violation of the Bill of Rights. The pro also stated "it's not about winning or losing, it's about minimizing the number of deaths. if our enemy wasn't going to kill everyone, it may have been better to just surrender to him as then we have fewer lives lost. " We believe we never said anything about winning or losing the war as America had already won the war as the atomic bomb was overkill. We were just looking for another way to win that involves less death and destruction. The way that the pro interpreted this sentence shows that they do not care about the death toll in the war. For the Japanese situation, it would be better to survive and surrender than fight without chance such as use of ships and planes(as the Allied forces had destroyed them all) and get annihilated. We also found that the similarities between the situation of the use of the Atomic Bomb and the situation the Pro gave us are few. The situation the Pro gave was "if a couple robbers break into your house and threaten to kill your mom, it's well within your rights and proportional to kill them both if you can. they were out of line and were going to do wrong. " Other than the fact that robbers would not logically break into a house and finding people inside, capture and threaten to kill them, this situation is highly impractical and unnecessary as there is a very small connection between these 2 events. War is nothing like this situation as war is more chaotic than someone threataning to kill someone else. To make this situation more like the situation, it would go more like this-Some muggers(Japanese solders/government) hurt your friend(Pearl Harbor). As retaliation, you(American government/solders) decide to take the muggers to court (the war) but after a good amount of time, to end the case, you attack the mugger's friend(Japanese civilians) and hurt them with a gun(atomic bomb). To stop the assault on their friend, the muggers surrender and let you win. That is more like what happened as the Japanese government attacked Pearl Harbor and instead of striking them, the United States attack the citizens. If the pro says that our points are "ridiculous", we believe that the pro should read these points yet again as the first 2 points (1-The bomb dropping was overkill as Japan was already on the verge of losing. 2-The US broke numerous international laws. ) are known facts and the 3rd one (The bombing was a waste of time, resources and lives. ) is a common belief and a legitimate opinion. The pro states "con says the japanese did nothing to us, but it's well established that they bombed us at pearl harbor. con might have specualtion that says otherwise, but that's all it is, well documented evidence v speculation. " I believe that the pro did not read our points correctly, as we did not say the Japanese did nothing to us, but the Japanese citizens did nothing to us. It was the Japanese government and soldiers that attacked us yet we attacked the citizens. The pro quote on quote says "con asks how are one american lost to500 proportional. what value does he give? are we to rest on the ridculous stuff about not about what's right or what hapepns but what outcome results in teh fewest lives lost? i cant see that being so and question if con really believes it, so how much? " In fact, we did give a proportion and if the pro side actually took the time to read over our statements properly, they would find that we gave them equal values so the proportion we gave them would be 1 to 1. And unless everyone here is the bloodthirsty person the pro is, as they do not want to take the outcome with the least deaths but in fact, consider that the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese civilians to be right. The pro side also seems to refuse the fact that there are other people in the world that have different perspectives from them as they say " i cant see that being so and question if con really believes it, so how much? " "i showed that in okinawa we lost over 70000 lives. one atomic bomb cased abotu the same death. so that's proportional. that we had to do another one only shows that they wouldn't surrender. how is it better to do another okinawa when we could use a bomb, hwne it's their lives proportioally lost instead of ours? " Because of how half of 225,000 (112,500) is not close to 70,000 (which is a difference of 42,500) the bomb droppings caused roughly 60% more death than the battle of Okinawa. Due to how the battle of Okinawa was before the atomic bomb droppings, and before we had destroyed all of the Japanese aircraft and ships, the evidence of surrender could not possibly be shown due to the fact of it being too early to show surrender in the first place. Another quote by the pro side says "also,if you take con's logic, the bombs could have reduced the overall deaths. con says over 100k japs died in okinawa. well, if we kept doing battles like that, the numbers could have gone well beyond what happened with the bombs. if both side isn't clearly winning or losing, it could lead to that. with a bomb, it shows that there's no way they are going to win. " Well, because of our position (pushed up to Japan) and the inability of the Japanese to fight back due to their planes and ships being destroyed, there would not be another battle like Okinawa. The way the pro side casually calls the Japanese the term "japs" (which is a racial slur) shows they do not care in the slightest for the well-being of other civilians if they are not American. "if both side isn't clearly winning or losing, it could lead to that. with a bomb, it shows that there's no way they are going to win. " However, the thing is, that the Americans were winning. We had destroyed all their military equipment and were pushed up to the island of Japan. They had no way of receiving help as there was no one to receive help from. The bomb was overkill as at this point in the war, the Americans had already won due to the Japanese being unable to fight back.