The Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki where justifed actions.

On 1: That's not what I said, I said we didn't want to accept a conditional surrender and thus we ignored their willingness to surrender which has now gone uncontested and thus it must be extended. //Lewrockwell automatically displays it's bias by announcing that they are an anti-war and anti-state website while this source,// Yet you never contested my evidence... It is also evidence from another source, the book "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb" which isn't biased. But if you want here is another source that says the same thing. On cancer: Yes we did help clean up but the radiation is still causing effects today whereas we don't have soldiers getting cancer from it now. Also, the cancer affected even unborn children who had nothing to do with the war. It also affected children decades later thus showing that we had no regard for the long lasting effects and thus my argument here stands. Also, if you look through the source, most of the cancer was caused by tests to see how much radiation could be withstood so my opponent's claim makes no sense. On surrender: This shows that you are ignoring history and ignoring my evidence. They had troops ready for a land invasion after they saw that we were going to ignore their pleas to surrender. //Yes, we weren't allies immediately after the war ended, countries defeated and occupied are rarely supporters of their defeater and occupying army// This is what I am saying. Ultimately we ended up being allies but it did bread resentment as you agree with here. So saying this and then saying, well it doesn't matter because we're allies now, is ignoring reality. On Russia: Arguing that nuclear weapons are a detterent? Oy. I would like to but we are a little late into the debate. We can last round I guess? But here you never negated my claims that the quote (I believe) was from World War I and afterwards that acquired a new government and thus there is no evidence to suggest that this quote is relevant at all. But regardless, it is now obvious that my opponent doesn't understand what proliferation is and thus we extend my argument from last round. On the cold war: // The fact that the United States and the USSR had nuclear weapons did not have any major negative consequences.// Are you kidding?! This is what has sprouted all our modern day conflicts! The fact that we developed more weapons made other countries feel unsafe and thus they wanted to develop them. I am sorry but you are so incorrect here. My argument about proliferation still stands. Again, can you please source things properly? It makes it so much easier to check facts. //Overview and more regarding surrender\ " While publicly stating their intent to fight on to the bitter end, Japan's leaders at the Supreme Council for the Direction of the War (the "Big Six") were privately making entreaties to the neutral Soviet Union, to mediate peace on terms favorable to the Japanese."[1] "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, 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."[2] ""The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan." Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. "The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman."[2][3] "Japan was already defeated and dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary." Those are not the words of a latter-day revisionist historian or a leftist writer. They are certainly not the words of an America-hater. They are the words of Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe and future president of the United States. Eisenhower knew, as did the entire senior U.S. officer corps, that by mid 1945 Japan was defenseless."[4] A key thing regarding our knowledge of the surrender is thus: "As a result of the naked futility of their position, the Japanese had approached the Russians, seeking their help in brokering a peace to end the War. The U.S. had long before broken the Japanese codes and knew that these negotiations were under way, knew that the Japanese had for months been trying to find a way to surrender."[4] So as we can see, reports from top military officials, reporters and even future president Eisenhower all agree that surrender was immanent and the atomic bombs were not needed. I suggest you, and others to read through [4] and see what you make of it because it has a lot of good information but I simply do not have enough characters to copy it all down :P //Actual Overview\ As we can see, my argument about civilian casualties still stands because my opponent ignored the fact that the problems have persisted to this day and thus we have been killing people not even involved in the war decades later. Also, my opponent doesn't understand that proliferation is different than saying you will build nuclear bombs and/or testing them and my opponent has not refuted this at all. I have also throughly disproven the claim that a land invasion would have been necessary and thus I see no reason to vote Pro. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.ibiblio.org... [3] ^ Leahy, William D. (1950). I was there. New York. p. 441. [4] http://www.commondreams.org...