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

Viewpoint: The use of the atomic bombs in World War 2 was not only ethical, it saved many more lives than the use of Conventional weapons would have allowed for. In addition the reason there has, thus far, not been a World War 3 is the mere fact of their, and the later Nuclear weapon, existence and the full knowledge of the after impact. It is not fair to say that the atomic bombs of World War 2 were in any way different from the conventional bombing of the time. Nor is it correct to claim that International Humanitarian Law would have prevented their use, at the time. My Arguments: Tokyo which was bombed heavily over the course of the entire war suffered similar casualties in two separate bombing runs killing 225,000 [1], more than 100,000 in each. The Nagasaki Bombing killed 100,000 approximately, but we don't consider the bombings of Tokyo to be a violation of Humanitarian Law. [2] There also, at the time, was no direct prohibition of bombing cities in international law. [3] Since bombing cities wasn't prohibited, and since each atomic bombing did less damage than some conventional bombings, it stands to reason that this could not be viewed, at the time in any case, as a violation of International Humanitarian Law. Only through the use of an Ex Post Facto case, could you even attempt to apply it. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were military targets, not civilian ones. [4] Nagasaki was a major military seaport and manufacturing center for the Japanese Imperial Navy, Hiroshima a manufacturing center for the Imperial Army. The civilian populations in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima were warned on August 1, 1945 that their city was on the target list for a new weapon to be used via leaflet campaign which was carried out over all 33 target cities, in addition Radio Saipan was broadcasting another warning that included the description of the bomb as being the most powerful bomb ever created. [5], [6] Operation Downfall, the code for the invasion of mainland Japan, called for approximately 500,000 casualties US side alone, this is more casualties than both nuclear attacks, which accounted for 220,000 total dead. It becomes clear that the atomic weapons would have saved, at the very least, American lives, but beyond that the Japanese would have suffered more casualties themselves. [7] There were already reports of Japanese people committing suicide before the advancement of the US military, during the invasion of Saipan [8] where at least 1000 Japanese jumped from cliffs. There is a thought among modern people that Japan was already beaten, however the Japanese military was willing to fight to the last civilian in order to protect their emperor. [1] Beyond this, the war in Europe was over, and Russia was preparing to invade Japan, the atomic bombing prevented Japan from being split up like Germany was, and likely reduced the length of the cold war. As a last point of rather insignificant note, but still important, the realization of the possibilities of nuclear arms, a direct result of their use during World War 2, prevented another large war from happening, due to the fear of mutual destruction. [9] In conclusion, on balance, I find it hard to say that the atomic bombings of Japan were somehow in violation of IHL, or even immoral compared to other bombing methods and technologies. Bombings of the time were less precise than today and as a result caused large numbers of casualties among civilian populations. Since the Japanese military was unwilling to surrender, though the government was, it was necessary to impress upon the military of Japan that they could not win, and were hopelessly out matched. To say it is more moral to kill hundreds of thousands using one weapon, rather than another, is a dubious proposition. War by its very nature is immoral, the bomb that saves lives is preferable to the bomb that kills more and in this case the bomb that saved lives was the atomic bomb. Source [1] http://www.theatlantic.com... Source [2] https://en.wikipedia.org... Source [3] https://en.wikipedia.org... Source [4] http://ww2db.com... Source [5] http://www.damninteresting.com... Source [6] http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com... Source [7] https://en.wikipedia.org... Source [8] https://en.wikipedia.org... Source [9] http://historynewsnetwork.org...