The use of Atomic bombs on Japan was justified.

This has been a very fun and engaging discussion. Since my opponent began by addressing the alternatives I offered in round 2, I will begin by rebutting his responses. 1: Demonstrate the Power of the Bomb My opponent does not have a word to say on this, likely because it is an extremely reasonable alternative. I am mentioning it here to remind the readers that the argument was made and went unanswered, but I will not further the point. 2: Let Russia Handle It My argument on this matter was not that the USSR could have launched a full-fledged invasion of the Japanese islands, but that the mere threat of invasion would prompt a swift surrender. I presented evidence in the form of secret communications between high-ranking officials considering their options given that they had no chance to defeat the Soviet Union, and the established fact that Japan was already discussing terms of surrender with the Soviets. My opponent fails to address this evidence, which suggests the USSR would not have needed to invade Japan, nor the US drop the atomic bombs. As it happened, the Soviets fought very briefly with Japan in Manchuria before the surrender. Here are two more quotes from intercepted transmissions sent between Japanese diplomats in 1945: July 11: "make clear to Russia. .. We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying as a result of the war; we hope to terminate the war". July 12: "it is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war". (1) 3: Continue Conventional Bombing While bombing raids had been conducted for some time over Japan, with little results in terms of ending the war, it is likely the bombings would have ultimately led to surrender. The report on the necessity of the bombs in 1945 had this to say on the matter: “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) So, in other words, even without the other factors, including the Russian invasion, the constant US bombing raids would have brought Japan to its knees in a timely fashion, and would have resulted in fewer casualties and not required the complete annihilation of two major cities. Was Japan Willing to Surrender? I believe the evidence speaks for itself. Not only was Japan prepared to surrender, but were already in the process of doing so when the nuclear strikes occurred. I have cited the most notable war report on the bomb, quoted transmissions and statements from Japanese officials, and pointed out that Japan was already in peace-talks with Russia. In his closing argument, my opponent offered a quotation stating that the majority of Japan’s War Council would not consider unconditional surrender. I have two points to make on this. First, the War Council never voted to surrender (3), but instead submitted to the authority of the Emperor, who had the ultimate decision, and who desired peace months before the atomic bombs were used. Their opinions mattered, but it was once again their duty to refuse surrender (until the Emperor decided otherwise), and to show a brave face to the public. Secondly, while they were resistant to unconditional surrender, they were already discussion surrender on more favorable terms with the Soviets. The US never offered Japan anything but total submission. Had the States considered letting Japan keep their emperor, they likely would have surrendered even earlier. (4) The evidence clearly indicates that whatever impression they gave off on the world stage, Japan was a weak and defeated country which was looking for a good opportunity to give up the fight. The bombs were not necessary to make this happen. Was Japan Capable of Retaliation? As my opponent makes clear, the special forces of Japan were capable of, and had committed, many atrocities of a biological sort which often involved sick human experimentation. However, my claim is not that Japan would not be willing to attempt such an attack on the US mainland, but instead that they lacked the capability toward the end of the war. Such an assault would require Japan to assemble a large fleet of aircraft capable of penetrating deep into America’s airspace. It is hard to believe this could happen, given Japan lacked the resources to even intercept American bombers. (5) It is also hard to imagine a nation discussing peace terms would endanger their chance of survival by launching a risky attack, which would exact a minor amount of revenge but would also secure their total destruction. Japan was simply in no position to cause mass casualties, civilian or military. Final Conclusion To determine whether the use of the atomic bombs at the end of WWII was justified, we must consider the motivations, which in this case were clearly to bring about a quick surrender and end the war. The bombs did so, but at a completely unnecessary cost to human life and infrastructure. Japan was in preparing to capitulate due to a number of factors, and the 1956 report on the bombs indicates the surrender would have come well before the end of the year. Furthermore, the decision to use the bombs was made without the exploration of other possibilities, such as a demonstration of the bomb, the threat of Russian invasion, continued blockades and bombings, and offering terms to Japan other than “total annihilation”. Leading experts on Japan and influential American figures of the war, including its two greatest generals, Eisenhower and McArthur, opposed the use of the bombs, which they were never even consulted about. The decision to use the ultimate weapon was earnest but rushed. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not justified. One more time, I thank my opponent for initiating this debate. I thoroughly enjoyed it. (1) . http://www.doug-long.com... (2) . http://www.authentichistory.com... (3)(4) . https://en.wikipedia.org... (5) . http://www.history.com...