Nuclear weapons are the most critical technology ever developed. In Japan, which suffered nuclear holocaust in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there is a deep desire for nuclear ending that derives from its personal experience of the terrible harm caused by nuclear weapons. In fact, more than 95% of the dead at Nagasaki and Hiroshima were civilians. Only 4.4% of the death charge was made up of military workers. In the New York Times September 5, 1945, the dishonesty was that the victims had suffered no radiation damage. The bombs killed as many as 80,000 people in Nagasaki and 140,000 people in Hiroshima by the end on end of 1945, with approximately half of those deaths happening on the days of the bombings. No family would like to suffer and see people suffering because of the nuclear weapons being used. Innocent parents, kids, babies, and many others die on the streets because of the nuclear weapons being used for a futile reason. There are better ways to settle things rather than make an easy way out for them. Bombing each other won’t make a difference except the deaths of hundred innocent people. If people want to settle things they need to talk face-to-face not hurt others that don’t even know what’s happening in the world, leave those innocent people alone and go kill each other somewhere else. If people really think violence is the answer than they are wrong because there are many legends that made a difference in this world without violence like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, ect. In fact, violence merely increases hate The U.S dropped the bomb on Hiroshima because they wanted to end the war. In Japan it was shameful to surrender, so they did not think invading would do any good. Plus they wanted to minimize U.S casualties. Yet this does not seem to be enough to make up a successful argument for “a world free of nuclear weapons”. Nuclear ending, in difference, tends to be small within the type of weapons linked to general safety. It is not seen as an honest and global human issue. To succeed, the nuclear removal group must be brought into a wider field of people’s thinking. However, there is a remarkable difference between instruments limiting nuclear weapons and those regarding other classes of weaponry. We also need to fully clear how the world today is unclear by the habit of gun worldwide relations, the most well-known example of which has been the threat to use nuclear weapons.
The point is that the atomic bombs and a U.S invasion were both unnecessary to end WWII. With no navy, no air force, getting beaten by the Chinese, and their people starving, Japan was basically defeated by 1945. From a military point of view, the atomic bombs were simply unjustified and not needed to end the war and get a Japanese surrender. Unless you have the same opinion with war crimes and disagree with our top allied military commanders of WWII, you cannot possibly see the use of atomic bombs as justified. The decision to use atomic bombs was simply militarily unnecessary and a total disregard for human life. It is an absolute joke that there are actually people in the US who believe the atomic bombs saved lives. It never saved lives or ended the war. The other non-nuclear option, of course, would have been to simply defend Japan and starve the Japanese people into surrender. However, as the attack planners considered the population would be devotedly aggressive, there would probably have been an enormous death charge before the Japanese give out. Whether both were necessary will always be questionable, but they provide to help bring to an ending a terrible war that threatened entire world peace and freedom.