Can we justify why we nuked Japan near the end of WWII?

>>303071
They were asking for it.

Also, because killing two full cities resulted in less deaths than sending the men to take the land.

I suggest you look up "strategic bombing" since that's what you're really asking about. To the best of my knowledge, conventional bombing killed significantly more people in Japan than nuclear bombing.

>>303072
Which you guys totally had to do to an island nation with no navy amirite?

They needed invaded for their own good, that kinda thing?

>>303092
Look up
>Gyokusai; 玉砕 (lit. "jade shards").

That mentality had been going with both Imperial Army and Navy, all the way to Iwo Jima. And it was getting worse and worse the closer the Nippon they got.

What would you have done as a President of USA?
>not an unfair question

File: 1466876183675.gif (2MB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x450px

>>303106
>What would you have done as a President of USA?
Easy.

>>303108
zero balls answer. Coward.

File: You, and your sarcasm detector must be great fun at parties.jpg (115KB, 331x440px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 331x440px

>>303110
That's the mentality that lost you the election, Hillary,

>>303071
it was a combination of coward-ism and fear

>>303071
Yes - the initial provocation of December 7th and the intelligence reports of total war on part of the Japanese to any mainland invasion. Admittedly, it is an incredible irony to understand that to save so many lives, Americans had to kill so many so indiscriminately.

But in war, the victor always justifies the means to an end.

>>303071
too late to tell you but this may be the wrong board

>>303108
America WAS a protectionist country before WW2. We didn't want to take sides or join the war until Japan bombed us. Trump's a return to pre-WW2 policies, which saw America fucked because we need trade to prosper.

>muh globalism

>>303071
To scare the Russians into not murdering everyone.

File: 1467594764260.jpg (208KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1440x1080px

>>303506
>supplying weapons, ammo and oil to the allies
>not taking a side

>>303193
...and if they didn't act, a bunch of winged lobsters were going to pick up the American armed forces and fling them over the sea onto the Japanese mainland?

File: 4L_y5iap8Nx.jpg (57KB, 427x271px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 427x271px

>>303513
Make that "selling weapons".

>>303513
Look, if you want to present a case that America was isolationist prior to WW2, you've gotta ignore certain inconvenient facts. Though he's probably unaware of a lot, like how the U.S. intervened during the Communist Revolution in Russia.

No
They didn't go after military targets, they went after civilians giving them zero chance. Not only in the explosion itself but the radiation aftermath.
Sure nips were stubborn cunts who wouldn't quit. But nuking two cities full of civilians was just low.

Allied lives > nip lives it's that simple and if you're going to shitpost about history why not just go to /his/?

>>303071
Not Nagasaki.

>>303071
you can justify anything. whether that justification makes something morally okay is going to be subjective.

>>303513
This. We knew what side we would join, we just didn't want to join.