My argument is that I am for the decision of the atomic bomb drop on Japan. The atomic bomb save millions of American lives that stop them from doing D-Day-style on Japanese homeland and islands. These island invasion cost a lot of American casualties, and the Japanese soldiers are willing and very determine fight to the death. They see suicide as an honorable alternative to surrender. The whole population of Japan are willing to die to fight the Americans, if the U.S. didn’t dropped the bomb on Japan, then the war will dragged on and the Americans will lose a lot of casualties and Japan will lose almost all the population. The Japanese keep evolving their tactics to find ways to fight off or put up resistance to U.S. navy. The Japanese set …show more content…
The civilians were also suffering from extreme food ration and were about to starve to death. (“I couldn’t have survived another month,” he said. “If the military had its way, we would have fought until all 80 million Japanese were dead. Only the atomic bomb saved me. Not me alone, but many Japanese, ironically speaking, were saved by the atomic bomb.”(the annual observance of Hiroshima’s destruction)) The bomb also was a necessary to shorten the war. Yes, it did killed the civilians and there were a lot of casualties. But would it be worth to sacrifice men to invade Japan and have to fight and killed the whole population. These veterans were saved from the bomb and it relieved other soldiers that were wounded at Europe and now healed, were going to fight at the Pacific. (Suddenly, secretly, covertly–I rejoiced. For as I lay there in that hospital, I had faced the bleak prospect of returning to the Pacific and the war and the law of averages. But now, I knew the Japanese would have to lay down their arms. The war was over. I had survived. Like a man wielding a sub-machine gun to defend himself against an unarmed boy, I had survived. So I rejoiced. (Robert Leckie, 1957 memoir Helmet for my