The question whether war is ever justified, and if so under what circumstances, is one which has been forcing itself upon the attention of all thoughtful individuals in looking at the utilitarian and deontological view on the ethics of war I found that both schools of ethics lead to difficulties when considering the rights and wrongs of warfare. To analyze the ethics involve I started with researching what is war and the history surrounding my topic of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. War is considered an armed conflict by a government or other large organization to stop or defeat something that is viewed as dangerous or bad.
August 6th and August 9th 1945, were days that brought an enormous change to the history of the world. On these days in Hiroshima
…show more content…
The debate over the legitimacy of the atomic bombings of Japan generally revolves around what it was going to take to get Japan to agree to an unconditional surrender and what that might cost in American and Japanese lives. Those who supported the use of the bomb took the utilitarian view that it would end the war quickly and thereby save even greater numbers of American and Japanese lives by avoiding an Allied invasion of the home islands. In the context of The Just War Theory, however, the issue still comes down to the legitimacy of targeting civilians in industrial cities this line had already been crossed. Utilitarian considerations, such as the doctrine of double effect, only apply if the intended target is indeed military. Strategic bombing in World War II essentially was a decision to kill people not because of their military role, but because of their nationality. The United States decision to bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki in my opinion based on the Just War Theory was not justified, because the Japanese nationals were punished collectively because of the actions of their