Was the United States justified in dropping the bombs on Japan to bring an end to the War in Asia?

he made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on strategic cities. His stated intention in ordering the bombings was to save American lives, to bring about a quick resolution of the war by inflicting destruction, and instilling fear of further destruction, sufficient to cause Japan to surrender.

Explanation:

No. The attack on Pear Harbor was strategic, it wiped out military and water defense America had hold of. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were not strategical. Furthermore, the bombs hardly took put any military bases or men in the battle. It just left millions without families and homes in a war they had no part of. They were forced to ration food and many of them had nothing in the end. If America wanted to act smart then we should have went for a military base. We destroyed all the aspects we work so hard on.

Explanation:

I studied these bombings and the aftermath and its not pretty unless you like hundreds of innocent children dead.

hi there!

question - in the 1900s there were two competing views about the environment that often pitted industrialist and conservationist against one another. how were these two competing views demonstrated by the environmental policies of president roosevelt and president taft?

hope this : )