We all know that the United States dropped atomic bombs towards the end of World War II, thus hastening the capitulation of the Japanese Empire . Following a firebombing campaign that destroyed many Japanese cities, American airmen dropped Little Boy over the city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, followed by Fat Man over Nagasaki on August 9. The bombings killed half the civilians in each city on the first day. most of them die from flash burns or flames and falling debris. In the months, years, and even decades that followed, large numbers of people died from burns, radiation sickness, and other injuries, compounded by other strange and rare illnesses. As the US use of nuclear weapons in Japan is highly controversial, I do not wish to justify or attack such an act. I just want to think critically about such a question. The controversial question is whether the use of the bomb was necessary to achieve victory in the Pacific War on terms satisfactory to the United States. But how do we define satisfactory? Everyone has a different level of satisfaction. For those who think that was more than enough, what reason do we have to oppose the bombings? The strongest argument is that such action was not necessary to end the war. The United States had suffered air raids on most major Japanese cities well before the bomb was dropped in August, causing enough destruction to weaken Imperial Japan and push it into surrender. Such air raids, coupled with the maritime blockade and the collapse of Germany, which redeployed its allied forces in Asia and the Pacific, would also have led to a Japanese capitulation, rendering the atomic bombings militarily useless. All the United States had to do was wait a little longer. The atomic bombing was just a... middle of paper...... that could have been dropped on Japan. However, this response was supported by the images shown to the public and the censorship of photographs showing corpses of people incinerated by the explosion as well as photos of mutilated survivors. At that time, propaganda encouraged people to portray the Japanese as pests, mere monkey-like creatures. We couldn't even imagine living in such crazy times. A likely reason for this ban was that the images depicting the burned victims and the aftermath of the bombings were extremely similar to the images taken in the liberated Nazi concentration camps by the press, which would, of course, cause a scandalous outcry in the public if it was displayed. Isn't that ironic? We worked to end fascism, but we achieved a similar result. Burned bodies, broken bones, endless tears and a whole nightmare that some may never recover from..