Final answer:
The question is about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II and the opposing viewpoints regarding their effectiveness. Critics argue that they were morally and militarily pointless, while advocates maintain that they were necessary to bring about a swift end to the war. The decision to use atomic weapons remains a controversial and debated topic among historians.
Step-by-step explanation:
The bombings mentioned in the question refer to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States during World War II. Critics argue that these bombings were morally and militarily pointless, a war crime, or a form of state terrorism. They argue that a naval blockade and traditional bombardment would have been enough to compel Japan to surrender unconditionally. However, advocates for the bombings point out that previous conventional bombings of Japan had not achieved the desired effect of surrender, and the atomic bombs were necessary to bring about an immediate end to the war. Ultimately, the decision to use atomic weapons remains highly controversial and is the subject of ongoing debate among historians.