[Captain Walker]

that’s not the point- a lot more people would’ve died if the US & allies attacked the Jap mainland, in the effort to get them to surrender, then died after the bombs were dropped, which ultimately led to their surrender...

The argument for the Bomb relies on two suppositions:

1. Our demand for unconditional surrender was morally justified.

2. An invasion of Japan was militarily necessary.

Take away even one of the two, and it's just another act of barbarism in a war with many other acts of barbarism.

[God luvs America]

completely disagree- dropping the bomb was justified by a single one of those, especially when you factor in what we found out the Japs were doing not only to US POWs, but citizens of the lands they conquered...

[alexander_busek]

The argument for the Bomb relies on two suppositions: 1. Our demand for unconditional surrender was morally justified. 2. An invasion of Japan was militarily necessary. Take away even one of the two, and it's just another act of barbarism in a war with many other acts of barbarism.

And...? Do you dispute that either of those two conditions were met?

Regards,

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

1. Our demand for unconditional surrender was morally justified.

Except we were not demanding unconditional surrender.

We made several offers including ones that would have allowed the Emperor to remain in charge of Japan. Which was what sort of happened anyway.

Japan turned all of them down because they thought they could outlast us.

2. An invasion of Japan was militarily necessary.

The Japanese made it so because they would not surrender.