Any discussion of the morality of the bombs should immediately be met with listing the activities of Kempietai, the horrendous abuse of prisoners, Unit 731 that made Mengele look like a legitimate scientist, the rape of Nanking that even shocked the nazis present in town, the Kamakaze, the cannibals of Chichi Jima, etc.
The Japs were flat ass evil. It took two A-bombs to shock them enough that they became nice Japanese people again.
Not a thing wrong with it and Mecca and Medina need the same treatment.
No, it is rhetorically easier and thus more elegant to simply demand that your opponent provide an alternate solution, that would have resulted in less loss of life.
Puts the onus entirely upon him. Otherwise, if you begin listing Japanese atrocities, your opponent might simply start listing alleged American atrocities - and it becomes a mud-slinging match!
"What should we have done instead?"
Regards,