Yeah, I knew that someone would misconstrue my comments.
What Truman did by authorizing the use of those weapons took a boatload of courage and it did save tens of thousands of GIs lives.
And I was in Japan and didn't get the same feeling from the Japanese. Of course, you must realize that it was only in the mid- to late 80s that Japan finally admitted their role in the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor and allowed those historical events to bve taught in the schools. Prior to that, the Japanese government was more willing to acknowledge the existence of Godzilla than any part they played in the attack on Pearl Harbor.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't respond aggressively if a nuke or dirty bomb is exploded by terrorists in the US. What I'm saying is that we need to be circumspect about casually suggesting that the US should nuke this place or that. The citizens in either of those places may have the capability to strike back . . . . or first. we might want to be a little circumspect about whom we think should be nuked - we could end up on the receiving end of someone else's ability to actually carry out such an attack.
You are correct that we should not advertise in advance what may or may not happen.
This is a purely speculative notion but say Israel or russia sets up a deal where it looks to be say Iran. We jump ugly and Iran for once in it's existance is innocent and we blow them to their maker.
nOt good.