[presidio9]

I believe President Truman thought he would have been impeached had he not dropped the bombs on Japan. But he also thought it was the right thing to do.

The idea that Truman had any alternative to dropping the atomic bombs is a revisionist myth. Casualties were higher in several conventional bombings throughout the war, and one only needs to review the horrific casualties at places like Iwo Jima to realize how catastrophic a full-scale invasion would have been for both sides. Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably ended up SAVING millions of lives.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Agreed.

The whole "Hiroshima" thing brings me back to my basic premise that I think should apply in all wars or actions when the decision is hard:

Who is better?

That is the critical question.

You can talk about "million American SOLDIERS" lost for a Japan invasion, or a million Japanese CIVILIANS (mostly) lost for "the bomb", but who is really better worth keeping?

We are. We were better than the Japs (sorry, no PC here) and are better than the Muzzies (always were and will be). So if it has to come to the dreadful decision, I pick US to save.