"Dropping the bombs could be argued to have saved both Allied and Japanese lives.",
Would the use of a nuclear weapon on Baghdad in 2003 have been justified to reduce the Allied death toll and reduce the estimated 600,000 civilian deaths in the subsequent years
It has also been argued that the Americans were anxious to test the bombs in real operations(why use the second weapon) to assess real damage to a city, otherwise why not demonstrate their power on a remote area? It has also been argued that they wanted to send a message to the Soviets and limit their expansion in the pacific region through any prolonging of the war.
The fanaticism of the Japanese troops was somewhat overstated and much of it stemmed from the fact that Allied troops did not tend to take Japanese prisoners and many that did surrender were summarily executed (a war crime, one when committed by the Japanese and Germans resulted in officers being tried and executed).
Bookmarks