The way I see it, it was neccessary and the easiest way to end the war. Japan would not have been an easy victory, it would have been a bloodbath that went on for years. They were the first non-European country to defeat a large European power in war. They were no joke.

Think about the Soviets for a second. Would it have been better to let them march into Japan? We would have had another Germany, Korea, Vietnam where we have to divide the land in half only to fight over it later (imagine a Japanese equivalent to the Vietnam War). The Japanese people would have been worse off, and the recovery of their country could have been slowed by decades. The Japan we know today would not exist, not even close.

They weren't exactly the nicest people during the war either. The Nazis are seen as monster (they were), but hardly anyone mentions the bullshit that Japan was responsible for during that war. They were as bad as the Nazis and in some cases even worse. Hirohito and his people got off easy, the whole country got off pretty easy if you ask me.

The Western Capitalist powers needed a strong base in Asia, and they needed to show that their system could work in Asia. I think it worked out in the end.

I think this is an old wound that is best left closed for the sake of human sanity...

I absolutely hate VGC's posting system. No wonder I don't post here often.

Ultimately, the decision was awful, but the best option out of a whole lot of bad options. It led to the unconditional surrender of the Japanese mainland which headed off an invasion which would have been far, FAR worse than what we saw. Millions more would of died due to starvation and the horrors of war. Millions more civilians would have died.

And that was if we invaded. If the Russians invaded....God only knows the untold horrors that we would have witnessed had they invaded.

Therefore, I will gladly take nuking the Japanese over continuing the war via conventional means.

Yes people always forget about the Soviet factor. They didn't help against Japan right away because they wanted to see if the Americans could handle it, and they felt they had done enough in Europe. After the Soviets saw that the Americans were going to struggle for a while, they declared war against Japan. Just imagine what would have happend if you had the Red army invade from the North, and the Americans come in from the South. This would have dragged on and the Soviets would have let the Americans take the majority of the casaulties, since the Soviets always felt that the other allies used them as cannon fodder for the Germans.

Japan would have been torn to shreds, and the people (specially women) would have suffered in terrible ways. Just look at how the Russian army raped the shit out of Germany after they were occupying them. The bombings were bad, but the other options were far worse.

Or perhaps it is called "learning from past mistakes".

Case in point Alfred Nobel.

Once again, "two wrongs don't make a right."

Besides, your anti-US, pro-Ahmadinejihad sentiments (as well as my responses - admittedly) are off topic.

A lot of you are presuming the idea that the war would have continued if not for nukes. The allies could have accepted a conditional surrender. That would have saved even more lives, but lives were not necessarily the priority.

US 'national' interests were served by the bombs being dropped as it helped to bring about an unconditional surrender and thus an occupation.

The US did give Marshall Aid to Europe whilst the Soviets drained resources from their areas. No surprises from both sides there really, given their respective experiences of war; both sides served their perceived 'national' interests from their own perceived world view.

Your thinking is being limited to for and against. Poor performance, sir, poor performance.

Pointing to the obvious hypocrisy in US/UK/French etc etc foreign policy doesn't mean one supports the 'enemy'. It just means we see through the jingoistic lies and rhetoric. The same goes for Iranian bluster and propaganda. Both utter rubbish. Most of us would rather just get on with our lives both Westerner and Iranian.

 From Iran's perspective getting a nuke is a defensive mechanism that works. Iraq no WMD = invaded;  North Korea some WMD = not invaded. In summary, US foreign policy says 'get a nuke'

Idiotic.

The Japanese soldiers committed attrocities in China and Korea, they killed thousands of people, raped, tortured and what not. The Nazis have done the same with the Jews, The French troups composed with Morrocans, Tunisians and Algerians in the Campain of Italy raped everything from little girls, to pregnant and old women and men along their way and slaughtered them. The Soviets that entered Berlin raped all the women from 9 to 99 years old. American GI's have also raped something like 17000 German women. 

But all these war crimes don't justify to drop A-Bombs on civilians.

And I think you all have made my point quite vividly...