Former_Naval_Person Wrote:
Apr 23, 2013 11:05 AM
The post-war revisionist view that nuclear weapons are somehow morally wrong has erased the calculus that went into the decision. On the one hand, something less than 300,000 died as a result of the bombings. (Remember that it took two such demonstrations to get the desired result, and the area of devastation was actually smaller than the horrific fire bombings done previoiusly.) The estimates on casualties from a conventional invasion, which would have otherwise been required to end the war, were 100,000 for allied forces, and one million for the Japanese, with even greater destruction. Thus, it could be argued that ending the war in this way was actually the more humanitarian option.