The use of Atomic weapons was a terrible thing to have to contemplate.
It was only because of horrors of that war, the mass killings, genocide, rapes, and enslavement on the part of the Imperial Army, that I think that it is justifiable.
I can understand having second thoughts about using Atomic weapons, and it is the sign of people’s humanity that they still have second thoughts to this day, and certainly did then.
As to the notion that the Imperial Army was ready to surrender unconditionally that some people suggest, I have to ask why didn’t they do it? They did not surrender after the first Atomic bomb. There was an attempted coup d’etat (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyūjō_incident) within the Imperial Army that was set to take power away from the ones who wanted to surrender after the second bomb drop to ensure that they did not surrender.
Using Atomic weapons is a terrible thing. It was only justifiable because of the terrible things that were occurring at that time. The Allies had a moral imperative to end the war as quickly and humanely as possible. The Japanese Imperial Army still held a lot of land throughout Asian, and was still committing horrible atrocities. I have read some posts here that leads me to believe that people do not appreciate the actions of the Japanese Imperial Army. The Japanese were actively starving, raping, and enslaving the other Asians.
It was not just that some Imperial Japanese soldiers were full of blood lust and killed and rapped a few civilians (a terrible thing that undoubtedly happened with everyone’s troops, also ours). Imperial Japan actively colonize Asian countries, deported and forced men into laboring for the Imperial Government, and forced women to work in brothels for the Imperial Army. I can’t think of a more accurate word for that than slavery. Again this is not something that a few soldiers did, but was the policy of the Imperial Government.
The Imperial Army’s policy was one of abuse, rape, torture, and slavery directed at indigenous populations. It is just a matter of fact.
Would these cruelties justify unleashing an Atomic holocaust on Japan in revenge? I think the answer is no. But it is important to understand that at the time when the USA used Atomic weapons against the Japanese the Imperial Army still held much of Asia, and was actively abusing the indigenous people. Blockading the home islands and starving Japan would have meant continued slavery, starvation and death for the subjects of the Imperial Army.
My grandfather fought in the European theater in WW2, and he has passed away. My wife’s grandfather fought against the Imperial Japanese Army in China. He has passed away. Most of the people who fought in WW2 on all sides have passed. There is no point in finger pointing.
But the Japanese democratic government has a history of minimizing and denying the atrocities that Imperial Japan committed against the people of Asia, continuing to modern times. I have no problem with the USA saying that it regrets the necessity of using the Atom bombs. It was horrific. But the notion that the democratic nations that fought in WW2 were the bad guys who should be condemned as murders is a mistake.
I occasionally hear of neo-Nazi groups that claim that Germany was the aggrieved party, and that the Allies overreacted and lied about what happened in Europe. In the USA it is rare to hear about Imperial Japanese supporters, although I understand that there are still a tiny amount of them in Japan.
Either way it seems like a serious mistake to claim that the democracies were the ones who murdered tens of thousands of innocent civilians because they weren't members of the human race. I can understand a little bit of metaphoric hyperbole, but that is a corruption of the words to a point where they have no meaning.
We have to keep an intact memory of the horrors of these events if we are to prevent such events in the future.