A very good book on the subject of whether we should have dropped the bombs is Richard Frank’s “Downfall; The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire.” He leaves no doubt that not only was dropping the bombs necessary to end the war, but that it was necessary to drop two of them to prove to the Japanese that we could drop as many as we wanted. This finally convinced their military leadership to end the war. Also, as you noted, the bombs saved lives. Japanese lives, and probably millions of them. Not from combat death, but from starvation. The air and naval blockade, along with the destruction of the internal trade links, meant that not only was there not enough food for the population, there was no means of distributing it. The Japanese were already on starvation rations in the summer of 1945. The winter would have been far worse, and would have claimed the old, the very young, and those in poor health. Think of Leningrad, but on a national scale.
No one should take joy in nuclear destruction. But it was war, and as General Sherman said: “War is hell.”
One thing the bombs did also, was to end the war before the Soviets got involved, which most likely would have led to a divided post-war Japan, and perhaps another Korea-style conflict. Remember the Russkies wanted revenge for 1905.
Agree. Every time that a thread like this comes up, I tout this book. He totally destroys the “it was senseless to use the bomb” argument.