Was talking to a friend of mine about the use of nukes and I was told about how it was the quicker way to save more lives. I’ve always heard this argument but still always believed that it was an extreme response that could have been avoided.
Am I naive in my thoughts here? What is everyone else’s interpretation of the events leading up to and the decision made to drop both bombs?
I have to admit that I don't see much difference between annihilating cities with nuclear bombs and annihilating cities with conventional firebombing.
I totally agree, and I even said to him that the major aspect that makes me think conventional would have been less deadly is nuclear fallout.