Is this actually an unpopular opinion? For sure horrible like all things in war, but I understand that the alternative was an invasion with a hell of a lot more casualties.
Yes. Unlike ground war, two entire metro full of people were killed and countless more suffered long term damages. Whatever the strategic value, this isn't a decision that I find ethical in any way.
The imminent threat of an invasion (assembled in staging area and ready to go) could have been tried before. It would have been very costly, but would have been necessary anyway for an actual invasion if the nuclear bombs didn't cause a surrender (there was a coup attempt to prevent it, so it was never a sure thing even with the bombs).
No cause if we invaded japan how would we scare the soviet union?!! Those japanese children whose entire families were burnt to a crisp in nuclear holocaust were needed in order to scare big bad communism
Wait, what do you mean the soviets stole the nuclear secrets from us?!! What what do you mean that France figured out the creation of nuclear weapons all on their own?? The freakin zionists have them too?!!!
Dw, this isn't an unpopular opinion, OP is just the most intelligent democrat voter
Your extensive knowledge of World War 2 history is astounding. Please teach me more; were there any more notable battles in World War 2, or was that it?
It did less damage than the firebombings and in the end probably took less life than prolonged war, the first was absolutely justified. The second is debatable.