Hiroshima justified? (Invasion should have been attempted at the very least if not carried thru)

"Linda Terrell" wrote in message ...

what's wrong with ending a war as quickly as possible
and avoiding a costly invasion?

We had a weapon that could end that war in a matter of weeks or
days. So let's invade and drag it out for weeks and months so
we can "justify" ending it with a super weapon?

I lived with lots of Japanese folks and studied the language
with native speakers and they all agree that had Japan had such
a weapon, they would have used it. It seems that most of the
hand-wringing over the use of the bomb seems to come from
Americans.

Interestingly, the ignorance of Japanese atrocities is (from
my admittedly limited survey) nearly 100%. People in Taiwan
know all about the Rape of Nanking, but people in Japan don't
seem to know that it even happened.

Has anyone seen/heard any thing different? Just curious.

Also, does anyone know how this thread has managed to multiply
itself to a half dozen? Posts seem to have replicated into
duplicate threads. I post one time and see it four times.