> It isn't debatable because we know hiroshima and nagasaki had no bearing on the japanese decision to surrender. Not only is this debatable but it is often de

> It isn't debatable because we know hiroshima and nagasaki had no bearing on the japanese decision to surrender. Not only is this debatable but it is often debated. Your post is absurd. In your mind the Holocaust is morally equivalent to the nuclear bombings of Japan. That's crazy: Japan and the US were engaged in a war (that Japan started) whereas the Jews (and other victims of the Nazis) were not at war with Germany. If you want a more nuanced perspective on the bombings and the surrender of Japan, read Downfall by Richard B. Frank. Even if you disagree with Frank, acting like there's no debate on this subject is dishonest. There's plenty of debate. In my opinion, people who talk about issues like this in absolute terms are unwilling or unable to grapple with the complexity that necessarily exists in wartime.