Is the U.S. Crazy?

[Vattel]

85. I wasn't talking only about Hiroshima and Nagasaki; so I don't see what the canard is.

I would urge you to revisit the history. Of course, we can never know for sure what terms would have been acceptable to Japan because we made no effort whatsoever to explore peace on any terms other than unconditional surrender. There is plenty of evidence, however, that in the early summer of 1945 (if not earlier in the war) peace was very possible on terms that would have involved Japan losing its occupied territory.

I would also suggest that you consider whether if we had any interest in minimizing noncombatant deaths, we would have bombed Nagasaki only three days after Hiroshima. The Japanese leaders didn't even have a chance to get the reports from their scientists about Hiroshima before the second bomb was dropped. That second bomb was certainly murder most foul.