To borrow an insight that Ralph Raico pointed out a number of years ago–if we didn’t have an atomic bomb at that time, would those people who think it was a good thing that Truman dropped the bomb be okay if Truman had sent U.S. soldiers into Hiroshima and shot to death the UNARMED¹ civilians as a means of forcing the Japanese to surrender?

Or, as a friend of mine pointed out, how about if a “bombless” Truman had sent U.S. soldiers into Hiroshima, rounded up all of the UNARMED civilians–and then marched them off to be mass-murdered in gas chambers?

Finally, my own thought on the subject: The next time there is a hostage situation, should the police round up UNARMED members of the hostage taker’s family and threaten to kill them if the hostage taker doesn’t release his hostages? After all, if killing the hostage taker’s UNARMED family members forced the hostage taker to surrender, then we saved the lives of ARMED policemen who might have been shot to death in a shoot-out with the hostage taker.
__________________________
¹I purposely do not use the word “innocent.” I don’t care if every UNARMED Japanese civilian (including the babies–yeah, right!) supported their government. You don’t murder UNARMED people. You arrest them if they are abetting a criminal action–but you don’t murder them. Period.