>>Your statements are suspect. Hiroshima was a city, the bomb was deteonated over the city and would have been easily recovered if it did no go off.<<

No, sir. The bomb was detonated over the water next to the city.


>>The statement "The problem is, if the first one works you still have to drop the second one because that's what it was made for."
needs a lot of explaination to make sense.<<

The bombs were not deterrents since no one knew their power. They were made to be used and cost way too much not to use them. Two had to be made in case the first one did not detonate. But even if it does, the second must be used because it was not made for any other reason than to be used.

>>There were both military and industrial targets in Hiroshima. The fact is, the selection of a city was to reduce the civilian casualties, by picking a minor city rather than Tokyo or a more significant poplation center.<<

You could have picked any spot in japan if that was the case. It was dropped on a city because that was what it was made to do--to reduce cities to rubble in a flash. There is no way to know how well it works until you drop it on an unsuspecting city. There is no other way. Hiroshima wasn't even the original target so your reasoning leaves much to be desired.

>>Cold, hard fact.<<

The only cold, hard fact is the one I've pointed out. when all is said and done, we dropped the bomb on women and children. Nothing can erase that. We did it and we must own up to it like intelligent adults and not stupid kids with "Well, they were doing bad things too!!" As my mother would say, "That doesn't excuse your bad things!"