Our Evidence

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large/documents/index.php?documentdate=1946-06-19&documentid=65&studycollectionid=abomb&pagenumber=
This webpage is real letters and documentation of the decision and history of the droppings. It shows the brutality of it all. It also unveils how unnecessary and inhumane the bombings really were. This also states the true facts of the death toll and effects of the bombings. I feel after anyone who would read this whole 50 page documentation anyone would say it was unnecessary and unjustifiable.
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/nuclearflower/nuclearbomb.htm
This website shows many pictures of the victims of the bombings. It shows the statistics of how many people died. It also shows how a percentage of people were affected. It also shows the before and after sites of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was incredible how this not only affected the people but also the land...making it almost uninhabitable.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7706
Says that the kick-starting of the cold war was intentional. That it was more so meant to impress the Soviet Union than to harm Japan. This could be a very stupid and unnecessary hidden agenda. If this is true, over 200,000 people died to impress a few men leading a country. What worth does that show? Well it shows it was unjustified if anything.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0806-25.htm
This article states that our bombings were childish and stupid, "...as if incinerating two hundred thousand human beings in a second was somehow an act of moral largesse." I whole-heartily agree with this statement. This basically says that why kill thousands of innocents to avenge a hundredth of trained killers? Put simply, the Americans attacked were posing a threat, can we say the same for these civilian cites?
http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/Hiroshima/EinsteinResponse.shtmlYou can hear it from the man himself, Albert Einstein, that they should have done more tests. Should have tried to calculate the potential damage. Should have tried to protect our fellow man as much as possible. Maybe tried to negotiate peace more, tried to prevent such a disaster, or any whatsoever. Should have...should have...should have...
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/21484152.html?dids=21484152:21484152&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Aug+06%2C+1995&author=Jonathan+Kwitny&pub=Los+Angeles+Times+%28pre-1997+Fulltext%29&desc=Shattering+the+Myth+of+the+Bomb+Hiroshima+and+Nagasaki+didn%27t+have+to+happen+THE+DECISION+TO+USE+THE+ATOMIC+BOMB%2C+By+Guy+Alperovitz+%28Alfred+A.+Knopf%3A+%2432.50%3B+847+pp.%29+HIROSHIMA+IN+AMERICA%2C+by+Robert+Jay+Lifton+and+Greg+Mitchell+%28Grosset%2FPutnam%3A+%2427.50%3B+425+pp.%29&pqatl=google
This man says that he thinks Japan was willing to surrender before the bombings. That ever after the first one they were willing to surrender, but we wanted to avenge and impress. He says that the president at the time should have made sure no civilian cites were harmed with the bomb, at LEAST. These are all in hindsight, sure, but all very simple solutions to very eloquent problems.