with, or agains?

I voted yes. Because we need it against the Japanese. Japanese will fight to last man but we don't want that because our Marines and GIs will die in million if we invaded Japan.

yea I do agree. Mostly, it prevented many things, and many "what ifs'? ".

That others may live, Mr. Macbeth. That others may live.

I voted yes.

Theoretically, it was possible(in hindsight) to bring the Japanese to the peace talks, however, the requirement of their capitulation just strenghtened their resolve to die for their Emperor. We know now that some assurance on this matter could have some effect.
But then it was not known...

yep indeed.

Wonder though who voted no heh..

Yes.

To save lives!

Not only did it save lives but also made one hell of a statement towards Stalin. The US had working a-bombs and thus called the shots in the international stage of world politics. They weren't the best of friends for a while now and this sure made a good impression.

It brought a very bloody war to an end, and in doing so saved millions of lives, both Japanese and Allied. If the Allied forces had to fight across Japan like the Americans had to fight for those islands in the Pacific then it would have been a blood bath

By the time the Allies made it across the Pacific, it was obvious that losing so many Marines and other forces to root out a thousand Japanese from small islands, Japan was to be the Mother Of All Battles, and our armed forces and America as a whole were ready to do anything to stop the slaughter of people on both sides.