why should I be able to judge what would have been better...

I just know its stupid to run around saying that everything the US does is for the "greater good" and all atrocity's don't matter in the big picture.


>If you object to the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima,
>you should provide an alternative, relevant to 1945.
>It's flippant at best to just say
>"testing nukes on citizens" without context.

So you think that every weapon is ok as long as there is no other way of winning with less casualty's?