QUOTE(TheRestofUs @ Aug 9 2005, 09:36 AM)
I would have demonstrated it in front of the Japanese people and the world, thereby accomplishing the goal of cowing Stalin!
We did. Still took two tries. And whether the Japanese would surrender was hotly debated in Tokyo right up to the end, even after two bomb drops.
War is hell, as Sherman said, and anything that brings that hell to an end sooner and with less loss of life is a good thing. Yes, civilians were killed. Civilians were killed at Vicksburg, too. A siege of an entire island, followed by a protracted and bloody invasion, would've killed a few civilians, too, in various ways, many of which are a lot less pleasant than the fate of the residents of two cities. It certainly would've killed more; estimates are that the bomb(s) reduced the Japanes casualties, in military personnel alone, by an order of magnitude, so yes, it was justified.
Having now viewed the choices, I guess my choice is technically "Other," because I'd opt for the choice that was actually taken: threaten them with the bomb, as we did, and when they don't believe you, as they didn't, use it; when they STILL don't believe you, perhaps thinking it was a once only option (since the Japanese were supposedly about six months away from the bomb themselves,) do it again to show them you're serious. Option B "make an idle threat and sit on your hand until they also have a bomb and start a nuclear war" is unappealing.