Hi Alex,
Ah...the bomb. I was a history major, mostly American history, in the early sixties. At the time there were a lot of so-called revisionists writing. One of the loudest voices was Gar Alperowitz. The revisionists contended that dropping the bomb (especially the second bomb) was less about ending the war with Japan and more about posturing for a post-war world in which the USSR would be an arch rival. The bomb (these writers believe) was a demonstration project for the USSR. Not only did it send a signal but it also forestalled their advance into Japan. We (according to these historians) had to end the war quickly to keep the USSR out.
Are the revisionists correct? What is certain is that consideration of the USSR was part of the discussion.
Was the bomb inevitable? I think that ship had sailed once the atom was split. There is a kind of classic Greek tragedy element to this. Inexorably, humanity moved toward this knowledge that may in the end be its doom.
I'm glad you liked the juxtaposition. Letting people speak for themselves is the best way to make a point, I think.
Have a great weekend.
RE: Words Matter