The USA Shouldn't have Bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Alright I am glad we agree on that the bomb was to boost our military might, but we disagree on if that was the only major reason. And before I hit that point, I want to discuss the horrors we caused. You say to protect 1.5 American military lives, we had to kill Japanese lives. Yes, that is the point of war. However the dropping of the bomb was as unethical as any other type of warfare. How is killing innocent civilians justifiable? And the amount we killed. Thousands and thousands. One account right after the bomb was dropped says- "He was the only person making his way into the city; he met hundreds and hundreds who were fleeing, and every one of them seemed to be hurt in some way. The eyebrows of some were burned off and skin hung from their faces and hands. Others, because of pain, held their arms up as if carrying something in both hands. Some were vomiting as they walked. Many were naked or in shreds of clothing. On some undressed bodies, the burns had made patterns--of undershirt straps and suspenders and, on the skin of some women (since white repelled the heat from the bomb and dark clothes absorbed it and conducted it to the skin), the shapes of flowers they had had on their kimonos. " That is not war. Wars cannot be won by slaughtering innocent women and children and if it is God help us. We have become barbarians that belong in the Dark Ages. And not only did we kill these innocent women and children, we made them suffer and suffer. The bombs cannot be called a bomb or an explosive. It is a poison that spread its radioactive toxin across a city. This caused innocent women and children to die of cancer and other terrible things years after. That is not war. And you say that it is justified because we had to protect 1.5 million lives but some things refute that. 1. How do you know that? That is simply a worst case scenario. And the estimate that the invasion of Japan would have cost us a million casualties is ludicrous and not based on anything. The studies done at the time and presented to the president showed that the soldiers killed would have been about 5% of that number. The fact that the Japanese were already trying to surrender when we dropped the bomb--and that we ultimately gave them the terms we first refused--makes the allegation that we would have had to invade Japan particularly ridiculous. 2. If they were to fight to the last man, how come they did not? After we dropped the bomb, they still had plenty of troops. 3. The Japanese had already asked the Russians to intercede for them and had indicated they would surrender if allowed to keep their emperor. We proceeded to drop the bomb while calling for unconditional surrender; immediately afterwards, we made peace on terms allowing them to keep their emperor. Their emporor is something we as Amricans don't understand. He is a deity to them. Not only that, do you know why Hiroshima was selected. It was selected because it had not been firebombed previously in the war. We picked it because we wanted to see the effects of the bomb on a "virgin city". With this effects we could show the Russians. This bomb would be used very unlikely on the Germans unless last case scenario because with the Japanese, there was a profound racism. This also helped our decision. Althoush you do disagree with the Nagasaki bombing, here is a little fact. The second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki only days afterward, before the Japanese even had assimilated what had happened at Hiroshima. They certainly would have surrendered without the necessity of a second bomb. There is no justification for this extremely inhumane and unjust massacre of thousands of Japanese civilians. Please look at this as a human and not a very patriotic American.