Dropping the Atomic Bombs on Japan was a Necessary Evil

Unlike my opponent and being nit-picky about every source and date (even though I have provided the appropriate documentation for all), I will go straight to voting issues within this round. 1. My opponents whole case is based off the assumption that the only alternative to dropping the atomic bombs was "Operation Downfall," when already the Javanese had SUED for PEACE, which the United States blatantly ignored and continued to drop the second bomb, which I have shown was unnecessary. Operation Downfall would not have been commenced for another THREE months, which would have given plenty of time to work out piece (also important to apply this into voting issue #3) 2. My opponent quotes that, "The cabinet meeting over the night of 9-10 August was deadlocked with six in favor of surrender under certain conditions, three to fight on until after the final battle had shown Japan's will, and with five neutral members." However, the site itself proves unreliable due to the fact that its references do not even work, and then references it's own site. This quote should not be weighted in today's debate and my argument (going back to voting issue #1) still stands. 3. There is written proof that Emperor Hirohito was planning on surrendering after the bombing of Hiroshima. The U.S. did not give enough time for them to officially surrender. Not only did it ruin more innocent lives, it was just done for a demonstration of power, which everyone knew the U.S. already had. Nagasaki's bombing was an unnecessary move and created the ferocious image of the U.S. being a nuclear beast. The U.S. is absorbed in its nuclear power, uncaring of the casualties of innocent people. 4. He quotes, "The intercepts of Japanese Imperial Army and Navy messages disclosed without exception that Japan's armed forces were determined to fight a final Armageddon battle in the homeland against an Allied invasion. The Japanese called this strategy Ketsu Go (Operation Decisive). It was founded on the premise that American morale was brittle and could be shattered by heavy losses in the initial invasion. American politicians would then gladly negotiate an end to the war far more generous than unconditional surrender." However, the intercepts were BEFORE the dropping of the FIRST BOMB. My opponent fails to realize this, and doesn't realize that my case is based on the dropping of the second bomb. This quote shall have no weight in today's debate. His next quote, ".... also hoped that if they could hold out until the ground invasion of Japan began, they would be able to inflict so many casualties on the Allies that Japan still might win some sort of negotiated settlement." [http://www.cfo.doe.gov......]" The link doesn't even work. Again, he fails to realize that Operation Downfall was three months away. I rest my case with these four key voting issues.It is because I have stuck clearly to the resolution and have defended all my arguments that I believe I have won the debate. Resolution: Dropping the Atomic Bombs on Japan was a Necessary Evil 1. Showed that the dropping of the second bomb on Nagasaki to end the war was COMPLETELY and UTTERLY unnecessary. 2. The alternative of discussing peace, which I showed was possible, would have saved countless, innocent, Japanese lives and the United States would not have committed war crimes and / or been considered state terrorism. I thank Pro for this interesting debate (first one), and am eager to see the results. Good luck!