Originally Posted by mdgspencer
The usual justification for using the atomic bomb against two Japanese cities is that it saved at least a million American lives. However, using the exact same reasoning, then this would also be justified--if the Japanese had developed the atomic bomb first and used it on two American cities--say Washington and New York City--and saved at least a million Japanese lives, they would have been morally justified doing this. Still today, in 2011, they would be justified in saying that it was morally right to use the atomic bomb against U.S. cities then.
The difference (and to my mind it is HUGE difference) is that while we were fighting a "just" war of self defense, the Japanese were prosecuting an aggressive war that they launched against us because we brought diplomatic and economic pressure on them to try to curb their prosecution of yet another aggressive war against China.
Not at all the same thing.
Your post is like saying that a person who kills an assailant in self defense is no different from the assailant.