[quote="followingtheway, post:1, topic:245376"]
What is your opinion on the matter?
Hi following the way:
I wanted to comment here because it seems that some people (such as myself) will be tempted to pick both choices. The morality of war is always problematic, so Catholic theologians developed the theory of "just war" under Medieval scholastics like Augustine and Aquinas. Basically, the damage caused by the aggressor must be significant (it was); other means of ending the conflict were ineffective (not sure about that); the methods used (tactics, weapons) must be significant enough to ensure success (almost certainly true); and the weapons used must not cause more evil than the evil you're trying to eliminate (I think that's hard to argue here). The Catechism (2314) has more:
"Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation. A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons -- especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons -- to commit such crimes."
I think it's clear that the Hiroshima atomic bomb is an example of the "indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants", as much of the city was destroyed and 70,000 people (mainly civilians) died. So it seems clear that the bombing was a moral evil. On the other hand, some military historians have looked at Allied battle plans, noting that the cities of Honshu and Kyushu would have been invaded in the autumn and winter of 1945 (had the Japanese not surrendered after the atomic attacks).
These scholars argue that the alternative to the Atomic Bomb was a full scale invasion of the Japanese mainland by Allied forces, which would have resulted in casualties exceeding 1 million (Allied soldiers) and 2-3 million (Japanese). So their take on it, basically, is that the Bomb, horrendous as it was, was the "lesser of two evils". So if you believe this view, then I suppose, yes, it is morally wrong, and yes, we had to do it. Unfortunately, for many modern problems, there may not be definitive "black and white, right or wrong" answers...not all problems are soluble.
I hope this helps.