It's been 80 years since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the question of whether or not those bombings were justified has never been more contentious. That wasn't the case in the immediate aftermath: 85% of the American public approved the decision to bomb the cities in 1945, but this has dropped to 56% in more recent years, particularly among younger generations. Only 47% of 18- to 29-year-olds, versus 70% of those 65 and older—the World War II generation—thought it was justified, because there was no other way that Japan would surrender.

But starting in the 1960s, newer generations of historians put forward revisionist histories. They argued that Japan was going to surrender anyway, or they were trying to negotiate a surrender, but the United States ignored them. Alternatively, they would say that the purpose of the atomic bombings was to put the United States and its allies on a strong footing in the opening stages of the Cold War. It would scare Russia and show that it was overwhelmingly overmatched in an arms and technology fight.

Today's guest is one of the last nuclear-trained bomber pilots in the Navy, who received training and delved deeply into what exactly to do if he had to drop a nuclear payload on a city, and he spent a lot of time pondering these very questions. His name is Lou Casabianca, and he's the author of the book “Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Invasion of Japan: Case Closed.” He argues the decision to drop the bombs was the right one, and it's not a muddled issue. Incontrovertibly putting forth the case that, after all these decades since the bombings, the justification is largely the same as those made in 1945. We answer all the common objections to the dropping of the atomic bombs, what would have happened if they hadn't been used and the United States had to undertake an invasion of the Japanese mainland, and why these questions still matter today.

It's been 80 years since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the question of whether or not those bombings were justified has never been more contentious. That wasn't the case in the immediate aftermath: 85% of the American public approved the decision to bomb the cities in 1945, but this has dropped to 56% in more recent years, particularly among younger generations. Only 47% of 18- to 29-year-olds, versus 70% of those 65 and older&mdash;the World War II generation&mdash;thought it was justified, because there was no other way that Japan would surrender.
But starting in the 1960s, newer generations of historians put forward revisionist histories. They argued that Japan was going to surrender anyway, or they were trying to negotiate a surrender, but the United States ignored them. Alternatively, they would say that the purpose of the atomic bombings was to put the United States and its allies on a strong footing in the opening stages of the Cold War. It would scare Russia and show that it was overwhelmingly overmatched in an arms and technology fight.
Today's guest is one of the last nuclear-trained bomber pilots in the Navy, who received training and delved deeply into what exactly to do if he had to drop a nuclear payload on a city, and he spent a lot of time pondering these very questions. His name is Lou Casabianca, and he's the author of the book &ldquo;Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Invasion of Japan: Case Closed.&rdquo; He argues the decision to drop the bombs was the right one, and it's not a muddled issue. Incontrovertibly putting forth the case that, after all these decades since the bombings, the justification is largely the same as those made in 1945. We answer all the common objections to the dropping of the atomic bombs, what would have happened if they hadn't been used and the United States had to undertake an invasion of the Japanese mainland, and why these questions still matter today.

For history lovers who listen to podcasts, History Unplugged is the most comprehensive show of its kind. It's the only show that dedicates episodes to both interviewing experts and answering questions from its audience. First, it features a call-in show where you can ask our resident historian (Scott Rank, PhD) absolutely anything (What was it like to be a Turkish sultan with four wives and twelve concubines? If you were sent back in time, how would you kill Hitler?). Second, it features long-form interviews with best-selling authors who have written about everything. Topics include gruff World War II generals who flew with airmen on bombing raids, a war horse who gained the rank of sergeant, and presidents who gave their best speeches while drunk.

A show about American history, world history, World Wars 1 & 2, the Civil War, and much more.

History Unplugged Podcast

For history lovers who listen to podcasts, History Unplugged is the most comprehensive show of its kind. It's the only show that dedicates episodes to both interviewing experts and answering questions from its audience. First, it features a call-in show where you can ask our resident historian (Scott Rank, PhD) absolutely anything (What was it like to be a Turkish sultan with four wives and twelve concubines? If you were sent back in time, how would you kill Hitler?). Second, it features long-form interviews with best-selling authors who have written about everything. Topics include gruff World War II generals who flew with airmen on bombing raids, a war horse who gained the rank of sergeant, and presidents who gave their best speeches while drunk.

Advertisement