August 6th marks the 80th anniversary of mankind’s most cataclysmic and ignominious achievement: The first weaponized use of an atomic bomb. At approximately 8:15 in the morning, the bomb “Little Boy” detonated over the city of Hiroshima, Japan. While estimates have varied between 70,000 and 140,000 dead, the sheer magnitude of devastation caused to a largely civilian population cannot be understated. To this day, much debate rages on regarding the necessity of such weapons in the closing chapter of the Second World War.

The current orthodoxy of American military history, however, stands firmly entrenched that the usage of this bomb (and a subsequent one in Nagasaki three days later) was critical to ending the war quickly and saving the lives of countless Americans and even Japanese civilians who would have assuredly died in the ensuing operation to seize the entirety of mainland Japan. But how vital was the atomic bombing truly to ending the war? A deeper dive into contemporary sources reveals that the bombing was needless, cruel, and firmly established an abhorrent precedent for a newly established global hegemon. …

It is difficult to put into words the weight that atomic warfare brought to the conclusion of the Second World War. It served as a horrifying and needless bookend to the worst catastrophe in the history of mankind. Senior leaders of the day recognized that in the dying embers of WWII, such weaponry was reckless and not needed to secure victory. Japan no longer had a functional navy or air force. Its army was depleted and demoralized after over a decade of war. Many of its senior political leaders were ready to end the war, and only sought minimal face-saving measures to do so. When viewed through the lens of nearly a century of clarity, it is hard to come away from any conclusion other than that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cruel signaling tools, with hundreds of thousands of innocent souls placed squarely in their experimental crosshairs.

Now, 80 years later, it is still necessary to reflect on the decision to use these weapons against largely civilian populations. Indeed, it is imperative now, as much as ever, to question the orthodoxy that has taken hold of so much of accepted military history. The inventories of nuclear weapons have grown to unbelievable heights in the subsequent decades, both in quantity and yield. Failure to recognize historical off-ramps to such calamity will only serve to encourage their usage once again in the future.