[Blitz]

What the fact that 'Japan started it' has to do with Hiroshima being or not being a war crime? Even if Hitler would have been mugged by a jew that would not make what he did any less evil or wrong, or minor a crime against humanity.

This is asinine. A better modern-day comparison would be "What do you think would happen if Israel decided to bomb a German military base tomorrow?". The end result of this unlikely scenario would be war, don't you think? And whose war crime would it be? Yes... the ones who started the fight.

I don't believe US and Japan would have lost more soldiers together than what died in bombs, but I don't know how powerful the bombs were *supposed* to be by the leaders of US. Maybe they thought that the less people would die in the bombs that would if a full war started.

Right. I guess somehow WW2 dosen't qualify as "a full war" to some people. I imagine you are speaking of the invasion of the Japanese mainland when you suggest fewer casualties on both sides. Even if this were true, the atom bombs didn't result in any American casualties, and that was the idea. After you have been locked in a mortal struggle with another culture for 4 years, the modern stigma against civilian casualties on the other side tends to lose it's power. "Yes we know two of your sons died in France, but we need your Last one to invade Japan to save them the pain of civilian casualties".

Please. War sucks, but don't condemn the actions of those drawn into a conflict as war crimes. Whatever idealistic propagande you've been reading dosen't apply in the real world.