Even the U.S. Navy does NOT believe the Atomic bombs played much of a role in Japan's surrender! If you visit the Naval Museum in Washington DC, a plaque next to a replica of the A-bomb states so. However, one should NOT question Truman's INTENTION to bring the war to an end using the bombs. Rather, we must recognize seldom anything goes as planned in war, ie. the A-BOMBS WERE DISAPPOINTMENTS! 80K and 70K causalities in Hiroshima and Nagasaki don't even compare to the firebombing of Tokyo. Why would Japan surrender because of them, especially throughout 1945 Japan was already losing one city every other day? Since the A-bombs failed to be silver bullets, to prevent the USSR from taking too much territory in Japan (you can't count on Stalin honoring Potsdam Declaration!), Truman was forced to strike a secret deal with Japan to spare the emperor - a pardon he wasn't willing to pursue without giving the A-bombs a try first. Those who criticize Truman for dropping the A-bombs should ask themselves if they would spare Hitler. If they wouldn't, how could they expect Truman to pardon the emperor without trying out alternatives first? Japan at this point was also willing to compromise, ie. dropping their insistence that the emperor's security must be officially guaranteed and codified in a treaty (a non-negotiable demand prior to the USSR declaring war on Japan). Japan knew it would lose the war by 1944 but kept fighting with the goal of preserving its imperial court after the war. When the USSR declared war on Japan, this ultimate goal was seriously shaken since communism and anything imperial doesn't mix! Though the Americans were never willing to safeguard the emperor's safety in writing, a verbal pledge at this point is still better than taking a chance with the Soviets.