Regarding Bob Austenfeld's Aug. 12 letter, "If others had had the A-bomb": I had a hard time deciphering why Austenfeld thinks it's so important that we consider (the quote from a book that he read) that "Had either the Germans or the Japanese been able to develop the A-bomb first, the world would quite possibly be a very different place today."
The letter seems to imply that the world is now better off because the United States used atomic bombs with greater prudence than rogue nations back then such as Germany and Japan would have done. Austenfeld may be right: Japan might have used more atomic bombs than the U.S. to win a war (although it is arguable whether Japan would have done so to bring a swifter end to a war already won, as the U.S. did). But there is no merit in suggesting such a possibility as it only opens the door to endless argumentation.
One thing is clear: Using atomic bombs is an absolute evil no matter how much prudence a country is said to exercise. It is an inexcusably and indisputably inhumane act.
What is really worth considering today is how we can achieve the goal of a nuclear-free world. Obviously, the U.S. has a bigger role to play toward total nuclear disarmament. The truth is that the world would be a much better place if the U.S. had not set off the nuclear-arms race.
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.