Thoughts on Nuclear Warfare 

In August 1945, the United States unleashed the fury of two atomic bombs on Japanese cities.  The question is raised: would it have been equally effective had the first bomb been dropped at sea, say twenty miles to the east of Tokyo and a second ten miles miles from the capital city.  Such a display of strength, and impending doom, would have been sufficient to produce the desired surrender. This seemingly reasonable approach, however, misses the crucial point. 

By August, the war in Europe had ended three months earlier.  Most of the allied troops were back home.  Russia, on the other hand, maintained its force of millions of troops.  Had Russian  leader, Josef Stalin, so wished, he could have, with minimal opposition, occupied the entire continent.  There was no force strong enough to restrain him.  Or was there such a force?

My thought is that U.S. President Harry Truman had to create more than  a display of strength.  He had to prove his resolve to drop the bomb on a Russian city should that massive army continue its westward march. 

Of relevance today is the possibility of Russian President Vladimir Putin introducing nuclear weapons into his war with Ukraine. I trust a U.S. nuclear-armed submarine has in its sights Putin's summer palace on the Black Sea coast.  Its destruction would make him worry about explosion number two.