So many answers seem to be rooted in the 50-year Cold War period, and none of them seem to address the 30 years since.

If you have two evils, you choose the lesser of two evils. If you eliminate the greater of the two evils, all you're left with is evil.

Saying that the country which dropped two atomic bombs on civilian populations is better than a hypothetical in which some other other country dropped more of them, it's... I mean, we're still the only country that ever dropped atomic bombs on civilian populations!

I try very hard to not have an opinion, since I know that I know very little. But the person didn't ask for my opinion, just "an argument."

Things are rarely as simple as good and evil. But if you want an argument against certainty, there are many.

This is more conjecture than a compelling argument, in my opinion.

this just isn't an argument.

it is both an argument and the historical reason, the Manhattan Project existed because the US didnt want fascists to have nukes first

I disagree. They are seemingly rhetorical questions, but the answers to those questions are not immediately as obvious as they are implied to be.

You asked for argument and he gave you one. You said it’s not an argument without backing it up anyhow why it’s not an argument

> “lol”

hope you have a good day, OK? you are loved.