Final answer:
The student's question revolves around the varying viewpoints on President Truman's decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan during World War II and involves consideration of moral responsibilities, the likelihood of Japan's surrender, and the urgency to save lives.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question addresses the historical and moral debate over President Truman's decision to use atomic bombs against Japan at the end of World War II. The arguments in favor of dropping the atomic bomb focus on ending the war swiftly to save American lives and to force Japan into surrender. Those against it appeal to moral responsibility and the potential for causing unnecessary destruction if Japan was close to surrendering without the use of the bomb. Scientists were divided in their opinions; some were more concerned about the bomb's effects on Japan, while others focused on its implications for the United States. Various alternatives to bombing inhabited cities were proposed, including demonstrations of the bomb's power on uninhabited land. However, Truman and his advisors felt that only the actual military use of the bomb would lead to a quick end to the war, preventing further Allied casualties and bringing about unconditional surrender.