Arguably, it was the H-bomb rather than the A-bomb that radically changed the meaning of war. Powerful as the Hiroshima bomb was, it's effects were no worse than a massive conventional fire bomb raid. Indeed, from a cost/benefit point of view, more Japanese would probably have been killed had the money spent on the Manhattan project gone into conventional bombers and other weapons. Hydrogen bombs, however, were rapidly and properly identified as the weapons of apocalypse.
I always understood that the bomb was used out of fear that the US public would become war-weary and, of course, to avoid the expected heavy losses (and who, knows, even defeat) with a conventional attack on the island nation. Perhaps even the Red Army was relieved by the bomb drop. And the US wanted vengeance, too, for Pearl Harbor, loss of the Philippines, ill treatment of prisoners, and to get China back (tho that was not to be). Indeed, the weapon was at hand, and, given the scale of destruction and blood already spilt, I'm the A-bomb solution was welcome by the victors.
I know my family would have been mighty unhappy to fight in the Pacific after the Europe campaign. Later, they they all started turning out babies like crazy to get the deferment for the Korean War.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
