With tensions on the rise between nations, it is tempting to reflect on the immediate aftermath of WWII for clues as to justification for long-standing distrust of governments.  Once the US opted out of the League of Nations, an intense isolationism built until America unleashed its forces against Japan, Germany and Italy.  Despite the eventual success of the "Get Germany First" campaign, a deep division arose about how to finish off Japan, as evidenced by complexities at Potsdam and the ultimate use of the the atomic bomb against a nation that many scholars and historians argue was defeated.  Stanford Professor Barton Bernstein and Robert Messer are two such scholars who remind us that Japan had effectively surrendered with the wish of keeping the Emperor, something even American diplomats thought would help keep the Japanese people more amenable to American re-organization amidst occupation.  However, despite this one condition, two cities were destroyed, yet within days this same single condition was approved.  Ironically, Emperor Hirohito lived another 44 years, dying in 1989.  Truman's own hesitance is documented in several places but meeting minutes show clearly that the expected invasion loss was well below estimates inflated after the war. 

A good question to ask, is, "Was this destruction necessary?" : Can the context of the intense anti-Japanese feelnng be placed in a 2015 perspective to properly address this question?"

The post-war world began after August, 1945.  What is the state if the Cold War in 2015?  Are fears of a nuclear North Korea and Iran igniting fears, similar to the Cold War fears,  that aliances may form which test the U.S. and NATO's resolve as to how to defend huge populations and at what cost?