"No man has the right to seek values from others by means of physical forces,
no man or group has the right to initiate the use of physical force against others, however men have the right to use force in self-defense and against those who initiate it's use." Claims philosopher Ayn Rand.
The Japanese were seeking values (land, natural resources etc.) by means of physical force, and therefore, according to this philosophy which I whole heartily agree with, any method the United States government used, even destroying their enemy beyond rational purpose (as some believe was done) was justifiable.
They rightfully acted for their own safety, neither sacrificing themselves to Japan nor sacrificing Japan to themselves.
The United States bombed Hiroshima for their own rational self-interest, with the achievement of the their own safety as their highest moral purpose.
The U.S. was not the aggressors and sought to take nothing away from the Japanese. Their only announced objective, and the first requirement of all strategic planning was to get the Japanese to surrender unconditionally.
. The dropping of "Little boy" on Hiroshima and "Fat Man" on Nagasaki served many purposes.
It halted an invasion of Japan from the north by Russia, which may have created a divided Japan much like what happened in Korea and Vietnam.
It stopped a possible US invasion of the homelands, and also gave the emperor leverage to bring war to and end.
Toward the end of the war, prior to the dropping of the bombs, Japan, though defeated in a military sense, showed no disposition to surrender unconditionally. Japanese troops demonstrated time and again that they could fight and inflict heavy casualties even when the outlook was hopeless.
The reason for such behavior could be traced to their belief in Bushido, and ancient code of conduct that held ideals such as "die but never surrender." and "Accept death before dishonor."
...