Webster's Dictionary defines hindsight as “the ability to understand, after something has happened, what should have been done or what caused the event.” It is a fair assumption that most people understand the old adage “hindsight is always 20/20”; alluding to the fact that, in our daily lives, we as humans make decisions based on what we know, what feels right, and occasionally what makes our lives easier. The average person does not have the mental capacity to consider every possible outcome a choice will have on their entire life, all within the thought process that leads them to reach a conclusion, however long and detailed that process may be. If we add enormous amounts of pressure, conflicting advice, the lives of millions of people, the failure of previous solutions and the responsibility to protect a nation; the aforementioned “average person” becomes president of the United States at the time of what was arguably the most destructive war in history. I cannot, in good conscience, applaud Harry Truman's decision to drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities, vaporizing hundreds of thousands of people; However, I refuse to argue privately, let alone literarily, that Truman made an immoral or strategically incorrect decision. Harry Truman did the best with the situation he was given. He himself is said to have felt remorse for the decision. In the summer of 1945, after the end of a difficult war with Germany, President Truman and his advisors were completely focused on ending the war with Japan as quickly as possible, and with as few American casualties as possible. The introduction of the RTAP reading highlights the fact that the current methods of battle with the Japanese were proving useless. Even when America has claimed victory... middle of paper... I can understand how as new information is discovered and questions as yet unanswered develop, people might be inclined to produce alternative theories as to why Truman chose to use atomic bombs. The RTAP (p.275) talks about the people who now question Truman's motives, known as revisionists because they attempt to revise common perceptions of history, proposing alternative theories and motivations. However, I believe we are beginning to tread on dangerous ground when we argue that major historical events should have been handled differently. Just like the person making the decision, we, as chronologically distanced viewers, could not evaluate all the possible repercussions our retrospective opinions would have on American history. As far as Harry Truman knew, the dropping of the atomic bombs saved the entire world from becoming evil communists.