We have to be careful not to judge the actions and decisions of the leaders of 1945 through the hindsight that we have from our positions 60+ years later.Washington had made it known that unconditional surrender were the only acceptable terms (although in the end, we did agree to a "conditional" surrender).  When it is brought up that the Japanese were making peace overtures, it must be remembered that they were talking to Moscow, not London, Washington, or Canberra.  At this point of the war, Moscow and Tokyo were to at war.  Likewise, they were in no position from which they could bargain.  Their forces were either being defeated or bypassed on all fronts, the Combined Fleet was no more, and the Allied blockade of mainland Japan was virtually complete.  I think the dropping of the atomic bombs was as much to convince the Japanese populace that they were defeated as it was to convince the military leadership and the Emperor.Two interesting points to perhaps discuss further -- many folks talk about whether or not the U.S. should have conducted an atomic demonstration to convince the Japanese to surrender.  While that point has merit on the surface, when in history has a demonstration of force brought two active combatants to peace terms?  And what in the previous four years of war indicated that the Japanese would respond favorably to such a demonstration?  Had Tokyo demonstrated that they valued the lives of the citizens and soldiers to a point where they would have bowed to such a demonstration?  When soldiers and citizens are indoctrinated that the noblest thing they can do is give their lives for the Emperor would they have surrendered (and stayed non-hostile for the next decade) without that loss of life?  Remember that the "War to End All Wars" had ended less than 30 years before - when the carnage wrought was such that man would never engage in a similarly terrible conflict.Second - the bombing of civilian populations.  Throughout the 1930s the debate wore on that strategic bombers / strategic airpower could bring a nation to it's knees.  So much so that effective fighter aircraft were often given second (or third) priorities for aviation expenditures.  Yet throughout the air raids on Guernica, London, and throughout Germany the bombing of civilian populations by and large only cemented national resolve -- far from causing the civilian population to rise up and overthrow their governments.One thing that the massive daylight raids on Tokyo (and the rest of Japan) did was to show hundreds of B-29s filling the skies.  Then a single bomber destroyed an entire city.  The mental image had to be drawn back to fleets of hundreds of aircraft carrying similar bombs.

Everybody's hitting all of the old classics (yes, I think Pvt Ryan may fit that category).I recently watched "Letters from Iwo Jima" on DVD, and personally, I think it is one of the best war movies ever made.  It's not action / shoot-em up, but in my humble opinion it does a better job of portraying men in combat than any other movie I've ever seen.Someone mentioned Korean War movies -- don't forget "Pork Chop Hill" with Gregory PeckOther WWII movies not yet mentioned:Cross of Iron -- James CoburnHell is for Heroes -- Steve McQueenHell to Eternity -- if you can get over Jeffery Hunter playing Guy Gabaldon (Gabaldon is a pint sized hispanic -- not a 6 foot handsome leading man!)  Okay, great story, cheesy movie.

Yeah, I knew that it was the second flag raising.  When you said staged, I thought that you might have meant posed.