Nagasaki 65 Years Later

Today 9th August Juche, 99, marks the 65th anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing. The Japanese city of Nagasaki was attacked with an atomic bomb on 9 August, 1945. Only three days before this tragic event, the Japanese city of Hiroshima was destroyed by another American Atomic Bomb attack. After viewing the options that the American Military had, U.S. President Harry Truman authorised the use of the only two atomic weapons, the United States had in its arsenal. The other two options were demonstrating the power of the Atomic bomb to Japanese governmental ministers in an attempt to dissuade them from carrying on in the fight. The other option was an aquatic invasion of the Japanese island of Honshu.
From what I understand, the first option I mentioned in the paragraph above was the preferred option. The major drawback of this option was that the United States only had two bombs ready for use. If the U.S. government sponsored a test and demonstration to Japanese authority, the U.S. military would then only have one weapon for use, if the Japanese were not compelled to surrender.
The other option, a military invasion of Japan, would apparently cost millions of both Japanese and American lives. The theory that millions of lives would be lost would come from Japanese traditions and the thought that every single Japanese person would fight to the death in order to save their homeland. I do believe that the Japanese people would fight until their own deaths, however I think there would have been a different resolution to the war if there was an American-led invasion of Honshu. I believe that since the Americans did not invade Honshu, the Soviet Union was unable to liberate the remainder of the Korean peninsula, resulting in the catastrophic Korean War.
I can understand the reasons as to why Harry Truman decided to use the atomic bomb. I do oppose the use of atomic weapons in combat, with the exception of an extreme last resort. If I were a president of a nation which has nuclear capabilities, I would only resort to the use of nuclear weapons, if and only if, my capital city was surrounded by an invader and was forced to figure out a way in which I could get the enemy to retreat slightly. I oppose the use of nuclear weapons, not because of any loss of human life, but the loss of history and priceless works of art. I would not want to sacrifice any part of World History or Culture for the use of an atomic weapon.