So? That doesn't make it invalid.
In that case, I'd like to add that I like cheese.
The fact that it's irrelevant doesn't make it invalid. You'll just have to accept that I like cheese.
If that's what you have to do to stop it, then you do it. Japan was a monster in warfare. No mercy, no disgrace, and never surrender. That's what made them successful. How do you respond to a monster who won't back down, ever?
I did some more research after your last post.
This is a map of Japan during WW2.
As you can see, there's a crapload of mainland on which to fight Japan, so your "Japan was just an island and impossible to attack" statement doesn't make much sense. In addition, one of the reasons for Japan's expansion was that the island itself did not have the natural resources it needed. Basically, pushing them back to the island, or at least taking back some of that conquered territory, would leave them with insufficient resources to continue the war.
In addition to that, you can see that some of Japan's territory was not only close to, but even bordered the USSR. Seems like a great place from which to launch attacks, no?
And about your "all of Japan was to blame" statement:
By that logic, all of the US would be to blame for the Iraq war, even if they did not support it, correct? How come, then, that when someone would suicide bomb, or just bomb, civilian targets in response to the war, they would be called terrorists?
Not trying to support suicide bombing or the killing of civilians, I'm just saying that if you think it was right to kill Japan's civilians in WW2, then you must think it's right for Iraqis to do the same against the US. Same situation, different countries.