It’s 64 years this Thursday since Hiroshima was destroyed with a nuclear bomb.

Historians and Military thinkers have debated ever since the strategic value of the bomb. It is possible to argue that lives were saved on balance by the bomb’s eliminating an Allied need for a land invasion of Japan, and so on.

But today I wonder a smaller question: not about those who made the decision to do it, but about those who chose the city of Hiroshima. Any of several cities could have been chosen, but what did it feel like around the conference table to choose this city over others?