LESLIE Jones (Letters, June 13), who advocated banning nuclear weapons and who implicitly criticised the American atomic strikes on Japan in 1945 was, I believe, naive and misguided.

Firstly, destroying the world's nuclear weapons, if it were possible, would eradicate one evil in favour of a greater one - war. The nuclear "balance of terror" has kept peace for 50 years. Thanks to the bomb, however, we have had little more than a political stand-off.

Mr Jones refers to America's atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Ugly as they were, the USA's actions were justifiable. Alongside Germany and Italy, Japan was one of the aggressors of World War Two. Tokyo's goal during the 1930s and 1940s was to carve, by force, an authoritarian empire throughout Asia and the Pacific.

President Harry Truman, who authorised the bombs' use, faced two choices: allow the war to drag on with thousands more American casualties, or bring peace by using the new technology at his disposal. He chose peace. He had no moral doubts, especially as it is very unlikely that the Japanese would have held back had they developed the bomb.

But to return to today: Banning the bomb is neither practical nor desirable. Nuclear weapons are barbaric and frightening but less so than a world stripped of their peaceful influence.

JONATHAN COLMAN, River Drive, Padiham.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.