Was Hiroshima hell or high-water mark?

In yesterday's USA Today, an article about the 60th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The article starts innocently enough, bringing up the usual criticism, but has the conclusion that it was necessary to save the lives of U.S. soldiers. However, USA Today wasn't done. In the last paragraph, it lauds Truman as "the President who brought us both victory and peace in a war that was justified and necessary", while criticizing George Bush as a "self proclaimed 'War President'" and has "brought us neither victory nor peace in the Iraq war, which former President Jimmy Carter this week called 'unnecessary and unjust'."

Besides all the obviously flawed comparisons, is USA Today advocating dropping an atomic bomb on the Middle East to win us victory and peace?