I was fine with subtle pro us narrations through out the series but the bias was appalling in the last episode 'war in the pacific'. It is structured in a way so as to justify the american use of nuclear weapons on civilian population. It tries to draw a picture that america had no other option other than to go for nuking thousands of civilian population to end the war. The justification given is that an invasion would have caused a lot of american life's being lost , now what if the British and the Russians thought this way there was no need for the battle of bulge or the prolonged fights in Berlin they could have just bombed out the civilians with conventional bombs forcing Germany to surrender so that military life's could have been saved. What sort of stupid justification is that isn't there any differentiation between civilian and military life and how does it help to differentiate us from the Nazi line of thinking. Remember japan never attacked any US civilian targets while it could have easily done that in the early days of the war. What is more shocking is there is no remorse or moral questions asked about the use of nuclear weapons but in the case of Dresden bombings the narrator is very particular in questioning the moral lineage of the British officer who headed the operation