I am curious as to why the U.S. did not use the atom bomb to conquer Germany. It was used on Japan but not in continental Europe. I know the Germans had their own nuclear program but I don't know how far they got and it's probably a secret as to what the Allies gained from Germany's unconditional surrender. Could the short time between the German surrender and the dropping of the bombs in Japan be influenced by Allies gaining nuclear research / weapons from Germany which they then used on Japan?
Follow-up:
Is it really logical that the mutually assured destruction deterrent during the Cold War was enough to prevent the US and Russia from using nuclear weapons on each other in light of the mass wars they were fighting (ie. Vietnam, etc.) or are there alternate explanations for why nuclear weapons have never been used on another nation since?
The first successful test of an atomic bomb was the Trinity Test on July 16, 1945, which was after Germany had already capitulated.
Is it really logical that the mutually assured destruction deterrent during the Cold War was enough to prevent the US and Russia from using nuclear weapons on each other in light of the mass wars they were fighting (ie. Vietnam, etc.) or are there alternate explanations for why nuclear weapons have never been used on another nation since?
Yes, to use nuclear weapons (even not against each other directly. Say by the US against the North Vietnamese) would force the other side to make some kind of response in order to not loose face and dissuade them from using them again, say cutting off west berlin, Which them kicks off a chain of escalation and counter escalation that would lead to conventional conflict which leads to nuclear war.