I have read that book. Its fine as long as you keep in mind it is 100% one-sided look at the events.  Keep in mind not one Japanese historian was involved.  It's is all from a western perspective of both the war history and interpretation of the history.  A good example of this is FDR. Claimed to be a great president.  My Wife, on the other hand, see's him as slightly better than Hitler.  He had her family locked up even though the Dept of the Navy made it clear that the Japanese population posed ZERO THREAT.   History is always biased based on interpretation of events.  

For example, no one ever talked about the idea that if the war had gone on and we had done a blockade siege of Japan.  We would have had to split Japan up with China and Russia. How did that work out in the rest of the world with Eastern Europe, Vietnam, Korea?   How is it working out with Russia already based on the events of the Japanese Soviet war and the CURRENT occupation of Kuril.

There is very little discussion of this even though historic events pose quite a dire question as the Soviets Continued combat actions against the Japanese Civilians after the Japanese surrender.  Now again imagine we take a prolonged starve them into submission approach. Russian China and the US in Japan.  Now we move 5 years down the road to Korea. Who wins that war when we don't have the staging bases and we SHARE JAPAN with the Chinese who we would be at war with?   Yeah this is always overlooked.  

So grab the book and remember western historians wrote that as we.

While you ponder that.  I'm headed to Okinawa to take my mother in law (survivor of the battle of Okinawa) to see her home and family one last time.