this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
243 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32146 readers
950 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Viewers are divided over whether the film should have shown Japanese victims of the weapon created by physicist Robert Oppenheimer. Experts say it's complicated.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] infamousbelgian@waste-of.space 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed, but that is not what the movie is about.

He did say (no one knows what he believed) that just having the bomb would mean world peace…

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Then he was a fool who's actions contributed to the murder of hundreds of thousands.

[–] NuPNuA@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Literally part of the film is him realising this, did you leave after the bomb went off in testing or what?

[–] runblack@reddthat.com 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Typical aggressive online SJW behaviour. Preaching absolute truths and spitting condemnations as if no one had thought about it before. Obviously, the world can be best explained without any nuance or shades of grey ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] kayjay@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

His reasoning was if the US didn’t make it, the Nazis would, and that would be even worse. He never wanted to make the bomb, it was just the lesser of two evils.

[–] RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Making the bomb was a good decision, dropping two over civilians after the war finished was genocide.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 6 points 1 year ago

But the war wasn't finished.

The US was never trying to exterminate the Japanese race and culture, so no it wasn't genocide. It was a fucked up act of war, maybe you could even call it an atrocity, but calling it a genocide is wrong by definition.

And exactly that is the struggle he had. He even informed the president (who told him to fuck off in a polite way)

[–] Nythos@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Used on a nation who’s army’s actions led to the murder of millions

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

You can't use a weapon on a nation, you can only use a weapon on a nation's population.

[–] TheBurlapBandit@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Look up projected casualties for Operation Downfall

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Look up most of the contemporary US pacific command saying the bombings were unnecessary. I know Asian people are just ants to people like you but Jesus, the pathetic rationalizations.

[–] TheBurlapBandit@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Ants is a pretty apt comparison to Japanese culture at the time. All expected to become soldiers and die for the hive. Seriously, shit was crazy. They were not going to surrender otherwise.

Firebombings were daily killing more than the bombs did as well.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ants is a pretty apt comparison to Japanese culture at the time.

Okay, thank you for proving my point and admitting you're a virulent racist so publicly.

[–] TheBurlapBandit@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean... That's what the culture was at the time. No need to name call over it. It is well documented and any attempt to obfuscate it is revisionism.

Our discussion is prompting me to look more into the history here, though. Your comment on modern generals' statements is intriguing. That lead me to learn about Soviet entry into the war, defeating Japan in Manchuria, which may have promoted talk of surrender among Japanese leadership.

I'll certainly keep researching and I'm open to changing my view. Feel free to present me with some material to consider rather than calling me racist.