History Memes

one of the most immoral and horrific thing to have happen in modern wars

On the context of the pacific war front, I'm not sure if it even makes the top 10.

Hell, I'm not sure it's one of the 2 worst things the US did on that single war on that single front.

The fire bombs at the time were arguably worse than the nuke.

it was one of the most immoral and horrific thing to have happen in modern wars.

You've clearly never studied WW2 or prior history.

Less people died in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined from the atomic bombs and their fallout than a single conventional bombing raid on Japan. And those were happening weekly. And the most realistic projections for what a conventional invasion to capitulate Japan would have looked like estimate as much as half of the Japanese population would have been killed in direct fighting and the humanitarian disaster that would follow the aftermath of their infrastructure being pummeled.

You can preach about how bad nuclear weapons are all you want, but to suggest their use is the most immoral thing ever done is either done from a place of complete ignorance or complete intellectual dishonesty. The two cities bombed were meticulously chosen to demonstrate the power of the weapons, afflict Japanese war effort while keeping the potential body count and collateral as low as possible while still enough to be taken seriously by the Japanese government. Japan already knew they lost the war, they were only hoping to make it bloody as possible for the Americans to try and meek out some kind of favorable terms, when the terms on the table were already more favorable than they could possibly hope for.

This is an argument that has been had for decades, and it’s not going to be settled here. I think this Sean video is one of the best things on the topic I’ve ever read/seen if you have two and a half hours.

I come down on the side that the atomic bomb was unnecessary. Japan was already looking at potential surrender (maybe not the kind of unconstitutional surrender where you let a 22 year old military aide/translator write the constitution over a couple of days…). The decision to drop the bomb was far more motivated by a desire to present a threat to the USSR and to dominate the world stage than it was to end the war.

The nukes stopped Japan but that was not the deciding factor for the whole of WWII.

I mean, the question is "How did the war end?", not "What was the deciding factor for all of WW2."

The goal of the book is not being precise, its giving the kid learning the rhetoric that the bomb was necessary and other means are ridiculous.

Indoctrination works well. You've already gotten a specimen as an example replying.

Hell, some debate that it might not have even been necessary to stop Japan.

Nah, not real thankfully.

Check the words at the top, the print around them is a slightly different colour and on the left there are gaps in the reflection on the paper where the edit happened (right under that green character).

There is also an editing error under the text on the second panel in the border.

Because from a US perspective, it's true if you squint.

Edit: Korea would also not disagree.

Japan's surrender was in direct response to the atomic bombings, it's correct in broad strokes.

Not the fucking gems on the sash 💀

Hmm, could what he did until then be somehow be forgiven if he does an absolute 180?

Is there redemption for someone who conquered and destroyed Western Europe, the Balkans, Scandinavia and Poland and already is responsible for a couple of hundred thousand or even million deaths?

Could the harm be had done be outdone by doing good?

It's an interesting thought experiment

Um... which Korea?

Like Samsung Korea (abbreviated to S. Korea) or the Not-Samsung Korea (Abbreviated to N. Korea)?