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.

  • Jimi_Hotsauce@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well of course it’s not, the us government wants to remind everyone that the bombings were a ‘nessicary evil’ that bs is still taught in schools. Not being a conspiracy guy but I cant imagine a high budget highly publicized movie would rock the boat like that. If you want to hear about sloughing go listen to the last podcast on the lefts 6 part magnum opus on the Manhattan project.

    • UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      So not to sound like I fully support the bombings, but they did touch in the movie about why it was a good thing. To save not only hundreds of thousands of American soldiers who would have invaded mainland Japan, but also the (potentially) greater amount of Japanese soldiers and citizens that would have died too. Millions to die because conventional war tactics weren’t enough to scare the Japanese.

      They were hard-core. They took the fire bombings (which had killed many more than the nukes) in stride. They raped Nanking with unimaginable horrors. Countless human atrocities in the name of “science”

      The Japan of today in not the Japan on WW2. There’s a good amount of people who would say the nukes were a merciful way to end the war. The US, in prep for the mainland assault, made the amount of purple hearts they thought they would need for just the wounded. Since the assault never happened, we still hand them out to this day

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Most of the current US naval command at the time later said the bombings were completely unnecessary. Your rhetoric is unsupported historical revisionism with the purpose of providing rhetorical cover for war crimes.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh, Japanese soldiers that the victims of the bombings had no control over doing war crimes surely means the victims of US war crimes had it coming.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’d rather the US just let them surrender on the condition that the emperor remained, as that is what ended up happening anyway. All those deaths between the offer being rejected and the unconditional surrender were pointless.

  • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Being so far removed from the use of his discovery and put of the loop now the army was done with him is a crucial character moment in the film, and we as the audience are following his story. Having scenes of the bombing, the aftermath of the victims would have undermined that.

    • RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The US is in complete denial of the genocide they did dropping two nuclear bombs in two different cities with mostly just civilians. Everybody else in the world see the pictures of the Japanese aftermath when we study the second world war.

      • Fazoo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not at all actually. We learn about it. We discuss it. What’s surprising to me is, you are harping on the atom bombs when the fire bombings caused way more death and destruction. It’s not even a comparison.

          • DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            US schools teach that the atom bombs were used as an alternative to an invasion of Japan. The numbers said millions would die on both sides if the Allies staged an invasion. Instead, the largest estimated loss ended up being 226,000 Japanese.

            The second bomb was dropped because the military leadership in Japan couldn’t believe the destruction from one bomb wasn’t just another night raid that was super effective and refused to surrender. Then the second bomb dropped, and immediate unconditional surrender was issued

          • Frigidlollipop@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ngl, your comment drove me to read up on everything preceding the bombing, right up to Japan’s brutal occupation of China and subsequent decision to invade pearl harbor in the hope of crippling the US long enough that they could secure oil reserves to continue their conquests. Pretty wild.

          • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The US cut off Japan’s oil supply due Japan’s aggressive foreign policy in Asia. The decision to attack the US was also controversial in the Japanese government.

            If you are going to make the argument that Japan was justified in attacking the US due to the oil embargo, then you are also justifying other actions like the British overthrow of Mohammad Mosaddegh and the installation of the Shah of Iran.

          • yogo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I agree with this comment but I don’t think it qualifies as a genocide, “just” a horrifying unwarranted act of war.

          • TechnoBabble@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            How does nuking multiple cities not contribute to the American war effort?

            There are 1000 decision making paths you can follow in regards to the atomic bombing of Japan, which wasn’t decided lightly, but ultimately the prevailing understanding is correct.

            This “holier than thou” alternate history thing you have going on is, sorry to say, it’s delusional.

  • infamousbelgian@waste-of.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The story is not about bombing Japan.

    Yes, that was a war crime. Yes, that was terrible.

    But if you know the story of Oppenheimer, or seen the movie, he did not decide anything. The military took over at that moment in time.

    So if it was a movie about the military, this had to be shown. But it is about him. So a suggestion (as is clearly in the movie for about the last hour or so) is more than enough of you ask me.

      • infamousbelgian@waste-of.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                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.mlM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

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