172
'Oppenheimer' draws debate over the absence of Japanese bombing victims in the film
(www.nbcnews.com)
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
172 points (83.3% liked)
World News
32285 readers
1 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
He decided to make the bomb. He knew what bombs are used for.
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…
Then he was a fool who's actions contributed to the murder of hundreds of thousands.
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)_/¯
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.
And exactly that is the struggle he had. He even informed the president (who told him to fuck off in a polite way)
Look up projected casualties for Operation Downfall
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.
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.
Okay, thank you for proving my point and admitting you're a virulent racist so publicly.
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.