• FleetingTit@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think a lot of people have and will continue to argue that the nuclear bombs saved more lives than they ended.

    They traded the lives of combatants who have a reasonable expectation of bodily harm or death with civilian lives. The US traded a grueling war for war crimes. (Don’t get me wrong, Japan committed their fair share of atrocities during WW2, but that doesn’t excuse the nukes)

    • sirjash@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Japanese leadership didn’t surrender after the firebombing of Tokyo, they didn’t surrender after the bombs, they surrendered after the Soviets declared war. The Generals didn’t give a fuck about the population, and Operation Meetinghouse caused just as many casualties as an atomic bomb. But what they definitely wanted to avoid at all costs was a Soviet occupation.

    • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s fair and about 98% true but it wasn’t just a trade for combatant’s lives since after taking the islands the war was now on the Japanese Mainland in addition to the atrocities happening in the Japanese Colonies on the Asian Mainland and the intent of the Japanese to once again attack the Americas (though incredibly unlikely at that point in the war). My point still stands that comparing the power dynamic of the Nipon Empire and USA to that of Hamas and Israel is ingenuine.

      For sure though, USA leadership should have been removed and held accountable for using Nuclear weapons on a densely populated area. Maybe even executed.