Internet references conflating the two films drew anger in Japan, which was twice attacked by nuclear weapons during the second world war

Internet references conflating the two films drew anger in Japan, which was twice attacked by nuclear weapons during the second world war

  • Altofaltception@lemmy.world
    3410·
    1 year ago

    It’s important to note that the nuclear program started as a race against the Nazis. Japan had no nuclear program during the war. Once the Nazis surrendered, there should have been no need to continue the development of the bomb. It was developed and then ultimately used on civilians, not once, but twice.

    • apemint@lemmy.world
      221·
      1 year ago

      And if Japan hadn’t surrendered, it would have been used up to a dozen times.

      The third bomb, and the others that may have followed, were a definitive part of the American strategy to end World War II. Although hopeful that nuclear weapons might end the war, American officials—from President Truman to his commanding officers—did not expect the war to end right away. Signs indicated that more atomic weapons were necessary, and U.S. leaders were rapidly moving to order more atomic strikes. Had the war continued, more atomic bombs would very likely have been used.

      • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
        10·
        1 year ago

        While that is true, as declassified documents show, it’s important to note they didn’t have that many more bombs ready at the moment (IIRC they did have a third one ready to be dropped) but they were being manufactured as quickly as they could, so the war would have to last a while for all of them to be used. But they planned to, which is a little scary

        • apemint@lemmy.world
          74·
          1 year ago

          Yes, the article mentions the manufacturing bottleneck.

          It’s insane that after seeing the effects of the first 2 bombs, military leaders still lobbied for more to be dropped.

          • TheDorkfromYork@lemm.eeEnglish
            162·
            1 year ago

            The nuclear bombs were hardly more cruel than any other part of WW2. Nukes killed a comparatively low number of people. Per unit, nukes are scary, but it was just a drop in the bucket.

    • TheDorkfromYork@lemm.eeEnglish
      163·
      1 year ago

      The Japanese did have a nuclear program that made little progress and was unlikely to be a threat.

      Ultimately your use of the word “should” implies that Japan would not have fought out the battle on the main land. Killing civils is bad, saving millions of lives is good.

                • ImFresh3xEnglish
                  3·
                  1 year ago

                  If you are going to add “and its allies” to that question then it’s only fair to ask what Japan and its allies did.

                  See Nazis.

                  Also see Japan annexing way more than the US ever did, and US hasn’t annexed any part of any sovereign country since wwii.

                  US foreign policy has been awful. But nothing even close to what Japan and the Nazis did and hoped to do.

                  Warning: graphic rape and mutilation of civilians, brutal maiming of prisoners, forced sex slavery, biological experimentation on humans, ethnic clenasing, and genocide of millions of people by JAPAN.

                  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

                  The axis powers were openly brutal beyond imagination. It’s not even a debate.

    • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
      8·
      1 year ago

      On that note, I highly recommend the book Racing the Enemy by Hasegawa Tsuyoshi. It’s a very in depth look at the weeks before the surrender from inside the emperor’s cabinet.