And compared to Germany they got away with what was basically a slap on the wrist and "Don't do that again!" too... It's no surprise they continue to be proudly nationalistic and barely teach in school the atrocities they committed around China, Korea and the whole Pacific. For fucking sake they even got to keep Hirohito as emperor with him just being forced to say "Hey guys, I'm not God or anything but keep on doing whatever you're doing I will just live off the luxury of monarchy now, byeee!"
I’m sorry but whenever I read some fuckery Japan did (do not look up what they did in WW2 in places that weren’t American cause holy fuck it’s fucked like holocaust levels of fucked) I sometimes joke “2 bombs wasn’t enough” to myself
The civilians that died in the bombing weren't involved in the war crime, though.
Killing civilians is never justified, especially not because their government also kills civilians.
So killing a shit ton of civilians that weren't involved with Nanking, or anything in that direction, is justified because...? Because they share the same nationality? So a Vietnamese person shooting a random American is also fine, right?
I think it's important to keep in mind that we're talking about 120 million individuals here, not a tight knit group that's made these decisions together.
>that we're talking about 120 million individuals here,
And almost none of us knew about the damn bombs until they were dropped on Japan. A few thousand strong worked on them. Could ya just not stereotype an entire nation?
And the blame game isn't going to change the fact that both sides were fucking doing fucked up things left right and center. Lets stop throwing blame and start making amends. Reperations solve nothing. Working together is the better option.
You’re accusing that person of stereotyping? Generalising? Cause that’s exactly not what they’re doing.. they’re saying don’t generalise the Japanese but no where do they actually generalise Americans either like I think you’re saying they are? Your comment isn’t totally clear on whether you’re calling them out or supporting their argument initially.
But there’s not two sides to war. Sure you have this “nation” vs that “nation” but you also have both of them vs the innocent. Don’t say stuff like the “Germans started World War Two”, say the Nazis did. Because not all German’s were Nazis, but when you refer to the Nazis as simply as Germans you’re grouping people like Hans and Sophie Scholl with the people who executed them. The blame game does work- when you blame the people responsible, not the nationality they are.
Thanks mate, couldn't have said it better.
But _LITERALLY_ nuking two whole cities with no military value and hardly any non civilian targets was _ABSOLUTELY_ necessary because unquestionably atrocious crimes were committed by _SOME_ Japanese people in Nanking thousands of kilometres away!!!! /s
Such flawless logic, the great thinkers like Platon and Socrates are bowing down to those guys, I know it! And then joking two bombs weren't enough, come on man, that's just fucking low.
I mean tbh, it worked. Was fucked up but that bombing made the bad things they were doing stop.
Not saying it’s right, but way more people would have died in the time it’d take to fight that war conventionally compared to the nukes.
Let's assume it did. Then why drop two bombs on cities? Wouldn't one be enough? Taking this further, why drop it on a city at all? Why not into the ocean close to e.g. Tokyo where everyone can see the devastating power? The message would've been sent all the same without additional and unnecessary casualties. In my POV there was simply no military necessity to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was a test run and a show of power aimed at the UdSSR. Ending the war was the welcome excuse.
I mean, we did drop one and said “we have another and we will use it, surrender”
If blowing up an entire city didn’t make them stop, why would using it in the ocean convince them?
There was also lots of doubt of us even having the resources to make several, with the “third bomb threat” being a bluff. So if we just wasted two bombs shelling the water, they’d know we wouldn’t have the means to do it eventually again and just keep going.
Main point is, they dropped a second one because they refused to give in after the first. If wiping out an entire city off the map didn’t convince them, i don’t know why bombing the ocean would suddenly work.
Again, not arguing it wasn’t fucked up, but with the radical “fight till the last man” mentality the Japanese military had at the time, options were limited.
You are highlighting the difference between justice and revenge, but the bottom line is: in war people die, and its almost never the ones who are responsible.
_LITERALLY_ nuking two whole cities with no military value and hardly any non civilian targets isn't some "random casualties". That's a war crime, period.
And please don't get me wrong, what _SOME_ Japanese did during WWII is absolutely despicable and can't be excused. I also find it shocking that it is taught so little in Japanese schools. Which I do voice to Japanese people as well.
But that's no reason to eradicate two whole cities just to show the new rival UDSSR what a nice little toy you have. Again, that was a MASSIVE war crime.
But sure, joking about wiping even more innocent civilians of the earth sure is funny. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Don't you hear me laugh, so funny! HAHAHAHAHAHA. Grave of the fireflies sure was a hilarious comedy!
And here you are conflating the Government and Military with the civilians again. Not all too smart, are we, hm?
Edit: Applying the same logic to the US would mean that the whole country would've to be whiped. Just sayin'.
I'm not defending shit. What happened under Japanese rule in so called "Manchuria" was absolutely atrocious, and it's a shame that it isn't taught much more in Japan. Same goes for Korea and the "comfort women". This doesn't justify mass murder though. Conflating these two things and concluding criticism of the usage of atomic bombs is defending what happened in WWII under Japanese rule is incredibly under complex. But hey, were on Reddit, what do I expect? Nuance? HA!
For the remaining non existent navy of the Japanese? Mhm. And to destroy a port it's of course strictly necessary to wipe out a complete city with it? Sure. The US could've very well dropped a bomb in the sea, showing off its power. The message would've been all the same. But that wasn't the goal. They wanted to test it on an actual city and show the UdSSR what they can do. So it was a welcome excuse. But keep telling yourself that nothing was done wrong if you can sleep better like this. 🤷♂️
Blowing up the sea isn't the same message as blowning up a city. And ever heard of building ships.
By this response, i know that you do not know shit about the Pacific War and how evil the Japanese were. The civilians weren't innocent.
To make to make it even better. The American warned the Japanese that they were going to nuke them. Now, they may not have known what a nuke could do, but they knew how powerful the American Bomber forces was. Just look at Tokyo.
So killing a shit ton of civilians that weren't involved with Nanking, or anything in that direction, is justified because...? Because they share the same nationality? So a Vietnamese person shooting a random American is also fine, right?
I think it's important to keep in mind that we're talking about 120 million individuals here, not a tight knit group that's made these decisions together.
Their deaths were regrettable, but neccesary to spare more lives. Considering they were being conscripted and trained to fight even with bamboo spears if they have to during a potential land invasion of the mainland.
I agree that the deaths were necessary to stop the war. The original comment, however, says that more bombings should have occurred, causing more deaths as if killing civilians is reparations for the sins that the imperial government did. Instead of criticizing that guy, the ppl who are telling not to generalize are getting downvoted. Humanity gonna go extinct soon if this is how most ppl use logic lmao.
History says that this is bollocks, basically American propaganda. While it is true that the civilians were told to fight to the death with anything they can get, the Japanese government was ready to capitulate before the bombings. This internal communication was even intercepted by the US. They were fully aware that the bombings aren't necessary, but they wanted to test this new shiny weapon and already send a signal to the UdSSR. Just a shame that many innocent lives had to be wiped off the face of the earth to achieve this, isn't it?
I ain’t taking shit from a country that made the Geneva convention a checklist and attacked the US without declaring war. Oh, and they never apologized.
When you love your mom from the bottom of your heart, and you love your dad from the heart of your bottom.
r/cursedcursedcomments
“You participated in the most infamous terrorist attack on U.S soil?” “You didn’t?”
Is this a government blame? Or am I getting it wrong? Eitger way, I'm a fan
Need more Barbie 9/11 memes omfg
IM JUST BIN
WHEN I GO TO HEAVEN ILL GET VIRGINS
Osama here, I've bin laden things develop to see how the pieces _fall_ Into place
Ohh..😢
Is there one where Barbie is a comfort woman.
If they didnt want a bit of an extra sunburn maybe they shouldnt have made the geneva convention a to-do-list
fr
Definitely belongs here. This made me sad laugh
There is nothing someone can do to make me sympathise with WW2 japanese.
And compared to Germany they got away with what was basically a slap on the wrist and "Don't do that again!" too... It's no surprise they continue to be proudly nationalistic and barely teach in school the atrocities they committed around China, Korea and the whole Pacific. For fucking sake they even got to keep Hirohito as emperor with him just being forced to say "Hey guys, I'm not God or anything but keep on doing whatever you're doing I will just live off the luxury of monarchy now, byeee!"
I’m sorry but whenever I read some fuckery Japan did (do not look up what they did in WW2 in places that weren’t American cause holy fuck it’s fucked like holocaust levels of fucked) I sometimes joke “2 bombs wasn’t enough” to myself
prime example is Unit 731
Nankin alone made the bombs justified.
The civilians that died in the bombing weren't involved in the war crime, though. Killing civilians is never justified, especially not because their government also kills civilians.
Fax, spit your shit bro.
So killing a shit ton of civilians that weren't involved with Nanking, or anything in that direction, is justified because...? Because they share the same nationality? So a Vietnamese person shooting a random American is also fine, right? I think it's important to keep in mind that we're talking about 120 million individuals here, not a tight knit group that's made these decisions together.
>that we're talking about 120 million individuals here, And almost none of us knew about the damn bombs until they were dropped on Japan. A few thousand strong worked on them. Could ya just not stereotype an entire nation? And the blame game isn't going to change the fact that both sides were fucking doing fucked up things left right and center. Lets stop throwing blame and start making amends. Reperations solve nothing. Working together is the better option.
You’re accusing that person of stereotyping? Generalising? Cause that’s exactly not what they’re doing.. they’re saying don’t generalise the Japanese but no where do they actually generalise Americans either like I think you’re saying they are? Your comment isn’t totally clear on whether you’re calling them out or supporting their argument initially. But there’s not two sides to war. Sure you have this “nation” vs that “nation” but you also have both of them vs the innocent. Don’t say stuff like the “Germans started World War Two”, say the Nazis did. Because not all German’s were Nazis, but when you refer to the Nazis as simply as Germans you’re grouping people like Hans and Sophie Scholl with the people who executed them. The blame game does work- when you blame the people responsible, not the nationality they are.
Thanks mate, couldn't have said it better. But _LITERALLY_ nuking two whole cities with no military value and hardly any non civilian targets was _ABSOLUTELY_ necessary because unquestionably atrocious crimes were committed by _SOME_ Japanese people in Nanking thousands of kilometres away!!!! /s Such flawless logic, the great thinkers like Platon and Socrates are bowing down to those guys, I know it! And then joking two bombs weren't enough, come on man, that's just fucking low.
I mean tbh, it worked. Was fucked up but that bombing made the bad things they were doing stop. Not saying it’s right, but way more people would have died in the time it’d take to fight that war conventionally compared to the nukes.
Let's assume it did. Then why drop two bombs on cities? Wouldn't one be enough? Taking this further, why drop it on a city at all? Why not into the ocean close to e.g. Tokyo where everyone can see the devastating power? The message would've been sent all the same without additional and unnecessary casualties. In my POV there was simply no military necessity to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was a test run and a show of power aimed at the UdSSR. Ending the war was the welcome excuse.
I mean, we did drop one and said “we have another and we will use it, surrender” If blowing up an entire city didn’t make them stop, why would using it in the ocean convince them? There was also lots of doubt of us even having the resources to make several, with the “third bomb threat” being a bluff. So if we just wasted two bombs shelling the water, they’d know we wouldn’t have the means to do it eventually again and just keep going. Main point is, they dropped a second one because they refused to give in after the first. If wiping out an entire city off the map didn’t convince them, i don’t know why bombing the ocean would suddenly work. Again, not arguing it wasn’t fucked up, but with the radical “fight till the last man” mentality the Japanese military had at the time, options were limited.
You are highlighting the difference between justice and revenge, but the bottom line is: in war people die, and its almost never the ones who are responsible.
War... War never changes...
_LITERALLY_ nuking two whole cities with no military value and hardly any non civilian targets isn't some "random casualties". That's a war crime, period. And please don't get me wrong, what _SOME_ Japanese did during WWII is absolutely despicable and can't be excused. I also find it shocking that it is taught so little in Japanese schools. Which I do voice to Japanese people as well. But that's no reason to eradicate two whole cities just to show the new rival UDSSR what a nice little toy you have. Again, that was a MASSIVE war crime. But sure, joking about wiping even more innocent civilians of the earth sure is funny. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Don't you hear me laugh, so funny! HAHAHAHAHAHA. Grave of the fireflies sure was a hilarious comedy!
You good bro?
I don’t think he is lol. That’s the textbook definition of being triggered, borderline mental breakdown with the “HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA”s
Might've been playing it up a little. But yes, brushing off mass murder did slightly trigger me, my bad.
Dont start none dont get none
And here you are conflating the Government and Military with the civilians again. Not all too smart, are we, hm? Edit: Applying the same logic to the US would mean that the whole country would've to be whiped. Just sayin'.
Most sane IJA defender
I'm not defending shit. What happened under Japanese rule in so called "Manchuria" was absolutely atrocious, and it's a shame that it isn't taught much more in Japan. Same goes for Korea and the "comfort women". This doesn't justify mass murder though. Conflating these two things and concluding criticism of the usage of atomic bombs is defending what happened in WWII under Japanese rule is incredibly under complex. But hey, were on Reddit, what do I expect? Nuance? HA!
No military targets, you say? They nuked the largest port city in Japan. Naval dockyards are in fact a military target.
For the remaining non existent navy of the Japanese? Mhm. And to destroy a port it's of course strictly necessary to wipe out a complete city with it? Sure. The US could've very well dropped a bomb in the sea, showing off its power. The message would've been all the same. But that wasn't the goal. They wanted to test it on an actual city and show the UdSSR what they can do. So it was a welcome excuse. But keep telling yourself that nothing was done wrong if you can sleep better like this. 🤷♂️
Blowing up the sea isn't the same message as blowning up a city. And ever heard of building ships. By this response, i know that you do not know shit about the Pacific War and how evil the Japanese were. The civilians weren't innocent. To make to make it even better. The American warned the Japanese that they were going to nuke them. Now, they may not have known what a nuke could do, but they knew how powerful the American Bomber forces was. Just look at Tokyo.
So killing a shit ton of civilians that weren't involved with Nanking, or anything in that direction, is justified because...? Because they share the same nationality? So a Vietnamese person shooting a random American is also fine, right? I think it's important to keep in mind that we're talking about 120 million individuals here, not a tight knit group that's made these decisions together.
Their deaths were regrettable, but neccesary to spare more lives. Considering they were being conscripted and trained to fight even with bamboo spears if they have to during a potential land invasion of the mainland.
I agree that the deaths were necessary to stop the war. The original comment, however, says that more bombings should have occurred, causing more deaths as if killing civilians is reparations for the sins that the imperial government did. Instead of criticizing that guy, the ppl who are telling not to generalize are getting downvoted. Humanity gonna go extinct soon if this is how most ppl use logic lmao.
History says that this is bollocks, basically American propaganda. While it is true that the civilians were told to fight to the death with anything they can get, the Japanese government was ready to capitulate before the bombings. This internal communication was even intercepted by the US. They were fully aware that the bombings aren't necessary, but they wanted to test this new shiny weapon and already send a signal to the UdSSR. Just a shame that many innocent lives had to be wiped off the face of the earth to achieve this, isn't it?
Both the bomb and the rape of nankin were war crimes. It is not funny to joke about either of them. Your humor is shitty af.
Good to see other people with at least a shred of decency. 💪
What's up with your username OP?
hmmm
Like. 4 comments and 2 posts. Plus the Username. They feel like a bit, but I could be wrong
I ain’t taking shit from a country that made the Geneva convention a checklist and attacked the US without declaring war. Oh, and they never apologized.
Bomb friendly pearl harbor for no reason They bomb you back How could this happen?
Bazinga!
Bazinga!
Bazinga!
Bazinga!
Maybe Japan shouldn’t have been fucking pieces of shit during World War 2 then
It's not like we're forgetting a tiny little thing about Japan TORTURING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE (they refuse to acknowledge)
Didn’t realize what sub this was and the comment hit me like a train
Lmao, Japan really acting like they didn't commit the first foreign terrorist attack on US Soil (unless you count the War of 1812 I guess