▲ 1705 ▼ Can you think of any now? (piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone) submitted 1 year ago by LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 375 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] skisnow@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 year ago (13 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago Whereas the actual phrase should be "the atomic bombings were necessary to force an immediate total surrender and scare them damn commies before they could take any credit for the Pacific theatre" permalink fedilink source parent [–] arcine@jlai.lu 2 points 7 months ago AFAIK, historical documents show the Japanese government were ready to surrender, if they had been sure the monarchy would be preserved. The bomb could have been replaced with properly worded surrender terms. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (10 children) Is it not just the misinterpretation of the fact that the US wanted to end the war quicker to prevent sending more soldiers into a meatgrinder? You can certainly call that "necessary" to prevent further deaths of US soldiers. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] skisnow@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago* I mean, kamikaze pilots did exist, so there had to be a certain level of what you're calling "brainwashing". And unless it's also a myth (completely possible), but weren't there Japanese soldiers found on an island years after the war had ended who were convinced that it was still going on? permalink fedilink source parent [–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The "brainwashed" thing is somewhat true, at least from the perspective of an outsider, not due to a racial thing, but there is a cultural aspect in addition to the tendency for all sides to be brainwashed by their own propaganda. But the Japanese propaganda told their soldiers to fight to the death, because if the Americans captured you, it would be worse than death. So, from the outside, they did appear to be brainwashed in that regard. Of course, Americans had similar propaganda making Japanese seem as evil as possible, often in the most racist way, so you'd have to say that Americans were brainwashed, too. Also, culturally, I think American culture emphasizes each person more, while Japanese emphasizes community more, which means things like kamikaze are easier to sell. And that sort of thing also appears like brainwashing to the outside. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago I'm pretty sure the largest consideration was keeping the Soviets from claiming land in Asia the same way they did in Europe. Also, we had this shiny new toy and a war was on; we weren't going to not use it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Celestial6370@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago I'd be curious if you listened to this what you would think. It does a really good job of laying out the timeline of decisions. I don't think the atomic bombs were nessecary to draw the war to a close. https://youtu.be/RCRTgtpC-Go permalink fedilink source parent [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) I think there might be an argument for the first bomb, but the second was completely unnecessary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -5 points 1 year ago (3 children) Not true. Even after the second bomb, Japan almost faced a military coup in order to keep the war going. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident They were not going to surrender without a massive show of force because of their culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children) They had literally agreed to surrender before the first bomb dropped, their only condition being that the emperor remain, which the US agreed to anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 child) Can you read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago Whereas the actual phrase should be "the atomic bombings were necessary to force an immediate total surrender and scare them damn commies before they could take any credit for the Pacific theatre" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] arcine@jlai.lu 2 points 7 months ago AFAIK, historical documents show the Japanese government were ready to surrender, if they had been sure the monarchy would be preserved. The bomb could have been replaced with properly worded surrender terms. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (10 children) Is it not just the misinterpretation of the fact that the US wanted to end the war quicker to prevent sending more soldiers into a meatgrinder? You can certainly call that "necessary" to prevent further deaths of US soldiers. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] skisnow@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago* I mean, kamikaze pilots did exist, so there had to be a certain level of what you're calling "brainwashing". And unless it's also a myth (completely possible), but weren't there Japanese soldiers found on an island years after the war had ended who were convinced that it was still going on? permalink fedilink source parent [–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The "brainwashed" thing is somewhat true, at least from the perspective of an outsider, not due to a racial thing, but there is a cultural aspect in addition to the tendency for all sides to be brainwashed by their own propaganda. But the Japanese propaganda told their soldiers to fight to the death, because if the Americans captured you, it would be worse than death. So, from the outside, they did appear to be brainwashed in that regard. Of course, Americans had similar propaganda making Japanese seem as evil as possible, often in the most racist way, so you'd have to say that Americans were brainwashed, too. Also, culturally, I think American culture emphasizes each person more, while Japanese emphasizes community more, which means things like kamikaze are easier to sell. And that sort of thing also appears like brainwashing to the outside. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago I'm pretty sure the largest consideration was keeping the Soviets from claiming land in Asia the same way they did in Europe. Also, we had this shiny new toy and a war was on; we weren't going to not use it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Celestial6370@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago I'd be curious if you listened to this what you would think. It does a really good job of laying out the timeline of decisions. I don't think the atomic bombs were nessecary to draw the war to a close. https://youtu.be/RCRTgtpC-Go permalink fedilink source parent [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) I think there might be an argument for the first bomb, but the second was completely unnecessary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -5 points 1 year ago (3 children) Not true. Even after the second bomb, Japan almost faced a military coup in order to keep the war going. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident They were not going to surrender without a massive show of force because of their culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children) They had literally agreed to surrender before the first bomb dropped, their only condition being that the emperor remain, which the US agreed to anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 child) Can you read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] skisnow@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago* I mean, kamikaze pilots did exist, so there had to be a certain level of what you're calling "brainwashing". And unless it's also a myth (completely possible), but weren't there Japanese soldiers found on an island years after the war had ended who were convinced that it was still going on? permalink fedilink source parent [–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The "brainwashed" thing is somewhat true, at least from the perspective of an outsider, not due to a racial thing, but there is a cultural aspect in addition to the tendency for all sides to be brainwashed by their own propaganda. But the Japanese propaganda told their soldiers to fight to the death, because if the Americans captured you, it would be worse than death. So, from the outside, they did appear to be brainwashed in that regard. Of course, Americans had similar propaganda making Japanese seem as evil as possible, often in the most racist way, so you'd have to say that Americans were brainwashed, too. Also, culturally, I think American culture emphasizes each person more, while Japanese emphasizes community more, which means things like kamikaze are easier to sell. And that sort of thing also appears like brainwashing to the outside. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago* I mean, kamikaze pilots did exist, so there had to be a certain level of what you're calling "brainwashing". And unless it's also a myth (completely possible), but weren't there Japanese soldiers found on an island years after the war had ended who were convinced that it was still going on? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The "brainwashed" thing is somewhat true, at least from the perspective of an outsider, not due to a racial thing, but there is a cultural aspect in addition to the tendency for all sides to be brainwashed by their own propaganda. But the Japanese propaganda told their soldiers to fight to the death, because if the Americans captured you, it would be worse than death. So, from the outside, they did appear to be brainwashed in that regard. Of course, Americans had similar propaganda making Japanese seem as evil as possible, often in the most racist way, so you'd have to say that Americans were brainwashed, too. Also, culturally, I think American culture emphasizes each person more, while Japanese emphasizes community more, which means things like kamikaze are easier to sell. And that sort of thing also appears like brainwashing to the outside. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago I'm pretty sure the largest consideration was keeping the Soviets from claiming land in Asia the same way they did in Europe. Also, we had this shiny new toy and a war was on; we weren't going to not use it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Celestial6370@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago I'd be curious if you listened to this what you would think. It does a really good job of laying out the timeline of decisions. I don't think the atomic bombs were nessecary to draw the war to a close. https://youtu.be/RCRTgtpC-Go permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) I think there might be an argument for the first bomb, but the second was completely unnecessary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -5 points 1 year ago (3 children) Not true. Even after the second bomb, Japan almost faced a military coup in order to keep the war going. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident They were not going to surrender without a massive show of force because of their culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children) They had literally agreed to surrender before the first bomb dropped, their only condition being that the emperor remain, which the US agreed to anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 child) Can you read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -5 points 1 year ago (3 children) Not true. Even after the second bomb, Japan almost faced a military coup in order to keep the war going. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident They were not going to surrender without a massive show of force because of their culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children) They had literally agreed to surrender before the first bomb dropped, their only condition being that the emperor remain, which the US agreed to anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 child) Can you read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children) They had literally agreed to surrender before the first bomb dropped, their only condition being that the emperor remain, which the US agreed to anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 child) Can you read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] nuggie_ss@lemmings.world -7 points 1 year ago (1 child) Can you read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eq0@literature.cafe -1 points 1 year ago In our timeline, after two nuclear bombs were dropped, a coup almost happened that would have blocked the surrender of Japan. Would it have been different without the bombs? permalink fedilink source parent