Not the fucking gems on the sash 💀

Forget gem powers. Steven ability to convert antagonist is epic.

Hmm, could what he did until then be somehow be forgiven if he does an absolute 180?

Is there redemption for someone who conquered and destroyed Western Europe, the Balkans, Scandinavia and Poland and already is responsible for a couple of hundred thousand or even million deaths?

Could the harm be had done be outdone by doing good?

It's an interesting thought experiment

Japan's surrender was in direct response to the atomic bombings, it's correct in broad strokes.

Took me a second to remember what PBS means to Americans, and in that second I was wondering why they're replacing cheap medicine with conservative propaganda.

Um... which Korea?

Like Samsung Korea (abbreviated to S. Korea) or the Not-Samsung Korea (Abbreviated to N. Korea)?

That's because on Lemmy it's cool and hip to hate on the US and people from the US.

Korea is a USA colony (most of NATO countries are - it's just semantics), evening from the constant USA military on their "sovereign" ground (including USA nuclear weapons) to school textbooks & TV news is as USA gov wishes.

one of the most immoral and horrific thing to have happen in modern wars

On the context of the pacific war front, I'm not sure if it even makes the top 10.

Hell, I'm not sure it's one of the 2 worst things the US did on that single war on that single front.

The nukes stopped Japan but that was not the deciding factor for the whole of WWII.

I mean, the question is "How did the war end?", not "What was the deciding factor for all of WW2."

The fire bombs at the time were arguably worse than the nuke.

This is an argument that has been had for decades, and it’s not going to be settled here. I think this Sean video is one of the best things on the topic I’ve ever read/seen if you have two and a half hours.

I come down on the side that the atomic bomb was unnecessary. Japan was already looking at potential surrender (maybe not the kind of unconstitutional surrender where you let a 22 year old military aide/translator write the constitution over a couple of days…). The decision to drop the bomb was far more motivated by a desire to present a threat to the USSR and to dominate the world stage than it was to end the war.

Hell, some debate that it might not have even been necessary to stop Japan.

it was one of the most immoral and horrific thing to have happen in modern wars.

You've clearly never studied WW2 or prior history.

Less people died in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined from the atomic bombs and their fallout than a single conventional bombing raid on Japan. And those were happening weekly. And the most realistic projections for what a conventional invasion to capitulate Japan would have looked like estimate as much as half of the Japanese population would have been killed in direct fighting and the humanitarian disaster that would follow the aftermath of their infrastructure being pummeled.

You can preach about how bad nuclear weapons are all you want, but to suggest their use is the most immoral thing ever done is either done from a place of complete ignorance or complete intellectual dishonesty. The two cities bombed were meticulously chosen to demonstrate the power of the weapons, afflict Japanese war effort while keeping the potential body count and collateral as low as possible while still enough to be taken seriously by the Japanese government. Japan already knew they lost the war, they were only hoping to make it bloody as possible for the Americans to try and meek out some kind of favorable terms, when the terms on the table were already more favorable than they could possibly hope for.

The goal of the book is not being precise, its giving the kid learning the rhetoric that the bomb was necessary and other means are ridiculous.

Indoctrination works well. You've already gotten a specimen as an example replying.

Woosh

You know that's satire, right? Right..?

I'm too busy giving downvotes to people who parrot this tired old joke

The Japanese Empire was not 'already collapsed', and the atomic bombings were not to 'show the world the supremacy'. Hell, the Japanese government was seriously considering continuing the fight after the first atomic bombing, and after the second bombing, still maintained a demand for conditions to their surrender and had to fight off an internal coup that wanted to continue fighting anyway.

US command at this time considered the three options to be the atomic bombings as a Hail-Mary, or else to resort to either blockade or invasion. In the case of blockade, millions of Japanese civilian deaths were projected - in the case of invasion (which was regarded as the more likely option), over a million American casualties were projected. The Purple Hearts that were produced in anticipation of the (never-performed) invasion lasted the US the rest of the 20th century.