Was the nuclear destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima morally correct? -

  • Emails (registration / password reset) appear to be working; be sure to check spam.

The Last Boyscout

kiwifarms.net
whichever was the first one, yes - it was. Imperial Japan's culture of zealotry was somethin' else, alright, and somethin' else than the usual was likely warranted to snap them out of it. shit, it's not like the utterly insane firebombing prior to it didn't kill and destroy a LOT more already.

whichever was the second, lmao no way - that was good ole USA going: "well, looks like we finally brought them to the table, but let's throw another one of those fuckers just to make sure and our scientists need more data and a 2nd control case." it really was USA's version of "Bomber Harris, do it again!"
 

Dyn

woman respecter
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
The only morally incorrect action was stopping after two bombs.
 

Toolbox

Buy dat hell
kiwifarms.net
No.

Japan was well within their right to attack Pearl Harbor, a military target, in response to American aggression. They even gave you guys several warnings to back off and you still continued dogging them.

America dropped two nukes on peaceful civilian villages. You murdered hundreds of thousands of men, women and children. It was a genocidal act and is considered a war crime by most historians.

It will always be a stain on your country. It's quite amusing watching America police the world over nukes when you are the only country in the world to have committed genocide via nukes.

I guess anime destroying American youth is karma?
Was Japan not actively already attacking US allies and trade routes?
 
Top