192
'Oppenheimer' draws debate over the absence of Japanese bombing victims in the film (www.nbcnews.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
133 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Viewers are divided over whether the film should have shown Japanese victims of the weapon created by physicist Robert Oppenheimer. Experts say it's complicated.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -4 points 3 years ago (2 children)

He decided to make the bomb. He knew what bombs are used for.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Agreed, but that is not what the movie is about.

    He did say (no one knows what he believed) that just having the bomb would mean world peace…

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -12 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Then he was a fool who's actions contributed to the murder of hundreds of thousands.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Literally part of the film is him realising this, did you leave after the bomb went off in testing or what?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 3 years ago*

    Typical aggressive online SJW behaviour. Preaching absolute truths and spitting condemnations as if no one had thought about it before. Obviously, the world can be best explained without any nuance or shades of grey ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    His reasoning was if the US didn’t make it, the Nazis would, and that would be even worse. He never wanted to make the bomb, it was just the lesser of two evils.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (2 children)

    Making the bomb was a good decision, dropping two over civilians after the war finished was genocide.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Look up projected casualties for Operation Downfall

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Look up most of the contemporary US pacific command saying the bombings were unnecessary. I know Asian people are just ants to people like you but Jesus, the pathetic rationalizations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Ants is a pretty apt comparison to Japanese culture at the time. All expected to become soldiers and die for the hive. Seriously, shit was crazy. They were not going to surrender otherwise.

    Firebombings were daily killing more than the bombs did as well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Ants is a pretty apt comparison to Japanese culture at the time.

    Okay, thank you for proving my point and admitting you're a virulent racist so publicly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    I mean... That's what the culture was at the time. No need to name call over it. It is well documented and any attempt to obfuscate it is revisionism.

    Our discussion is prompting me to look more into the history here, though. Your comment on modern generals' statements is intriguing. That lead me to learn about Soviet entry into the war, defeating Japan in Manchuria, which may have promoted talk of surrender among Japanese leadership.

    I'll certainly keep researching and I'm open to changing my view. Feel free to present me with some material to consider rather than calling me racist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 years ago

    Yes, but part of the story of the film is that he's so caught up in the joy of science and discovery he isn't thinking that far ahead and it suddenly becomes real after he's in the meeting deciding on targets (note how that's one of the few scenes without a score). Then the distance he's kept at from the use of the weapons inspires his outlook in later scenes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent