▲ 305 ▼ 'Oppenheimer' finally premieres in Japan to mixed reactions and high emotions (www.npr.org) submitted 2 years ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world 216 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Murvel@lemm.ee 29 points 2 years ago (11 children) The bombings has to be seen in the context of the unimaginable horrors orchestrated by the Japanese state that had to be stopped, at almost any cost. permalink fedilink source hideshow 16 child comments replies: [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 42 points 2 years ago (1 child) Almost... Another way to see it is they burdened future generations as an expedient measure to save the lives of the people now in the past. Another another way to look at the bomb is preventing another world war. An interesting historical point is Japan had largely been defeated by the time the bombs were dropped. And they had the option to bomb an uninhabited (or very lightly) part of Japan's territory as a show of force. But, instead they specifically chose to irradiate civilians. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (2 children) They burdened future generations? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (2 children) Because future generations have to safehold and not misuse extremely destructive knowledge. We have a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons, but do they have the ethics to use them responsibly, understanding their full potential? Do the other countries with nuclear bombs have that ethical responsibility, especially over generations? Cuz that big red button is going to be around for a while. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago If it weren't the USA, it would have been the Nazis or Russians who invented it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) One would argue given enough time some kind of civilizations ending event is an inevitability. With nukes we're just increasing that risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, I would say the threat of dying in nuclear hell fire (if you were lucky) a bit of a burden. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) It is also interesting that the movie focuses on the scientists developing the bomb over everything else. There is a removal of the protagonists from seeing the destruction of their work, but that was done on purpose by the military. Even within that, you see a discussion of morality of the bomb by its developers and that the scientists, in almost all cases, have a more nuanced understanding of the destructive power they are developing and the ethics of using such a device. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think that's always the way. Compartmentalisation. Though I don't blame the film for not showing the horrors taking place in those cities. At the time Oppenheimer wouldn't have access to those images, and so I guess neither do we. On the other hand - unless I miss remember - we do get to see him watching a film reel. So, maybe they could have shoehorned the scenes of destruction. But, personally, I think it's enough to see the effect it has on Oppenheimer. Any more could be classed as prurient voyeurism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) [–] ilmagico@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (5 children) This is of course just my opinion, but no horrors, imaginable or otherwise, that the Japanese could've possibly orchestrated at the time, with the means they had available, would've come close to the devastation caused by the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (17 children) Look up the Rape of Nanking. Studying that alone made me believe the bombs were warranted. That's not even including Unit 731, and the fact that the Japanese government still will not acknowledge their attrocities. The bombs were a sad necessity to stop the monstrosities. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies) [+] Scrof@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 years ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 11 points 2 years ago 20 million+ permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (4 replies) [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Murvel@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago (12 children) Of course, thats your prerogative, but then, quite frankly, you don't know enough about Japanese war crimes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] frefi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fight war crimes with war crimes permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Murvel@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (17 children) Debatable. But as always with this topic; what else would force the Japanese surrender? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies) load more comments (11 replies) [–] stonedemoman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (20 children) I disagree. The proliferation of Fascist ideology, in Asia alone, would've far eclipsed the devastation of two nuclear payloads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 20 child comments load more comments (20 replies) [–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Is there a Japanese film like Oppenheimer but from their perspective? I've seen plenty of stuff that feels influenced by Hiroshima and Nagasaki, including the horrors from a perspective unique to people who have first hand experience; but it's all fictional. Like, is there maybe a movie about the dude who survived both bombs? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Ludrol@szmer.info 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) I don't have a full grasp of it but Barefoot Gen (1983) is on my watch list and deals with the topic of atomic bombs E: Ah... you wanted a documentary. This isn't it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] T156@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (2 children) Also that the alternative was burning cities with the people still in them, and they'd seen that, which was have been more horrifying and slow than a nuclear conflagration. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) load more comments (6 replies)
[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 42 points 2 years ago (1 child) Almost... Another way to see it is they burdened future generations as an expedient measure to save the lives of the people now in the past. Another another way to look at the bomb is preventing another world war. An interesting historical point is Japan had largely been defeated by the time the bombs were dropped. And they had the option to bomb an uninhabited (or very lightly) part of Japan's territory as a show of force. But, instead they specifically chose to irradiate civilians. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (2 children) They burdened future generations? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (2 children) Because future generations have to safehold and not misuse extremely destructive knowledge. We have a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons, but do they have the ethics to use them responsibly, understanding their full potential? Do the other countries with nuclear bombs have that ethical responsibility, especially over generations? Cuz that big red button is going to be around for a while. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago If it weren't the USA, it would have been the Nazis or Russians who invented it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) One would argue given enough time some kind of civilizations ending event is an inevitability. With nukes we're just increasing that risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, I would say the threat of dying in nuclear hell fire (if you were lucky) a bit of a burden. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] piecat@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (2 children) They burdened future generations? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (2 children) Because future generations have to safehold and not misuse extremely destructive knowledge. We have a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons, but do they have the ethics to use them responsibly, understanding their full potential? Do the other countries with nuclear bombs have that ethical responsibility, especially over generations? Cuz that big red button is going to be around for a while. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago If it weren't the USA, it would have been the Nazis or Russians who invented it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) One would argue given enough time some kind of civilizations ending event is an inevitability. With nukes we're just increasing that risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, I would say the threat of dying in nuclear hell fire (if you were lucky) a bit of a burden. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (2 children) Because future generations have to safehold and not misuse extremely destructive knowledge. We have a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons, but do they have the ethics to use them responsibly, understanding their full potential? Do the other countries with nuclear bombs have that ethical responsibility, especially over generations? Cuz that big red button is going to be around for a while. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago If it weren't the USA, it would have been the Nazis or Russians who invented it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) One would argue given enough time some kind of civilizations ending event is an inevitability. With nukes we're just increasing that risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] piecat@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago If it weren't the USA, it would have been the Nazis or Russians who invented it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) One would argue given enough time some kind of civilizations ending event is an inevitability. With nukes we're just increasing that risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, I would say the threat of dying in nuclear hell fire (if you were lucky) a bit of a burden. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) It is also interesting that the movie focuses on the scientists developing the bomb over everything else. There is a removal of the protagonists from seeing the destruction of their work, but that was done on purpose by the military. Even within that, you see a discussion of morality of the bomb by its developers and that the scientists, in almost all cases, have a more nuanced understanding of the destructive power they are developing and the ethics of using such a device. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think that's always the way. Compartmentalisation. Though I don't blame the film for not showing the horrors taking place in those cities. At the time Oppenheimer wouldn't have access to those images, and so I guess neither do we. On the other hand - unless I miss remember - we do get to see him watching a film reel. So, maybe they could have shoehorned the scenes of destruction. But, personally, I think it's enough to see the effect it has on Oppenheimer. Any more could be classed as prurient voyeurism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think that's always the way. Compartmentalisation. Though I don't blame the film for not showing the horrors taking place in those cities. At the time Oppenheimer wouldn't have access to those images, and so I guess neither do we. On the other hand - unless I miss remember - we do get to see him watching a film reel. So, maybe they could have shoehorned the scenes of destruction. But, personally, I think it's enough to see the effect it has on Oppenheimer. Any more could be classed as prurient voyeurism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ilmagico@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (5 children) This is of course just my opinion, but no horrors, imaginable or otherwise, that the Japanese could've possibly orchestrated at the time, with the means they had available, would've come close to the devastation caused by the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (17 children) Look up the Rape of Nanking. Studying that alone made me believe the bombs were warranted. That's not even including Unit 731, and the fact that the Japanese government still will not acknowledge their attrocities. The bombs were a sad necessity to stop the monstrosities. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies) [+] Scrof@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 years ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 11 points 2 years ago 20 million+ permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (4 replies) [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Murvel@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago (12 children) Of course, thats your prerogative, but then, quite frankly, you don't know enough about Japanese war crimes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] frefi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fight war crimes with war crimes permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Murvel@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (17 children) Debatable. But as always with this topic; what else would force the Japanese surrender? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies) load more comments (11 replies) [–] stonedemoman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (20 children) I disagree. The proliferation of Fascist ideology, in Asia alone, would've far eclipsed the devastation of two nuclear payloads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 20 child comments load more comments (20 replies)
[–] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (17 children) Look up the Rape of Nanking. Studying that alone made me believe the bombs were warranted. That's not even including Unit 731, and the fact that the Japanese government still will not acknowledge their attrocities. The bombs were a sad necessity to stop the monstrosities. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies)
[+] Scrof@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 years ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 11 points 2 years ago 20 million+ permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (4 replies)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 11 points 2 years ago 20 million+ permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 week ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Murvel@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago (12 children) Of course, thats your prerogative, but then, quite frankly, you don't know enough about Japanese war crimes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] frefi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fight war crimes with war crimes permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Murvel@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (17 children) Debatable. But as always with this topic; what else would force the Japanese surrender? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies) load more comments (11 replies)
[–] frefi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fight war crimes with war crimes permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Murvel@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (17 children) Debatable. But as always with this topic; what else would force the Japanese surrender? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies)
[–] Murvel@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (17 children) Debatable. But as always with this topic; what else would force the Japanese surrender? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments load more comments (17 replies)
[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago (20 children) I disagree. The proliferation of Fascist ideology, in Asia alone, would've far eclipsed the devastation of two nuclear payloads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 20 child comments load more comments (20 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Is there a Japanese film like Oppenheimer but from their perspective? I've seen plenty of stuff that feels influenced by Hiroshima and Nagasaki, including the horrors from a perspective unique to people who have first hand experience; but it's all fictional. Like, is there maybe a movie about the dude who survived both bombs? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Ludrol@szmer.info 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) I don't have a full grasp of it but Barefoot Gen (1983) is on my watch list and deals with the topic of atomic bombs E: Ah... you wanted a documentary. This isn't it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ludrol@szmer.info 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) I don't have a full grasp of it but Barefoot Gen (1983) is on my watch list and deals with the topic of atomic bombs E: Ah... you wanted a documentary. This isn't it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] T156@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (2 children) Also that the alternative was burning cities with the people still in them, and they'd seen that, which was have been more horrifying and slow than a nuclear conflagration. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)