you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    They burdened future generations?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • load more comments (11 replies)
  • [–] 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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (6 replies)