299
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
299 points (96.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43597 readers
1557 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
A nuclear war definitely implies use of nuclear weapons on both sides. That was nuclear conquest, or nuclear terrorism.
Just slaughtering civilians in a country that was already willing to negotiate their surrender.
Japan wasn't exactly a bunch of saints when it came to slaughtering civilians.
Japanese civilians weren't exactly the ones doing the slaughtering. It's not like the nukes targeted a military target.
I was definitely talking about the nation of Japan and their military.
So? The nukes weren't dropped on he military. They just slaughtered civilians.
Willing to negotiate a surrender favourable to them, sure.
Willing to negotiate a surrender that wouldn't force them to become a conquest of the US. They just wanted to keep their own government. The US refused, it wanted unconditional surrender and total control of Japan.
๐๐๐