How the fuck was this scene so kino?
How the fuck was this scene so kino?
Camden Stewart
Hudson James
Because it told the truth
John Bailey
based Streicher
Grayson Collins
Jewish directors were laying it on pretty thick don't ya think?
Andrew Perry
>how can we make him look as mentally unstable as possible
Luis Richardson
It broadened the conversation on the morality of the outcome of WW2. McNamara compels the argument of 'proportionality' in the 2003 documentary The Fog Of War, telling about guidelines during war after being part of the American destructive scenario from 1940 until the post Vietnam era.
Asher Wright
I mean, Dresden suggests that if Hitler hadn't been dead by August '45 we probably would have used nukes on Germany. Italians and Germans were interned like the Japanese. Segregation is different from mass murder.
This honestly seems like historically illiterate attempts to make equivalencies appear that don't make any sense in order to make Americans go, "Oh, yeah, we ARE as bad as the Germans." Now, Americans are broadly as bad as the Germans, but not for the reasons listed.
William Foster
Germany had way more air defence than Japan so flying a lone nuke bomber to Germany probably wouldn't have been feasible. Their houses were also made of brick and stone unlike Japanese houses which were pretty much made of paper.
So the logistics probably indicate a nuclear strike on Germany would have been less feasible than on Japan.
In any case the Bombing of Hamburg killed far far more civilians than the bombing of Dresden. The reason Dresden horrifies people is because the city was an historical European heritage site with no military value and filled with refugees. The fact that it was completely incinerated in 1945 so close to the end of the war shows it was just a wanton act of destruction and bloodlust. They just wanted to kill as many people as possible as an act of revenge against Germany. It had no strategic or military basis especially since a huge number of bombers that size could have been better used targeting military sites.
Same deal with Nagasaki. It was a Catholic heritage site, Truman just chose it because he was a Freemason so he wanted to wipe out the most Catholic city in japan, whilst japan was on the verge of surrender. If they had literally given them a few more days they would have surrendered anyway.
Nathan King
>Truman just chose it
uh, Truman didn't chose the a-bomb targets. He left that up to Stimson. Truman hated asians and probably couldn't give less of a fuck which cities we destroyed.
Michael Wilson
Germany also interned the Jews for most of the war. They only started dying in large numbers in 1945, in most cases even after being "liberated". You have to realise the German government literally had no control over the German state at that point. Hitler controlled a small pocket around Berlin, and the Flensburg government controlled just a narrow strip on the danish border. To insinuate that Hitler would have had any control over the fact that millions died of hunger or typhus, or insinuating that it was a deliberate act of murder, is ridiculous.
Easton Davis
>The POTUS and Commander in Chief has no say in choosing military targets for an operation of this significance
It's a fact that Truman was an acknowledged Freemason. Even if he hated Asians, that just means he would have doubly hated the Catholic capital if the East
Landon Howard
he had say. he just didn't care. he barely understood the A-bomb in the first place. The Generals wanted Kyoto to be the first target, Stimson said no because it was the cultural capital of Japan.
And as far as Truman hating Catholics, not true either. He once walked out of church when the pastor gave an anti-Catholic sermon and also refused to join the KKK because they were anti-Catholic.
>I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's honest and decent and not a nigger or a Chinaman. Uncle Wills says that the Lord made a white man from dust, a nigger from mud, and then threw what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion that negroes ought to be in Arica, yellow men in Asia, and white men in Europe and America.
Adrian Edwards
Eh, they started dying in 1943 when Germany's calorie requirements began severely exceeding production. The camps were told they could spare X calories and if that wasn't enough, well...
Connor Hall
desu a few more months, hell just over one month and whether the japs wanted to or not would've been out of the war. They were infighting like crazy and were so depleted they were sending damn near untrained teenagers into war. Their rations were also pretty much gone, nuke or not Japan was just going to collapse soon anyway.
America knew this, hence why using the bomb was a very controversial topic for years. When the red scare started most of this was forgotten and since being conservative was the in thing the new generation only heard that bombing japan was necessary and despite their later objections to war never questioned that nuke for the most part after that accepting it as a necessary tragedy.
The likely scenario is that America was testing the results of their new weapon on a populated area.
Aiden Thomas
My larger point was that this clip was a historically illiterate view of WWII history. If the US could have used a nuke on Germany we would have. If the holocaust happened as current experts say (though that wasn't what experts said until the '70s) that's incomparable to segregation. Etc.
Ethan Anderson
Why do people equate being sent to a summer camp for a year as genocide?
Oliver Cook
After the first atomic bomb was dropped on Japan, the Japanese military commanders asked Japan's best nuclear scientists if they could have a bomb ready before winter of 1946. I'm sorry, but the idea that the Japanese were already on the verge of surrendering and everyone knew it is revisionist nonsense.
Juan Mitchell
2 nukes werent enough should've annihlated that whole country and china and korea. we would own the entire planet already and never have to deal with commie chinks and slavs.
Elijah Jenkins
LMAO there are seriously people in the comments of that video who think that internment and segregation is morally equivalent to the murder of 11 million people
Isaiah Gonzalez
That's a false report the military used to justify the second bombing and the first, actually. In fact, the japanese military went to surrender before the second bomb but were "mistranslated" so the americans thought they were still sticking to the war even though a weapon of unimaginable destruction they couldn't defend literally leveled an entire city, thus the second bomb. The war was over. They were very depleted. There's a reason why a vast majority of the people who invented the bomb protested against it's use. There's a reason why they wanted to bomb a populated area that had gone relatively unaffected by the war. It's because they wanted to test their new weapon.
Luke Jackson
Both japan and germany were in favour of surrender already in 1944 but not unconditional surrender wich is what usa wanted
Mason Ward
11 milion on 3 internement camps, all of them liberated by the (((soviets)))
Aaron Kelly
*plays soccer in my war camp having the "time of my life" but get sick with typhus*
Leo Edwards
>This honestly seems like historically illiterate attempts to make equivalencies appear that don't make any sense in order to make Americans go, "Oh, yeah, we ARE as bad as the Germans."
I haven't watched the movie, but it seems like it shows Göring himself pulling out whataboutism type of argument. It's not the screenwriter trying to tell you something.
Adam Bailey
There were plenty of reasons why dropping the nukes made sense. The war in Europe had been over for more than three months and the peace was already being carved up by the victors, public support for continued conflict was bound to diminish. Iwo Jima and Okinawa had resulted in the better part of 100000 American casualties, including over 20000 dead. The Japanese surrender wasn't a given before the bombings (and it's not like the Americans would have known the intimate details of the debates going on within the Japanese leadership at the time), and without the threat of overwhelming destruction it's likely they would have held out for a negotiated surrender. There are also the reasons of weapons testing and the implication for the post-war era of revealing the existence of nuclear weapons. In all there were more good reasons at the time for the Americans to drop the bombs than not, so they did it.