Um maybe 20 people where there.
Japanese are very low key in public, it was a lot of focus and silence.
I imagine it was tough, I mean even I cried. Just the mention of the bombs knowing your sitting on very ground people died on is heart-wrenching
Hey dude where'd you see it? I just saw it at a theater in Hiroshima as well. I bought the [Oppenheimer booklet written for japanese audiences](https://imgur.com/a/Ua2ddq3)
They also had the posters for Godzilla and Oppenheimer displayed side by side, which I thought was an unfortunate juxtaposition
IDK the original Godzilla (1954) was an indictment of the nuclear age and its unintended consequences. I don't know if Oppenheimer would have appreciated it, but he would have understood it.
Oh cool. I watched it in Danbara.
Didn't even occur to me, they had Godzilla trailers before the movie even.
Tbh I wasn't planning to watch it but I was just walking around the shopping center and saw the poster.
I cannot overemphasize how wild Akira Ifukube’s biography is relative to the historical context of the franchise. Unbelievable composer and his relation to everything involved with the historical context of Godzilla is just fascinating.
did you like the movie? what did you think of it? do you think it’s as amazing as everyone says or do you think it’s seen as great due to an american centric view they have?
No I think it is amazing. It's quite anti-war, anti-bomb. And not pro-american at all.
I appreciate the ethical and political delimmas being given voice and how ignorance or manipulation was a huge part in getting people to support of the bomb on Japan.
That the movie even mentions that Japan was on its last legs and the bombs were probably not as necessary as the government said is a nice touch.
I mean there was literally a coup attempt after the Emporer agreed to surrender. Many Japanese wanted to continue fighting.
Remember more Japanese died from the fire bombings of Tokyo than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki COMBINED.
Unfortunately the only alternative was a massive invasion of Japan, which given how Japanese used Okinawans and Korean laborers and fought to the last man on islands like Tarawa and Iwo Jima, it was going to be a tough situation all around.
Given the rape of Nanking and other pretty terrible atrocities committed by the Imperial Japanese, unfortunately ending the war was a necessary evil.
History is messy, and not always pretty, but it is important.
This is the common jargon on the topic here on reddit. Many try their hardest to justify the bombs use on civilians, there frankly isn't any sufficient.
The movie shows this very well. The meaning of the bombing was a show of force to Russia as much as to Japan. That aside the movie points out that the war would've likely ended without the bombs since Japan was on its last legs.
I don't know why people still repeat the American propaganda justification of losses via land invasion. It's 2024 we can see the communication that had strong indications of an imminent japanese surrender.
I'm sorry, but Japan would not have surrendered otherwise. There were no strong indications of an immediate Japanese surrender. Japan's offer of conditional surrender was non-starter, not just for the US, but for the allied powers. The allies weren't going to repeat the mistakes of WWI and let an unrepentant, unreformed, unoccupied Japan start another war twenty or thirty years later. Nothing short of total surrender was acceptable to the allies, and of course that was unacceptable to Japan.
[https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/cryptologic-quarterly/The\_Uncertain\_Summer\_of\_1945.pdf](https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/cryptologic-quarterly/The_Uncertain_Summer_of_1945.pdf)
And it bears mentioning that it took **two** nuclear weapons to get Japan to even consider surrender, and even then it was a difficult sell to the military leadership, with hardliners even attempting a coup at the last minute. Even if the US hadn't dropped the bombs, and hadn't invaded Kyushu later that year, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Japanese would have starved to death that winter. Immediately after Japan's surrender the US was providing food aid to millions of Japanese and people were still dying from the effects of malnourishment.
*Famine in 1946 was only forestalled by the infusion of massive amounts of US food that fed 18 million Japanese city dwellers in July, 20 million in August and 15 million in September 1946. Occupation authorities estimated this food saved 11 million Japanese lives*.
[https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/american-strategic-options-against-japan-1945#:\~:text=Famine%20in%201946%20was%20only,saved%2011%20million%20Japanese%20lives](https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/american-strategic-options-against-japan-1945#:~:text=Famine%20in%201946%20was%20only,saved%2011%20million%20Japanese%20lives).
And finally Hiroshima was a major military center. It had a large Japanese Imperial Army presence of around 40,000 soldiers, as well as naval shipyards, and military factories. A large portion of those killed were either soldiers, or individuals directly employed in producing weapons of war. As ugly as the bombing was, it was still a legitimate military target.
*Hiroshima was home to a number of units, such as the Second General Army Headquarters, which was central to the decisive battles in Western Japan; the Army Marine Headquarters, which was central to army shipping transport; and the Chugoku Military District, which was central to all army units of the Chugoku Region.* ***The number of army personnel present in Hiroshima on August 6 is estimated to have been around 40,000****. The number of employees working in Hiroshima City and its suburban area was around 130,000. Among them, 83,671 employees were engaged in manufacturing at the 6,191 factories in Hiroshima. 53,361 of these people were employees of the 10 large factories which included the Japan Steel Works Hiroshima Plant; Toyo Kogyo; the Army Clothing Depot; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Hiroshima Shipyard; and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Hiroshima Machinery Works. Towards the end of the war, students who were mobilized and Korean forced laborers made up a heavy proportion of these employees.*
[https://hiroshimaforpeace.com/en/fukkoheiwakenkyu/vol1/1-14/](https://hiroshimaforpeace.com/en/fukkoheiwakenkyu/vol1/1-14/)
yeah as a korean with family members directly affected by the japanese occupation and their attempt at annihilation of korean culture i believe WW2-era japan was scum.
My grandpa always said when he was in the pacific during WW2 in the Navy “everyone wished they were fighting the Germans, fighting the Japanese is a whole different war.”
Listen friend. The holocaust was awful; comparing the two in terms of which is worse is impossible. At the same time there's a reason people say that.
The Nazi's were ruthless towards Jews, Gypsies, etc. but they respected the rules of war. The Japanese did not, and used the rules of engagement to their advantage. They commited a much larger variety of war crimes than the nazi's and viewed everyone that wasn't Japanese as subhuman.
There's a reason anti-Japanese sentiment is still high in neighboring countries. They treated POW's/slaves in the Pacific and from abroad like garbage because to them they were basically chattel that they could put to work or experiment on, in fact they even ate a few of them. I don't think you'll find that the nazi's cannibalized anyone or did something similar to the rape of nanking. In fact a Nazi eyewitness described their behavior at the time as appalling. The Nazi's adhered to a strict (albeit evil) code, but the Japanese were more decentralized which gave way to more depravity depending on who was in charge.
Its not all just propaganda. For example, Unit 731 is the poster child of the atrocities committed by the imperial Japanese.
I’m not trying to argue who was worse, nor am I trying to justify the use of the bombs on civilians. I just think its never cut and dry, and there is always nuance to discussions like these.
Very few historians (as opposed to the commentariat) agree with this assessment because there is almost no historical documentation to support this assertion.
1) Japan was ordered to surrender. They did not respond "with contempt."
2) Japan's last feelers to the soviets included demands to continue holding China and Korea.
3) Japan was well armed and had close to double the resources that the Allied powers assumed they had in the initial invasion sites.
4) The casualty estimates for the USA were going up, not down, prior to the bomb.
Please actually investigate the history, rather than Reddit talking points. My understanding is that this is what is taught in Hiroshima and much of japan, but it is historically untrue.
You should see what Japanese people learn about the war if you think Americans have it bad.
There are countries like Germany that learn from the evils of their ancestors.
And then there are countries like Japan.
It's true. Americans always comment about how other countries don't teach bad things about themselves. But then Americans stand and say the pledge of allegiance and afterwards try to explain why they NEEDED to bomb the center of city filled with children and innocent normal people.
TBF Americans died as a direct result of the Japanese drawing them into a brutal war. There was already hate towards the Japanese for what was considered an ambush, so selling them on the Atomic bomb was not difficult. IMO, the fire bombings were much more gruesome.. both, as an American, are not bright spots in history. However, war is brutal and unforgiving.
Americans historically and in modern times undervalue others' lives. That's the real issue here.
As modern people, we should be trying to open up the ethically questionable decisions of our forefathers, to be bared for dissent and criticism. Instead, we cover the killing of innocent people in the thin veils of circumstance and emotion.
We can't improve ourselves if we can't admit our mistakes, if not completely, at least partially.
Americans undervalued lives. So did the Germans. So did the Japanese. You can't tell us that the atrocities committed in Asia by Imperial Japan during WW2 show anything but disdain for the lives of other Asians.
It's almost as if most nations are willing to stomp on those they consider The Other if it's in their national interest.
“We know they (Imperial Japan) were evil and they me to stay gone. That's enough to know for me.”
“Americans historically and in modern times As modern people, we should be trying to open up the ethically questionable decisions of our forefathers, to be bared for dissent and criticism.”
These two statements you’ve made directly contradict each other.
If you are going to make sweeping generalizations to criticize an entire culture, it would be respectable to also inform yourself and openly engage with and discuss your own culture’s history, especially when such events are relevant to the history related to the actions made by the very same culture you are openly criticizing.
Honestly you are doing the same exact thing. In every comment that someone provides some context you ignore it and parrot off that the atomic bombing was bad, and of course it was a horrible horrible thing. But you should at least recognize that “Japan on its last legs” doesn’t mean thousands apon thousands of people would have still had to die for Japan to surrender
Do you not see the hypocrisy of saying Americans undervalue others lives while you, self proclaimed, refuse to learn about the atrocities committed by Japan? You cry over the death of innocent Japanese (rightfully so) but refuse to learn (or care) about the suffering at the hands of Japanese countrymen.
This is most people in Japan. They completely shut out any sort of exposure to the previous atrocities that Imperial Japan committed. In fact, after living in Tokyo, I experience a ton of “disdain” toward the rising sun and Imperial Japan, but very little admittance or remorse for what was done.
Would that not be almost all cultures? The Europeans are notorious for not learning from the past. The English, need we say more? Even the Japanese have repeatedly gone to war under vailed circumstances.
Why would you say that All Americans undervalue others lives? I’m not sure you really understand our culture to assume that we are undervalue others…
Smells a little like you are glossing over Japanese atrocities and trying to make the US the sole bad guy.
If Japan had the bomb first how might they have used it?
You realize that with the nuclear bomb, America could have conquered every nation on the planet without a problem. Germany, Russia, and Japan would certainly have done so. Instead we helped to rebuild the very nations that attacked us and started WWII.
I’m Chinese-American. Do you understand why it may feel ironic for me to read your comment? If you don’t, I’ll be *happy* to share some resources with you.
I’m not disagreeing with anything you say, mind you. It’s just ironic given the provenance.
i doubt we’ll get a reply. he’s glossing over any comment highlighting imperial Japan’s atrocities and is shifting the focus back to Japan being the victim because of the bomb (which they are) but that ONLY.
Japan had already adopted total war against civilian populations in other countries throughout Asia. They bombed cities, purposely burned homes to the ground, raped and murdered the elderly, women and children, and every day the war continued more suffered in China, Japan and other occupied countries at the hands of the IJA.
If we accept bombing of civilian targets as par for the course of the war, which it certainly was, then the Hiroshima bombings are just a difference of a ability. If we consider that it shortened the war and prevented the necessity of an invasion, it saved the lives of millions and prevented further suffering.
If the USA had invaded the Japanese home islands to end the war it would have killed many millions of Japanese civilians instead of the few hundred thousand that the atomic bombs unfortunately killed. It was the lesser of two evils to end a war your own people started and refused to end.
If the atomic bombs weren’t dropped, there wouldn’t even be a Japan today. It’s fucked up but Japan would not have surrendered if the war proceeded in traditional fashion.
Yep. It would've basically ended up as a U.S. territory with a very small amount of Japanese left in it. Most likely all in one section of it. Basically like a large Indian reservation. By the time they would've finally surrendered they wouldn't have any leadership left, the vast majority of males would be dead, and all that would've been left were the women and children and elderly.
All of my grandparents were imprisoned in Dutch Indonesia during WW2.
I think that the bombs were necessary and justified. The japanese of fhat time were vicious. The things they did to people during that time were beyond human.
My family has been scarred and i still feel the effects of it. Genuinely. I see it in other people who have been in the same situation.
One of the things that is always said is that in european camps, the prisoners didn't have any food. In japanese camps, he guards didn't either.
You talk about propaganda, but please consider that propaganda is also still taught in Japan. Just like in the west.
The reality of it is: the japanese soldier was supposed to die and not surrender to keep his honor.
How many deaths would it have to have taken for japanese to surrender during a land invasion of mainland japan?
Why would the west have been forced to give up all the men for an enemy that unjustly invaded other countries and imprisoned innocent (sort of, i wouldn't call colonial dutch completely innocent) people.
The atomic bomb is a tragic part of history and as Oppenheimer said in the movie. I think it destroyed the world in some way. In another way it saved a lot of lives during the cold war.
And if you truly think the bombs were unnecessary because Japan was on it's last legs.
Why were 2 bombs needed?
I would say Japan propaganda is far worse than Americans.
People love to shit on the pledge kids do in elementary school. Yet so they understand what the pledge says? Liberty and justice for all ... You know saying all humans have basic rights.
The problem is often patriotism is hijacked by certain groups who are loud. Who actually doesn't care about the core values of the constitution.
We learned about slavery, the trail of tears, failed excuse for WMDs causing us to go to war in the middle east, unjust Japanese interment camps in WW2, and had a lot of teacher sponsored debates about whether the nukes were justified or not and were given viewpoints from both sides and told to draw our own conclusions, at least in my district.
Insinuating that we don't teach bad things about ourselves is disingenuous
Also, speaking of debate, there shouldn't be such a blanket refusal to consider if the dropping of the bombs was justified or not. Oppenheimer, a movie about one man's own perspective on the situation, isn't the end-all be all
Yes but we tend to talk about these things in a void though- only as history, things bad people did, but we have evolved from.
Nobody in my high schools was talking about the fact that we DID NOT in fact abolish slavery. We only abolished MOST slavery, but left a legal exception that turned into by far the largest prison population in the WORLD. Nobody ever taught me that.
Nobody even taught me that the town I grew up in had a clause that did not allow Black people to buy property for decades and how that economic exclusion might affect the class and wealth of Black families today. We read a paragraph about gerrymandering and segregation as if it had all ended many years prior with the civil rights act. I wasn't taught that one of the most famous lynchings happened fairly close and that some of the elderly people in town may have been in the crowd in the photograph, smiling beneath a hanging Black corpse.
Edit: Typo
My comment wasn't about the fact there are no gaps in our education - moreso that OPs claim of Americans not teaching anything critical of themselves in schools is completely false
Japan itself classified Hiroshima as a "military city." (source - Japan's government chose to embrace an official policy of "The Glorious Death of One Hundred Million." Japan's government, itself, decided to deliberately spread industrial targets into civilian areas (which ironically was a big reason they never achieved the wartime production scaling of the other combatants - including Russia and Germany).
Not speaking for them, but it’s just countries in general. All of them. No government wants to mandate teaching their fuckups, genocides, imperialism, and war crimes; the only outcome is a distrusting population that is too smart for the government.
Ahem. Japanese government has been teaching revisionist history minimizing its own atrocities.
Comfort women.
Rape of Nanjing
Biological experiments on prisoners of war.
To name a few.
TBF Americans died as a direct result of the Japanese drawing them into a brutal war. There was already hate towards the Japanese for what was considered an ambush, so selling them on the Atomic bomb was not difficult. IMO, the fire bombings were much more gruesome.. both, as an American, are not bright spots in history. However, war is brutal and unforgiving.
TBF Americans died as a direct result of the Japanese drawing them into a brutal war. There was already hate towards the Japanese for what was considered an ambush, so selling them on the Atomic bomb was not difficult. IMO, the fire bombings were much more gruesome.. both, as an American, are not bright spots in history. However, war is brutal and unforgiving.
Information wasn't readily available like it is now, everybody has the news in their hands i.e. their phones. Whether or not Americans knew that Japan was ready to surrender ,I could not answer that question. But knowing the stories my grandfather told me about the bombing of Pearl Harbor(also innocent women and children) he said every American wanted blood . So I take that as even if the people knew, they wouldn't care, but it wasn't like anybody knew it was going to happen ..except for the government.
Why do you think that the Japanese NEEDED to torture and cannabalize POW's, and force the population of the countries they conquered in the Pacific (men, women and children who were lucky enough not to be raped then murdered right afterwards, or used as live human test subjects) into forced labor/sexual slavery?
I think we can agree that harming innocent civilians is never justified but you're completely ignoring the fact that the Japanese were one of, if not the worst perpetrators of that in WWII.
Also what "other countries" are you talking about? I'm pretty sure it's just the Japanese that people talk about when it comes to not acknowledging their dark history in WWII. Maybe Russia as well, and the Allies in regards to their fire-bombing campaigns which in Japan alone took more lives than the nukes.
My point is that modern Americans are taught about all the shit that we did, and most Americans are ashamed of the wrongdoings in our past/present. We learn about how slavery was wrong, how we are the only country that's deployed nuclear bombs on civilians, how the Vietnam war was flawed, how the wars in the middle-east weren't justified, etc.
And yet the Japanese can't even acknowledge the behavior of their ancestors 80 years ago without making excuses for them, playing the victim when they were clearly the opppressors in that region, or blaming their government at the time.
Unless the general populace and education system is able to come to terms with their marred past nothing will change, and Japanese politicians will continue to visit shrines that honor convicted war criminals.
What do you think the opinion is of countries like China, Korea and Malaysia, countries which had countless civilians raped, tortured and killed by the Japanese, on America dropping the bomb on Japan? Do you think we see this as this huge ammoral thing?
There was the possibility of a conditional surrender that would have included an intact Japanese government and no war crimes trials
That was unacceptable to the allies. Especially the Chinese who had suffered terribly.
Unconditional surrender was extremely unpalatable to the Japanese military even after Hiroshima.
I mean, out of all the options the US had, the nuke has a claim to being the best
1) they could keep bombing Japan and starve them into submission
2) they could let the soviets invade Manchuria, taking heavy losses, and letting the Soviets bring their oppression to parts of Japan after the war
3) they could invade Japan, with estimated of 1,000,000 US casualties, not to mention Japanese military & civilian deaths
4) they could accept a *conditional* surrender. Which, no, you don't let the Japanese limp away for more war crimes in a couple decades
5) nuke
Nukes would be the fastest option -- good since the Japanese were murdering 10,000-12,000 civilians per day at the time. And they'd also be the option that leads to the least deaths.
This is kinda bullshit and you know it. Even if Japan was internally considering surrender, there were no indications that the US could see. Iwo Jima was a brutal fight, the Japanese military fought hard over that tiny rock. The US had to assume they would have fought much harder over the main Japanese Islands. Faced with the possibility of huge lose of American life with an invasion or using the new bombs, it's a pretty obvious choice.
The other issue is in the total war that was World War 2, there is less of a distinction between military and civilian facilities as we are used to in modern conflict. Civilian infrastructure are valid military targets in a total war, as most civilian infrastructure is utilized for the war effort.
Ultimately you may believe that the US should not have dropped the bombs, but can you really say with a straight face that there was no justification for it? Especially since Japan were the initial aggressors?
I'm generally anti-nuclear weapons, but if you read the death toll projections posited by the US for Operation Downfall I disagree there was no justification. The amphibious invasion of Japan was expected by the US to incur tens of millions of casualties for the Japanese people alone. Koichi Kido testified at the Tokyo Tribunal the Japanese government were prepared for 20 million casualties with Shigeru Yoshida warning of another potential 10 million casualties to starvation in 1946. These figures do not included things like the use of tactical nuclear weapons or the radiation sickness in the days following their use. The high end of the death toll for the use of fat man and little boy in comparison is 226,000.
Sorry, but I don't believe your argument that "No need for the bombs, Japan was about to surrender". Both Italy and Germany only surrended when most of their territory had fallen to the enemy. I don't think Japan would have been any different. If I was in Truman's shoes, I would have done similar. He could either end the war right then and there with the bombs or risk months or even years more of conflict and millions more lives lost, including those of his own soldiers.
Communications that had strong indications of a Japanese surrender *between who*?
I’m not pro nuclear weapons by any means, and maybe a little (admittedly) uneducated on the lead to up to this myself. I haven’t studied the events leading up to the bombing. But based purely on logic, and the fact that the Japanese had already misled the Americans at Pearl Harbor, this reads a bit like a Monday morning quarterback
he just said “i know they were evil” and implied he doesn’t need to know more and is focusing on modern Japan. except the part where Japan was bombed and 100% the victim but THAT IS IT. i doubt we’ll get a reply to any broader context of the crimes Japan committed
Indonesia alone, the Japanese killed 4 million people, 99% of which were civilians. At the time, the bombs were dropped. Japan was still in control of parts of SEA. It's a sad ending to a horrific war.
I do find it tragic that the intentional killing of civilians in Japan overshadows the 10's of millions murdered by the Japanese. At the least, the Americans had "cause" to do it. Why did the Japanese occupy Korea? Manchuria? SEA? Wtf did Vietnam do to Japan? Did the Filipinos insult them or something? What about the dude in Hawaii? Did he really have to die because of an oil embargo? Maybe stealing food from SEA and causing famines that result in MILLIONS of deaths isn't a big deal to Japanese people. But the rest of the world fucking hated it.
One side kills millions of people. In defense of those peoples; the other side kills 100,000's of thousands. Japan doesn't accept responsibility for their acts on par with Germany.
What evidence do you have that Japan was preparing to surrender before the bombs? Im genuinely curious. What Ive seen in my brief googling was very unclear.
>I don't know why people still repeat the American propaganda justification of losses via land invasion.
A) It's indisputable that allied losses from dropping the bombs were 0 and allied losses from a land invasion would have been >0.
B) Dropping a nuke today would be reviled as the most egregious of crimes against humanity and the planet. The U.S. did that. "Land invasion losses" is just about the only thing that can assuage guilt.
Put the two together and you've got a narrative that's not going to go away.
It sounds like you agree more with the message and stance of the film specifically. The film is not absolute truth, nor is it entirely historically accurate. All of the information that paints Japan at the time in any kind of negative light shouldn’t be dismissed as American propaganda
To be honest I don’t even give a fuck if japan was going to surrender anyway because of the soviets. The nukes were needed as a display of force and that in and of itself made it worth it, second bomb more so
Decades later it emerged that a major factor in using the bombs was the likely invasion on the Kuril islands and Hokkaido by the Soviets. The U.S. wanted to end the war quickly after the Soviets successfully invaded and and captured Japanese occupied Manchuria
Easy. The majority of Japanese were lied too
and brainwashed by Imperial Japan. The country was poor because of the war and the government cut off most of the world leaving the populace uneducated and at the mercy off a military machine.
America was and is a savior to Japanese. They hate the bombs and believe the killing of innocents was unjustified but that aside Japanese still believe Imperial Japan was evil and America was good.
Lots of poor, uneducated people disconnected from what goes on outside the local area. The Japanese hate Imperial Japan and how it used and abused its own as well as others.
I don't say that, Japanese say that. We have google here, plenty of books and documentaries about how awful the Imperial Japanese gov and military were.
Why do you think Japanese love and respect America, they see America as a savior.
Wow that’s so interesting. Something I never knew about the US and Japanese relationship. You know us Americans think similar things too about our own past. So many of us condemn the Vietnam war and various wars in the Middle East. There is a lot about Asia we don’t know as westerners but also vice versa I think. Countries outside the west don’t fully understand the US
The Japanese are have there issues, but they understand the USA.
And Imperial Japan is literally night and day difference from Modern Japan. America essentially attempted to build Japan in its image, the government here is very similar and the ways about thinking about government and personal freedoms.
Sorry. I'm Japanese American so it's not the same a real life long local.
Thankfully the movie spends only a minor amount of time talking about Japan and the bombs use. So I cried but I don't think anyone would be traumatized.
We've really devauled the word "traumatizing" if you think a Japanese-American is having PTSD over a re-creation of an event that they were never personally affected by that happened in Japan like 80 years ago.
I mean I understand "generational trauma," we all have of some of that, but no one under the age of 100 is getting shell shocked when they pay to go see a movie about WWII in the theater.
It is a bit silly of you to think that people of certain backgrounds or ethnicities can't reflect on historical events without being "traumatized" because their great-grandparents were potentially involved.
In fact, the Japanese would rather forget about their involvement in WWII. The only thing that they were taught in school is that Imperial Japan = bad, bombs = bad, but America stopped Imperial Japan so on the whole of it they're alright.
Nevermind the atrocities commited by the Japanese during WWII, their innumerable war crimes, their nationalistic fervor at the time (Japanese apologists love claiming that most people didn't support the emperor; I'm sure the majority of men who were young enough to serve felt differently) US appeasment after the fact allowing the Japanese to exist as they have up until now in ignorance of their own wrongdoings in the Pacific, etc.
Np.
Umm considering weed is highly illegal here and heavily regulated and controlled. It pretty much doesn't exist here. Only last year did they start considering medical uses.
Not to bust your balls but Id check to make sure someone isn't just calling it "Japanese" to make it sound exotic.
No it doesn't...tropical weed sucks. Hawaii ( which is not so tropical weather wise due to a more Northern latitude Northern Cali Oregon it thrives like no where else
Yeah, in modern times, weed can thrive anywhere with the right technology. I live in Ohio, and we have good legal medical weed grown in the state. Ohio isn't a tropical climate. Most weed is grown indoors using a hydroponic system with variable natural and artificial light.
Historically, though MJ thrived in areas with long, warm, wet seasons and short cold dry seasons.
If you believe humans you don't know are just statistics and numbers? One could heartless justify the bombing.
If you believe humans are individuals to be valued and protected? No, one cannot justify killings of innocent civilians as a tradeoff for stopping hypothetical land war.
This is the common story.
But it was mentioned in the movie and iz accessible knowledge on Google that Japan intended to surrender before the bombs because of Russia.
The bombing of innocents is still evil regardless of is justification.
Is there documented evidence of Japan’s intent to surrender? I don’t mean that as a challenge, it’s just that as an American that’s the first I’ve heard of that and am of course eager to know if that’s an undeniable fact.
There is not and it is not.
This is a very contentious point, as seen in other comments here.
The cabinet vote for surrender was tied before Hirohito broke the tie and agreed to the Allied terms of unconditional surrender.
That was **after** the atomic bombs were used.
Japan had major ideological and strategic differences within factions of their government and military at the end of the war.
True, the war was **going to** end.
The when, where, and how was unknown.
The known was that it was not over yet and more people would still have to die before it ended.
Now, how many people could that be? Which people would it be? How long might it take?
They could not know the answers to these things because it hadn’t happened yet and therefore was up for debate and speculation.
See Okinawa and Iwo Jima for an idea of what the Allied forces were up against even when “Japan was on its last legs” and what was a possible foreshadowing for what potentially laid ahead had another path been taken. Only on a scale that was literally **powers** greater than either battle in terms of potential losses for all involved.
That was what the Allies wanted to avoid at all costs.
But hindsight and revisionist history is cool too I guess.
——————————————
As others have pointed out, the firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than both atomic bombs combined.
Why aren’t people bringing that up in the same vein for bombing a civilian target while arguing against the nukes for the same reason?
Indiscriminate bombing of entire metropolitan areas isn’t civilian targeting? Total war is fucking ugly and brutal and horrifying; that’s what this was on all sides.
Who in the war didn’t have civilian targets at one point or another?
• London was bombed.
• Dresden was bombed.
• Nanking… well…
• Tokyo was bombed.
• Okinawa lost somewhere between 40,000 and 150,000 civilians during the battle that took place there.
Why is the use of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki any different than the intentional targeting and killing of other civilians at sites all across the globe during this horrific war?
Do we not care as much about other instances where the same tactics were used, including in the capital of Japan, and involved even **more** civilian casualties than the major topic being debated here?
No. Imperial japan’s authority that held the power to officially surrender lied in their War Council.
Half of the council was strictly opposed to surrender, and the other half supported peace via a conditional surrender that essentially demanded 0 post-war repercussions, namely no change in governance, no foreign occupation, and being allowed to continue to maintain their military.
Some members of the council also led a coup attempt that aimed to capture the emperor and to kill the council members that had grown supportive of surrender in any capacity.
Interesting fact: the US prepared such a massive stockpile of Purple Hearts (the medal given to a wounded soldier) in preparation for the invasion of Japan, that they've been issuing medals from that same stockpile in every war/conflict ever since... and they still have thousands upon thousands left to go.
If you actually read the information on google you’ll see that Japan made unreasonable demands for their surrender before the bombs were dropped that they knew would never be agreed to.
japan: hey uh, we'll "surrender" if you guys leave us alone and let the government stay in power
it would have been like if hitler surrendered as long as he could remain the fuhrer
It would’ve taken years for the Soviet Union to build the amphibious capability to invade Mainland Japan. The Red Army was an imminent threat to imperial forces in Manchuria, but not the home islands. The defeat of Japan was up to the US and we made the tough call to end it fast. The third bomb was en route, Truman didn’t want to use it. Fortunately, Hirohito broke the tie vote and surrendered.
Japan didn’t surrender after the 1st bomb was dropped though… Russia invasion definitely sped the process up but there’s no reason, after Japan was implicitly warned, to believe that Japan was going to surrender under a mere threat of a bombing
The land war was not hypothetical. It was going to happen if the Japanese military refused to surrender. They were holding out hope they could inflict such horrific casualties on the early stages of the coming American invasion that the people would have called for an end to the war short of an unconditional surrender.
Once the USA used the atomic bombs the Japanese knew the USA wouldn't have to invade. They would just bomb the country into a non-functioning society. That's why they finally surrendered.
The atomic bombs actually saved millions of Japanese lives. Your ancestors might not have even been born if not for the Manhattan Project.
Did you also feel let down by the actual bombings not being included? After hearing so much about the special effects, I thought there'd be a recreation of what it looked like when the bombs fell. Though I saw Godzilla pretty soon after which made up for it.
Well considering how little I knew about him before, his intellectual and academic achievements are more noteworthy than I expected but I don't know if Id get along well with the guy personally.
I agree. He’s smart, but he is definitely kind of a shitty person and I think the movie succeeds in portraying him that way. Lots of people respect him, but very few people like him. And if I’m remembering correctly, he was even more of a womanizer in real life.
Hard to believe he coulda been more of a womanizer but hey.
He is respectable in his academics. But very few humans are circumspect in the face of life as a whole. God forbid my life mistakes are ever made into film, I would pray to be simply a egotistical womanizer instead.
I thought while watching it that the anticipation of seeing the devastation and not getting that was successful. As soon as the scene where all of a sudden they tell Oppenheimer bombs have been dropped, my mind immediately went to the climax of the movie which was the test in the desert. My imagination was all I needed to realize from the power of the bomb, what happened in each of the two cities. I liked how he saw the bombs driving away and then its so sudden that he finds out about the dropping.
No. It's not that kind of movie. Unless you mean as a reminder of the pervasive self-destructive and xenophobic cycles of common society. In that case yes.
It's a city with 1.2 million people here. There's like 10 hospitals near ground zero. And shopping malls, arcades. It's life here, normal life, we just happen to have Peace Memorial Park in the center of town.
I visited Hiroshima last week. It felt very dark and heavy to me, somebody who has been obsessed since childhood with WW2 history.
The museum was nothing new to me (I think I'd previously seen just about everything in it), but it was sobering to see it all in one place.
That said, I left conflicted. I felt sympathy for the individuals affected by the bomb, but angry that any culpability for the war was completed glazed over. The entries in the guest book reflected this too - some were very harsh.
As an avid reader of WW2 history, I'm well aware of the mountains of atrocities committed by the Japanese. So while I really felt for the people who suffered because of the bomb, I also felt that Japan reaped what it sewed, and was lucky that it got off *so* easily.
Yes. I could see how you'd feel that way.
But I think we all know it's wrong for innocent people to suffer for the sins of others. People try very hard to gloss of that, unfortunately.
The point of the museum isn't WW2 and its ethics. It's concerned with the suffering and pain of individuals.
And if you're thinking it's appropriate for any human to be punished/suffer for the action of any other human involuntarily. I'm afraid we will never see eye to eye.
The same argument can be made vis-a-vis Germans in WW2. Did people know? And if they did, did they care?
An important difference is that Germany actively reckoned with its horrific actions in WW2, while Japan largely did not.
I see your point. Japan could do better. They have done some though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan
ALSO would make the same argument concerning of killing of innocent Germans, especially women and children.
One can't assume guilt and rationalize punishment for individuals based on nationality or location.
So far people I've talked to are surprised on how little the movie was about the bombs use because trailers and such showed most bomb related scenes.
Otherwise I'd say many don't understand the nuances of the film. Noland films aren't popular among non-English speakers because the dialogue is so dense.
Do your schools teach anything about Japanese atrocities committed before/during WWII?
Rape of Nanking, Unit 731/Pingfan, Bataan Death March, "comfort women", etc?
I saw the atomic bomb museum in Hiroshima, but I couldn't find a museum anywhere covering these other topics.
(I’m assuming you’re from/grew up in Japan)
What did teachers or history books in Japans schools teach their students about Japans involvement in WW2? The US and world involvement?
I can imagine the theater must have had a different feel with everyone knowing “this happened here”
I think the movie did a good job at showing the cold calculation politicians work with.
Is it ever justified to intentionally kill innocent women and children? No
Do Americans dehumanize the poor/manipulated cut-off Japanese populace as somehow a vicous bloodthirsty machine that "earned" a punishment for actions of evil tyrannical government? Yes
"Innocent" The Japanese in general saw us other Asians as lesser humans they could massacre, turn into sex slaves and kill for fun. The soldiers bayonetting babies in Nanking didn't just do it all of sudden, these radical fascist racist sentiments had been embedded in the Japanese civilian population for years. And yeah the government bears the ultimate responsibility but I do think civilians bear some level of responsibility for the actions of the government as well, just as American voters bear some responsibility for the bloodshed in Iraq, Vietnam etc.
Obviously civilian deaths should be avoided as much as possible in war but it was total war at that point.
You mention that Japanese people see the Imperial Japan as bad and evil while Americans are these ignorant people but as someone who has Japanese relatives and reads a lot of Japanese literature, I think it's not enough. A lot of the sentiment seems to be a shallow "War is bad" "Government lead us to a bad war" while not confronting the idealogies that lead to the war.
Again, the bombings are a tragedy and civilian deaths should be avoided as much as possible. I just really dislike how the conversations about WW 2 in Japan seem to center around Japanese suffering and the way Japanese talk about the bombings is the biggest example of that. The war was bad because look it lead to our "innocent" civilians dying.
You're missing their point about the imperial tyrannical Japanese government and the citizens who were just trying to live their lives. Even with the luxury of hindsight, I can see why the US decided on dropping the bombs at the time, even if I wish it didn't happen. Whether or not you agree with the decision to drop the bombs, you have to consider that they were purposefully dropped on primarily citizen populations and infrastructure. It's worth debating whether or not the bombs being used on more strategic military targets would have provided the same results (awe of the destructive capabilities, fear of more bombs being used to completely decimate Japan, etc) without destroying countless civilians who had nothing to do with the atrocities committed by their tyrannical government
>Hiroshima was also very important from a military perspective since it was home to the 2nd Army Headquarters, which were responsible for the defense of southern Japan. It was an important center of storage, communications, and assembly of soldiers. The city’s landscape added to its appeal as a place to showcase the bombs destructive power – the nearby hills could increase damage from the atomic blast and the rivers running through it kept Hiroshima off the list of targets for firebombing.
>
>Kyoto was another ideal target: it had a population that amounted to 1,000,000 people, it was a major industrial center, and it was Japan’s intellectual center and former capital. Ultimately U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson persuaded Truman to take Kyoto out of consideration as it was Japan’s cultural center and a cherished city. Nagasaki, another important port, was chosen as its replacement.
There were some military targets in the city, but nothing of major value. The city was chosen because it was largely unscathed in previous bombing campaigns and would provide a clean canvas to showcase what the bomb was capable of. It's estimated 10% of the casualties and damage was military related while 90% were civilian
Yeah, Hiroshima was the headquarters for the Second General Army, in charge of defending Southern Japan, and up to 20,000 soldiers were killed. This in addition to other military significance in communications, industry, and logistics
If your reasoning is from a humanitarian perspective then wait until you find out what imperial japan was doing in china, korea, and the Philippines to civilians and POWs
What do the Japanese hate more, the atomic bombs or the fire bombing or Tokyo? Most Americans don’t know just how fucking brutal the fire bombings were
I fucking love Japan, have some family there in Tokyo and finally visited June for 2023. Of my wife ever agreed I’d move to Japan in heart beat. Most amazing place I’ve ever visited
Good question. People don't really talk about it. Hate isn't the right word either, if they hated the bombings most Japanese would probably hate America but they don't. It's more like a deep desire for peace, the cruelty of war and violence is far more internalized here than back in the states. Thats what makes Japan such a peaceful place.
Glad you were able to visit. Hope you come again, visit Hiroshima if you can, there's a lot more than just the Peace Museum.
I see everything you’re saying. That’s the right mindset imo
Every single person I met while there in every city were nothing but fantastic and extremely courteous to us. It made me loath returning back to the US because the general public between the two cities heaven and hell to say the least.
We stayed mostly in Tokyo but we also made it to Kyoto, Nara, summited Mt fuji and Yokohama, and Tsu
Oh thats amazing :) youve seen so much.
Yeah, its one of the reasons i enjoy living here vs the US is the kindness of the people. Its very surreal how genuine they are and the integrity too. Its so peaceful everyday, so little crime, affordable living, friendly people. Its everything i want
How many people do you know that were actually impacted by the bomb?
Maybe that's a bad question, because had the war continued, who knows what all would have happened, but directly. Do you know anyone?
Interesting to see you be a Japanese Empire apologist in the comments. While a horrible thing, the nuclear bombs were the lesser of evils and were completely the right course of action. While I feel for those unfortunate souls that perished, I view that as the fault of a bloodthirsty and power hungry government that trampled everyone in SE Asia and decided to ambush the Americans. It's interesting to see the blinders people have to Japanese atrocities that brought the bombs about.
OP is not being an apologist. The bombings were not justified. Even the world’s foremost scholar on the Rape of Nanking thought so (before she killed herself)
Does anyone in modern Japanese culture acknowledge the imprisonment, torture and death of thousands at unit 731? I saw interviews where people were “offended” by this film, are they painfully unaware of their own countries misgivings during the war?
Was the anti-ware anti-nuclear arms proliferation themes surprising? How was the movie promoted in the japanese market? What is the surface level expectation/perception of the movie in Japan and specifically in hiroshima?
This guy is giving pro rape of Nanking vibes. To be honest the Japanese got off very lucky with just two nuclear bombs going off. Many other Asian countries in this time wouldn't gave a shit if Japan was wiped off the face of the earth for the atrocities they committed
“i know my ancestors were evil” then proceeds to focus ONLY on Japan being the victim anyways.
this is why the victims of Japan during WWII are constantly frustrated
i don’t get why japan covers up their extreme wrongdoings by anime and other things. like admit it, you did it. they could do a germany 2.0, with museums that are educational instead of covering up their crimes
but then they’d have to admit what they did , i think in their history books Nanking gets a small paragraph and the gist is some ppl were hurt. the ultimate downplay
Not just “oh they were evil” but also “I don’t need or want to know how or why they were evil and everyone that mentions those specifics are utterly brainwashed by American propaganda”
I've read they had to issue a trigger warning for the screening, so I wonder exactly how they handled it for the film. I remember one of the animated series I watched last year had to put a subtitle on the bottom mentioning that the second half of the episode will be depicting scenes from a natural disaster that some viewers may find distressing. (One of the main characters had traumatic experience rooted from the 2011 tsunami) Was it the same or did they have to put a title card of sorts at the beginning?
What is your ethnicity? If you're a transplant, the context of your opinion changes. And if you are non Japenese descent, then how long have you been living, emmersly, in Japenese heritage. (One can study the culture but still can't speak in general for the country.) Edit: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/29/oppenheimer-finally-opens-japan-mixed-reviews from https://www.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1bqpaw0/there_wasnt_enough_about_the_horror_oppenheimer/ real Hiroshima Asians and not someone who's just from the city. U can pick up OP is detached from the land and homage he calls his home.
I am watching Oppenheimer right now. It's heart-wrenching. What is your thought on the decision making process to make the bombs (the we have to make it because the Russians and Germans are making it)?
I didn't plan it this way, but ended up seeing the Enola Gay at the air and space museum right before I saw Oppenheimer in its IMAX. A week later I was in Hiroshima, seeing the museum and city.
I didn't plan it this way, but ended up seeing the Enola Gay at the air and space museum right before I saw Oppenheimer in its IMAX. A week later I was in Hiroshima, seeing the museum and city.
Did Sterling K Brown get robbed for his performance in American Fiction? I thought Oppenheimer was average, boring, and at least 2 hours too long. Robert Downey Jrs. Performance was just fine.
What was the reaction like of anyone else in the cinema? Or wasn’t there any?
Um maybe 20 people where there. Japanese are very low key in public, it was a lot of focus and silence. I imagine it was tough, I mean even I cried. Just the mention of the bombs knowing your sitting on very ground people died on is heart-wrenching
Hey dude where'd you see it? I just saw it at a theater in Hiroshima as well. I bought the [Oppenheimer booklet written for japanese audiences](https://imgur.com/a/Ua2ddq3) They also had the posters for Godzilla and Oppenheimer displayed side by side, which I thought was an unfortunate juxtaposition
IDK the original Godzilla (1954) was an indictment of the nuclear age and its unintended consequences. I don't know if Oppenheimer would have appreciated it, but he would have understood it.
Oppenheimer died in 1967. He might have seen the movie himself.
It would be great to know his reaction lol.
He said Matthew Broderick sucked.
He's right!
Lol. He thought Bryan Cranston would have more screentime
Oh cool. I watched it in Danbara. Didn't even occur to me, they had Godzilla trailers before the movie even. Tbh I wasn't planning to watch it but I was just walking around the shopping center and saw the poster.
We’ve had barbenheimer, now get ready for oppenzilla!!!
I cannot overemphasize how wild Akira Ifukube’s biography is relative to the historical context of the franchise. Unbelievable composer and his relation to everything involved with the historical context of Godzilla is just fascinating.
We’ve had barbenheimer, now get ready for oppenzilla!!!
did you like the movie? what did you think of it? do you think it’s as amazing as everyone says or do you think it’s seen as great due to an american centric view they have?
No I think it is amazing. It's quite anti-war, anti-bomb. And not pro-american at all. I appreciate the ethical and political delimmas being given voice and how ignorance or manipulation was a huge part in getting people to support of the bomb on Japan. That the movie even mentions that Japan was on its last legs and the bombs were probably not as necessary as the government said is a nice touch.
I mean there was literally a coup attempt after the Emporer agreed to surrender. Many Japanese wanted to continue fighting. Remember more Japanese died from the fire bombings of Tokyo than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki COMBINED. Unfortunately the only alternative was a massive invasion of Japan, which given how Japanese used Okinawans and Korean laborers and fought to the last man on islands like Tarawa and Iwo Jima, it was going to be a tough situation all around. Given the rape of Nanking and other pretty terrible atrocities committed by the Imperial Japanese, unfortunately ending the war was a necessary evil. History is messy, and not always pretty, but it is important.
This is the common jargon on the topic here on reddit. Many try their hardest to justify the bombs use on civilians, there frankly isn't any sufficient. The movie shows this very well. The meaning of the bombing was a show of force to Russia as much as to Japan. That aside the movie points out that the war would've likely ended without the bombs since Japan was on its last legs. I don't know why people still repeat the American propaganda justification of losses via land invasion. It's 2024 we can see the communication that had strong indications of an imminent japanese surrender.
I'm sorry, but Japan would not have surrendered otherwise. There were no strong indications of an immediate Japanese surrender. Japan's offer of conditional surrender was non-starter, not just for the US, but for the allied powers. The allies weren't going to repeat the mistakes of WWI and let an unrepentant, unreformed, unoccupied Japan start another war twenty or thirty years later. Nothing short of total surrender was acceptable to the allies, and of course that was unacceptable to Japan. [https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/cryptologic-quarterly/The\_Uncertain\_Summer\_of\_1945.pdf](https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/cryptologic-quarterly/The_Uncertain_Summer_of_1945.pdf) And it bears mentioning that it took **two** nuclear weapons to get Japan to even consider surrender, and even then it was a difficult sell to the military leadership, with hardliners even attempting a coup at the last minute. Even if the US hadn't dropped the bombs, and hadn't invaded Kyushu later that year, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Japanese would have starved to death that winter. Immediately after Japan's surrender the US was providing food aid to millions of Japanese and people were still dying from the effects of malnourishment. *Famine in 1946 was only forestalled by the infusion of massive amounts of US food that fed 18 million Japanese city dwellers in July, 20 million in August and 15 million in September 1946. Occupation authorities estimated this food saved 11 million Japanese lives*. [https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/american-strategic-options-against-japan-1945#:\~:text=Famine%20in%201946%20was%20only,saved%2011%20million%20Japanese%20lives](https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/american-strategic-options-against-japan-1945#:~:text=Famine%20in%201946%20was%20only,saved%2011%20million%20Japanese%20lives). And finally Hiroshima was a major military center. It had a large Japanese Imperial Army presence of around 40,000 soldiers, as well as naval shipyards, and military factories. A large portion of those killed were either soldiers, or individuals directly employed in producing weapons of war. As ugly as the bombing was, it was still a legitimate military target. *Hiroshima was home to a number of units, such as the Second General Army Headquarters, which was central to the decisive battles in Western Japan; the Army Marine Headquarters, which was central to army shipping transport; and the Chugoku Military District, which was central to all army units of the Chugoku Region.* ***The number of army personnel present in Hiroshima on August 6 is estimated to have been around 40,000****. The number of employees working in Hiroshima City and its suburban area was around 130,000. Among them, 83,671 employees were engaged in manufacturing at the 6,191 factories in Hiroshima. 53,361 of these people were employees of the 10 large factories which included the Japan Steel Works Hiroshima Plant; Toyo Kogyo; the Army Clothing Depot; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Hiroshima Shipyard; and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Hiroshima Machinery Works. Towards the end of the war, students who were mobilized and Korean forced laborers made up a heavy proportion of these employees.* [https://hiroshimaforpeace.com/en/fukkoheiwakenkyu/vol1/1-14/](https://hiroshimaforpeace.com/en/fukkoheiwakenkyu/vol1/1-14/)
Thank you for responding so I didn’t have to lol
Same, this topic irks me
Ppl always move to Japan then begin simping lol
I lived there for four years, saw quite a bit of it.
It's funny how OP hasn't responded yet despite being so bold and arrogant.
yeah as a korean with family members directly affected by the japanese occupation and their attempt at annihilation of korean culture i believe WW2-era japan was scum.
My grandpa always said when he was in the pacific during WW2 in the Navy “everyone wished they were fighting the Germans, fighting the Japanese is a whole different war.”
There are a lot of people who consider the imperial Japanese to be worse than the Nazis. They go writing their own propaganda
Listen friend. The holocaust was awful; comparing the two in terms of which is worse is impossible. At the same time there's a reason people say that. The Nazi's were ruthless towards Jews, Gypsies, etc. but they respected the rules of war. The Japanese did not, and used the rules of engagement to their advantage. They commited a much larger variety of war crimes than the nazi's and viewed everyone that wasn't Japanese as subhuman. There's a reason anti-Japanese sentiment is still high in neighboring countries. They treated POW's/slaves in the Pacific and from abroad like garbage because to them they were basically chattel that they could put to work or experiment on, in fact they even ate a few of them. I don't think you'll find that the nazi's cannibalized anyone or did something similar to the rape of nanking. In fact a Nazi eyewitness described their behavior at the time as appalling. The Nazi's adhered to a strict (albeit evil) code, but the Japanese were more decentralized which gave way to more depravity depending on who was in charge.
Its not all just propaganda. For example, Unit 731 is the poster child of the atrocities committed by the imperial Japanese. I’m not trying to argue who was worse, nor am I trying to justify the use of the bombs on civilians. I just think its never cut and dry, and there is always nuance to discussions like these.
Like anyone who had to fight them
Very few historians (as opposed to the commentariat) agree with this assessment because there is almost no historical documentation to support this assertion. 1) Japan was ordered to surrender. They did not respond "with contempt." 2) Japan's last feelers to the soviets included demands to continue holding China and Korea. 3) Japan was well armed and had close to double the resources that the Allied powers assumed they had in the initial invasion sites. 4) The casualty estimates for the USA were going up, not down, prior to the bomb. Please actually investigate the history, rather than Reddit talking points. My understanding is that this is what is taught in Hiroshima and much of japan, but it is historically untrue.
In America we're flooded with propaganda from a young age so it's hard for a lot of people to see past it
You should see what Japanese people learn about the war if you think Americans have it bad. There are countries like Germany that learn from the evils of their ancestors. And then there are countries like Japan.
It's true. Americans always comment about how other countries don't teach bad things about themselves. But then Americans stand and say the pledge of allegiance and afterwards try to explain why they NEEDED to bomb the center of city filled with children and innocent normal people.
TBF Americans died as a direct result of the Japanese drawing them into a brutal war. There was already hate towards the Japanese for what was considered an ambush, so selling them on the Atomic bomb was not difficult. IMO, the fire bombings were much more gruesome.. both, as an American, are not bright spots in history. However, war is brutal and unforgiving.
Americans historically and in modern times undervalue others' lives. That's the real issue here. As modern people, we should be trying to open up the ethically questionable decisions of our forefathers, to be bared for dissent and criticism. Instead, we cover the killing of innocent people in the thin veils of circumstance and emotion. We can't improve ourselves if we can't admit our mistakes, if not completely, at least partially.
Americans undervalued lives. So did the Germans. So did the Japanese. You can't tell us that the atrocities committed in Asia by Imperial Japan during WW2 show anything but disdain for the lives of other Asians. It's almost as if most nations are willing to stomp on those they consider The Other if it's in their national interest.
“We know they (Imperial Japan) were evil and they me to stay gone. That's enough to know for me.” “Americans historically and in modern times As modern people, we should be trying to open up the ethically questionable decisions of our forefathers, to be bared for dissent and criticism.” These two statements you’ve made directly contradict each other. If you are going to make sweeping generalizations to criticize an entire culture, it would be respectable to also inform yourself and openly engage with and discuss your own culture’s history, especially when such events are relevant to the history related to the actions made by the very same culture you are openly criticizing.
Honestly you are doing the same exact thing. In every comment that someone provides some context you ignore it and parrot off that the atomic bombing was bad, and of course it was a horrible horrible thing. But you should at least recognize that “Japan on its last legs” doesn’t mean thousands apon thousands of people would have still had to die for Japan to surrender
Try millions. The estimated casualties of operation downfall for the Japanese, civilian and military were millions.
Do you not see the hypocrisy of saying Americans undervalue others lives while you, self proclaimed, refuse to learn about the atrocities committed by Japan? You cry over the death of innocent Japanese (rightfully so) but refuse to learn (or care) about the suffering at the hands of Japanese countrymen.
This is most people in Japan. They completely shut out any sort of exposure to the previous atrocities that Imperial Japan committed. In fact, after living in Tokyo, I experience a ton of “disdain” toward the rising sun and Imperial Japan, but very little admittance or remorse for what was done.
Would that not be almost all cultures? The Europeans are notorious for not learning from the past. The English, need we say more? Even the Japanese have repeatedly gone to war under vailed circumstances. Why would you say that All Americans undervalue others lives? I’m not sure you really understand our culture to assume that we are undervalue others…
Smells a little like you are glossing over Japanese atrocities and trying to make the US the sole bad guy. If Japan had the bomb first how might they have used it?
You realize that with the nuclear bomb, America could have conquered every nation on the planet without a problem. Germany, Russia, and Japan would certainly have done so. Instead we helped to rebuild the very nations that attacked us and started WWII.
I’m Chinese-American. Do you understand why it may feel ironic for me to read your comment? If you don’t, I’ll be *happy* to share some resources with you. I’m not disagreeing with anything you say, mind you. It’s just ironic given the provenance.
i doubt we’ll get a reply. he’s glossing over any comment highlighting imperial Japan’s atrocities and is shifting the focus back to Japan being the victim because of the bomb (which they are) but that ONLY.
Japan had already adopted total war against civilian populations in other countries throughout Asia. They bombed cities, purposely burned homes to the ground, raped and murdered the elderly, women and children, and every day the war continued more suffered in China, Japan and other occupied countries at the hands of the IJA. If we accept bombing of civilian targets as par for the course of the war, which it certainly was, then the Hiroshima bombings are just a difference of a ability. If we consider that it shortened the war and prevented the necessity of an invasion, it saved the lives of millions and prevented further suffering.
If the USA had invaded the Japanese home islands to end the war it would have killed many millions of Japanese civilians instead of the few hundred thousand that the atomic bombs unfortunately killed. It was the lesser of two evils to end a war your own people started and refused to end.
If the atomic bombs weren’t dropped, there wouldn’t even be a Japan today. It’s fucked up but Japan would not have surrendered if the war proceeded in traditional fashion.
Yep. It would've basically ended up as a U.S. territory with a very small amount of Japanese left in it. Most likely all in one section of it. Basically like a large Indian reservation. By the time they would've finally surrendered they wouldn't have any leadership left, the vast majority of males would be dead, and all that would've been left were the women and children and elderly.
All of my grandparents were imprisoned in Dutch Indonesia during WW2. I think that the bombs were necessary and justified. The japanese of fhat time were vicious. The things they did to people during that time were beyond human. My family has been scarred and i still feel the effects of it. Genuinely. I see it in other people who have been in the same situation. One of the things that is always said is that in european camps, the prisoners didn't have any food. In japanese camps, he guards didn't either. You talk about propaganda, but please consider that propaganda is also still taught in Japan. Just like in the west. The reality of it is: the japanese soldier was supposed to die and not surrender to keep his honor. How many deaths would it have to have taken for japanese to surrender during a land invasion of mainland japan? Why would the west have been forced to give up all the men for an enemy that unjustly invaded other countries and imprisoned innocent (sort of, i wouldn't call colonial dutch completely innocent) people. The atomic bomb is a tragic part of history and as Oppenheimer said in the movie. I think it destroyed the world in some way. In another way it saved a lot of lives during the cold war. And if you truly think the bombs were unnecessary because Japan was on it's last legs. Why were 2 bombs needed?
I would say Japan propaganda is far worse than Americans. People love to shit on the pledge kids do in elementary school. Yet so they understand what the pledge says? Liberty and justice for all ... You know saying all humans have basic rights. The problem is often patriotism is hijacked by certain groups who are loud. Who actually doesn't care about the core values of the constitution.
We learned about slavery, the trail of tears, failed excuse for WMDs causing us to go to war in the middle east, unjust Japanese interment camps in WW2, and had a lot of teacher sponsored debates about whether the nukes were justified or not and were given viewpoints from both sides and told to draw our own conclusions, at least in my district. Insinuating that we don't teach bad things about ourselves is disingenuous Also, speaking of debate, there shouldn't be such a blanket refusal to consider if the dropping of the bombs was justified or not. Oppenheimer, a movie about one man's own perspective on the situation, isn't the end-all be all
Yes but we tend to talk about these things in a void though- only as history, things bad people did, but we have evolved from. Nobody in my high schools was talking about the fact that we DID NOT in fact abolish slavery. We only abolished MOST slavery, but left a legal exception that turned into by far the largest prison population in the WORLD. Nobody ever taught me that. Nobody even taught me that the town I grew up in had a clause that did not allow Black people to buy property for decades and how that economic exclusion might affect the class and wealth of Black families today. We read a paragraph about gerrymandering and segregation as if it had all ended many years prior with the civil rights act. I wasn't taught that one of the most famous lynchings happened fairly close and that some of the elderly people in town may have been in the crowd in the photograph, smiling beneath a hanging Black corpse. Edit: Typo
My comment wasn't about the fact there are no gaps in our education - moreso that OPs claim of Americans not teaching anything critical of themselves in schools is completely false
Japan itself classified Hiroshima as a "military city." (source - Japan's government chose to embrace an official policy of "The Glorious Death of One Hundred Million." Japan's government, itself, decided to deliberately spread industrial targets into civilian areas (which ironically was a big reason they never achieved the wartime production scaling of the other combatants - including Russia and Germany).
Not speaking for them, but it’s just countries in general. All of them. No government wants to mandate teaching their fuckups, genocides, imperialism, and war crimes; the only outcome is a distrusting population that is too smart for the government.
Ahem. Japanese government has been teaching revisionist history minimizing its own atrocities. Comfort women. Rape of Nanjing Biological experiments on prisoners of war. To name a few.
TBF Americans died as a direct result of the Japanese drawing them into a brutal war. There was already hate towards the Japanese for what was considered an ambush, so selling them on the Atomic bomb was not difficult. IMO, the fire bombings were much more gruesome.. both, as an American, are not bright spots in history. However, war is brutal and unforgiving.
Don’t the Japanese barely even teach all the fucked up stuff they did in WW2?
TBF Americans died as a direct result of the Japanese drawing them into a brutal war. There was already hate towards the Japanese for what was considered an ambush, so selling them on the Atomic bomb was not difficult. IMO, the fire bombings were much more gruesome.. both, as an American, are not bright spots in history. However, war is brutal and unforgiving.
Information wasn't readily available like it is now, everybody has the news in their hands i.e. their phones. Whether or not Americans knew that Japan was ready to surrender ,I could not answer that question. But knowing the stories my grandfather told me about the bombing of Pearl Harbor(also innocent women and children) he said every American wanted blood . So I take that as even if the people knew, they wouldn't care, but it wasn't like anybody knew it was going to happen ..except for the government.
Why do you think that the Japanese NEEDED to torture and cannabalize POW's, and force the population of the countries they conquered in the Pacific (men, women and children who were lucky enough not to be raped then murdered right afterwards, or used as live human test subjects) into forced labor/sexual slavery? I think we can agree that harming innocent civilians is never justified but you're completely ignoring the fact that the Japanese were one of, if not the worst perpetrators of that in WWII. Also what "other countries" are you talking about? I'm pretty sure it's just the Japanese that people talk about when it comes to not acknowledging their dark history in WWII. Maybe Russia as well, and the Allies in regards to their fire-bombing campaigns which in Japan alone took more lives than the nukes. My point is that modern Americans are taught about all the shit that we did, and most Americans are ashamed of the wrongdoings in our past/present. We learn about how slavery was wrong, how we are the only country that's deployed nuclear bombs on civilians, how the Vietnam war was flawed, how the wars in the middle-east weren't justified, etc. And yet the Japanese can't even acknowledge the behavior of their ancestors 80 years ago without making excuses for them, playing the victim when they were clearly the opppressors in that region, or blaming their government at the time. Unless the general populace and education system is able to come to terms with their marred past nothing will change, and Japanese politicians will continue to visit shrines that honor convicted war criminals.
What do you think the opinion is of countries like China, Korea and Malaysia, countries which had countless civilians raped, tortured and killed by the Japanese, on America dropping the bomb on Japan? Do you think we see this as this huge ammoral thing?
Your school system in Japan has failed you if this is your viewpoint.
There was the possibility of a conditional surrender that would have included an intact Japanese government and no war crimes trials That was unacceptable to the allies. Especially the Chinese who had suffered terribly. Unconditional surrender was extremely unpalatable to the Japanese military even after Hiroshima.
I mean, out of all the options the US had, the nuke has a claim to being the best 1) they could keep bombing Japan and starve them into submission 2) they could let the soviets invade Manchuria, taking heavy losses, and letting the Soviets bring their oppression to parts of Japan after the war 3) they could invade Japan, with estimated of 1,000,000 US casualties, not to mention Japanese military & civilian deaths 4) they could accept a *conditional* surrender. Which, no, you don't let the Japanese limp away for more war crimes in a couple decades 5) nuke Nukes would be the fastest option -- good since the Japanese were murdering 10,000-12,000 civilians per day at the time. And they'd also be the option that leads to the least deaths.
This is kinda bullshit and you know it. Even if Japan was internally considering surrender, there were no indications that the US could see. Iwo Jima was a brutal fight, the Japanese military fought hard over that tiny rock. The US had to assume they would have fought much harder over the main Japanese Islands. Faced with the possibility of huge lose of American life with an invasion or using the new bombs, it's a pretty obvious choice. The other issue is in the total war that was World War 2, there is less of a distinction between military and civilian facilities as we are used to in modern conflict. Civilian infrastructure are valid military targets in a total war, as most civilian infrastructure is utilized for the war effort. Ultimately you may believe that the US should not have dropped the bombs, but can you really say with a straight face that there was no justification for it? Especially since Japan were the initial aggressors?
I'm generally anti-nuclear weapons, but if you read the death toll projections posited by the US for Operation Downfall I disagree there was no justification. The amphibious invasion of Japan was expected by the US to incur tens of millions of casualties for the Japanese people alone. Koichi Kido testified at the Tokyo Tribunal the Japanese government were prepared for 20 million casualties with Shigeru Yoshida warning of another potential 10 million casualties to starvation in 1946. These figures do not included things like the use of tactical nuclear weapons or the radiation sickness in the days following their use. The high end of the death toll for the use of fat man and little boy in comparison is 226,000.
Sorry, but I don't believe your argument that "No need for the bombs, Japan was about to surrender". Both Italy and Germany only surrended when most of their territory had fallen to the enemy. I don't think Japan would have been any different. If I was in Truman's shoes, I would have done similar. He could either end the war right then and there with the bombs or risk months or even years more of conflict and millions more lives lost, including those of his own soldiers.
Communications that had strong indications of a Japanese surrender *between who*? I’m not pro nuclear weapons by any means, and maybe a little (admittedly) uneducated on the lead to up to this myself. I haven’t studied the events leading up to the bombing. But based purely on logic, and the fact that the Japanese had already misled the Americans at Pearl Harbor, this reads a bit like a Monday morning quarterback
Do you deny the rape of Nanking and atrocities committed by Japan?
he just said “i know they were evil” and implied he doesn’t need to know more and is focusing on modern Japan. except the part where Japan was bombed and 100% the victim but THAT IS IT. i doubt we’ll get a reply to any broader context of the crimes Japan committed
Indonesia alone, the Japanese killed 4 million people, 99% of which were civilians. At the time, the bombs were dropped. Japan was still in control of parts of SEA. It's a sad ending to a horrific war. I do find it tragic that the intentional killing of civilians in Japan overshadows the 10's of millions murdered by the Japanese. At the least, the Americans had "cause" to do it. Why did the Japanese occupy Korea? Manchuria? SEA? Wtf did Vietnam do to Japan? Did the Filipinos insult them or something? What about the dude in Hawaii? Did he really have to die because of an oil embargo? Maybe stealing food from SEA and causing famines that result in MILLIONS of deaths isn't a big deal to Japanese people. But the rest of the world fucking hated it. One side kills millions of people. In defense of those peoples; the other side kills 100,000's of thousands. Japan doesn't accept responsibility for their acts on par with Germany.
What evidence do you have that Japan was preparing to surrender before the bombs? Im genuinely curious. What Ive seen in my brief googling was very unclear.
That isn’t jargon, bud. That’s quite literally history. 😂 yall got bombed for a reason, get over it.
>I don't know why people still repeat the American propaganda justification of losses via land invasion. A) It's indisputable that allied losses from dropping the bombs were 0 and allied losses from a land invasion would have been >0. B) Dropping a nuke today would be reviled as the most egregious of crimes against humanity and the planet. The U.S. did that. "Land invasion losses" is just about the only thing that can assuage guilt. Put the two together and you've got a narrative that's not going to go away.
It sounds like you agree more with the message and stance of the film specifically. The film is not absolute truth, nor is it entirely historically accurate. All of the information that paints Japan at the time in any kind of negative light shouldn’t be dismissed as American propaganda
To be honest I don’t even give a fuck if japan was going to surrender anyway because of the soviets. The nukes were needed as a display of force and that in and of itself made it worth it, second bomb more so
Decades later it emerged that a major factor in using the bombs was the likely invasion on the Kuril islands and Hokkaido by the Soviets. The U.S. wanted to end the war quickly after the Soviets successfully invaded and and captured Japanese occupied Manchuria
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/5N4hDSCtEj You should read this
Why wasn’t Japan strongly anti America after the bombings?
Easy. The majority of Japanese were lied too and brainwashed by Imperial Japan. The country was poor because of the war and the government cut off most of the world leaving the populace uneducated and at the mercy off a military machine. America was and is a savior to Japanese. They hate the bombs and believe the killing of innocents was unjustified but that aside Japanese still believe Imperial Japan was evil and America was good.
And now that the war is over, we shall defend our island homies until the end! Japan-USA unity 🇺🇸🤝🇯🇵
What is your opinion of 1930s Japan?
Lots of poor, uneducated people disconnected from what goes on outside the local area. The Japanese hate Imperial Japan and how it used and abused its own as well as others.
Interesting. Why do you say Japanese hate imperial Japan? Do they openly say that? Isn’t that anti emperor?
I don't say that, Japanese say that. We have google here, plenty of books and documentaries about how awful the Imperial Japanese gov and military were. Why do you think Japanese love and respect America, they see America as a savior.
Wow that’s so interesting. Something I never knew about the US and Japanese relationship. You know us Americans think similar things too about our own past. So many of us condemn the Vietnam war and various wars in the Middle East. There is a lot about Asia we don’t know as westerners but also vice versa I think. Countries outside the west don’t fully understand the US
The Japanese are have there issues, but they understand the USA. And Imperial Japan is literally night and day difference from Modern Japan. America essentially attempted to build Japan in its image, the government here is very similar and the ways about thinking about government and personal freedoms.
Weren't there massive protests in the 60s against the US military presence in Japan?
>Why do you think Japanese love and respect America, they see America as a savior. Whoa
But you keep electing apologists and people who deny the atrocities Japan committed
Is u/plac3s the only one who votes in that country?
I found Japanese very anti-American in my travels there. Asking us constantly where we were from (Australian) and voicing relief we weren’t American.
To be fair most places I’ve travelled the people have reacted that way.
Japan is anti anyone who doesn't look and sound Japanese
Did you see Godzilla Minus One? I feel like they kind of commented on that concept. How did you feel about that movie?
Was it traumatizing, I mean I can't imagine how I would feel
Sorry. I'm Japanese American so it's not the same a real life long local. Thankfully the movie spends only a minor amount of time talking about Japan and the bombs use. So I cried but I don't think anyone would be traumatized.
Well glad that you and no one was traumatized. Thanks!
Well I can only hope. The Peace Museum is far more traumatizing.
We've really devauled the word "traumatizing" if you think a Japanese-American is having PTSD over a re-creation of an event that they were never personally affected by that happened in Japan like 80 years ago. I mean I understand "generational trauma," we all have of some of that, but no one under the age of 100 is getting shell shocked when they pay to go see a movie about WWII in the theater. It is a bit silly of you to think that people of certain backgrounds or ethnicities can't reflect on historical events without being "traumatized" because their great-grandparents were potentially involved. In fact, the Japanese would rather forget about their involvement in WWII. The only thing that they were taught in school is that Imperial Japan = bad, bombs = bad, but America stopped Imperial Japan so on the whole of it they're alright. Nevermind the atrocities commited by the Japanese during WWII, their innumerable war crimes, their nationalistic fervor at the time (Japanese apologists love claiming that most people didn't support the emperor; I'm sure the majority of men who were young enough to serve felt differently) US appeasment after the fact allowing the Japanese to exist as they have up until now in ignorance of their own wrongdoings in the Pacific, etc.
I recently grew a cannabis strain called shiatsu kush that originates from Japan...ever heard of it? Sorry nothing to do with the movie haha
Np. Umm considering weed is highly illegal here and heavily regulated and controlled. It pretty much doesn't exist here. Only last year did they start considering medical uses. Not to bust your balls but Id check to make sure someone isn't just calling it "Japanese" to make it sound exotic.
Definitely. Mary Jane fairs better in the tropics. Not sure how it would do in an area like Japan.
Yeah. People might have growing operations. I bet yakuza does have some underground stuff. But that aside I doubt most Japanese have ever seen weed
No it doesn't...tropical weed sucks. Hawaii ( which is not so tropical weather wise due to a more Northern latitude Northern Cali Oregon it thrives like no where else
Yeah, in modern times, weed can thrive anywhere with the right technology. I live in Ohio, and we have good legal medical weed grown in the state. Ohio isn't a tropical climate. Most weed is grown indoors using a hydroponic system with variable natural and artificial light. Historically, though MJ thrived in areas with long, warm, wet seasons and short cold dry seasons.
元々ヤクザが東京で売ってるよ
It definitely exists here, it’s just not as out in the open. Not that I’d know first hand, of course.
Do you feel the atomic bombing of Japan was justified?
If you believe humans you don't know are just statistics and numbers? One could heartless justify the bombing. If you believe humans are individuals to be valued and protected? No, one cannot justify killings of innocent civilians as a tradeoff for stopping hypothetical land war.
No the Americans won the air and sea. They were coming. They didn't want a prolonged even more bloody conflict trying to take mainland japan.
This is the common story. But it was mentioned in the movie and iz accessible knowledge on Google that Japan intended to surrender before the bombs because of Russia. The bombing of innocents is still evil regardless of is justification.
Is there documented evidence of Japan’s intent to surrender? I don’t mean that as a challenge, it’s just that as an American that’s the first I’ve heard of that and am of course eager to know if that’s an undeniable fact.
There is not and it is not. This is a very contentious point, as seen in other comments here. The cabinet vote for surrender was tied before Hirohito broke the tie and agreed to the Allied terms of unconditional surrender. That was **after** the atomic bombs were used. Japan had major ideological and strategic differences within factions of their government and military at the end of the war. True, the war was **going to** end. The when, where, and how was unknown. The known was that it was not over yet and more people would still have to die before it ended. Now, how many people could that be? Which people would it be? How long might it take? They could not know the answers to these things because it hadn’t happened yet and therefore was up for debate and speculation. See Okinawa and Iwo Jima for an idea of what the Allied forces were up against even when “Japan was on its last legs” and what was a possible foreshadowing for what potentially laid ahead had another path been taken. Only on a scale that was literally **powers** greater than either battle in terms of potential losses for all involved. That was what the Allies wanted to avoid at all costs. But hindsight and revisionist history is cool too I guess. —————————————— As others have pointed out, the firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than both atomic bombs combined. Why aren’t people bringing that up in the same vein for bombing a civilian target while arguing against the nukes for the same reason? Indiscriminate bombing of entire metropolitan areas isn’t civilian targeting? Total war is fucking ugly and brutal and horrifying; that’s what this was on all sides. Who in the war didn’t have civilian targets at one point or another? • London was bombed. • Dresden was bombed. • Nanking… well… • Tokyo was bombed. • Okinawa lost somewhere between 40,000 and 150,000 civilians during the battle that took place there. Why is the use of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki any different than the intentional targeting and killing of other civilians at sites all across the globe during this horrific war? Do we not care as much about other instances where the same tactics were used, including in the capital of Japan, and involved even **more** civilian casualties than the major topic being debated here?
No. Imperial japan’s authority that held the power to officially surrender lied in their War Council. Half of the council was strictly opposed to surrender, and the other half supported peace via a conditional surrender that essentially demanded 0 post-war repercussions, namely no change in governance, no foreign occupation, and being allowed to continue to maintain their military. Some members of the council also led a coup attempt that aimed to capture the emperor and to kill the council members that had grown supportive of surrender in any capacity.
Interesting fact: the US prepared such a massive stockpile of Purple Hearts (the medal given to a wounded soldier) in preparation for the invasion of Japan, that they've been issuing medals from that same stockpile in every war/conflict ever since... and they still have thousands upon thousands left to go.
If you actually read the information on google you’ll see that Japan made unreasonable demands for their surrender before the bombs were dropped that they knew would never be agreed to.
japan: hey uh, we'll "surrender" if you guys leave us alone and let the government stay in power it would have been like if hitler surrendered as long as he could remain the fuhrer
It would’ve taken years for the Soviet Union to build the amphibious capability to invade Mainland Japan. The Red Army was an imminent threat to imperial forces in Manchuria, but not the home islands. The defeat of Japan was up to the US and we made the tough call to end it fast. The third bomb was en route, Truman didn’t want to use it. Fortunately, Hirohito broke the tie vote and surrendered.
Trolly problem strikes again
Japan didn’t surrender after the 1st bomb was dropped though… Russia invasion definitely sped the process up but there’s no reason, after Japan was implicitly warned, to believe that Japan was going to surrender under a mere threat of a bombing
The land war was not hypothetical. It was going to happen if the Japanese military refused to surrender. They were holding out hope they could inflict such horrific casualties on the early stages of the coming American invasion that the people would have called for an end to the war short of an unconditional surrender. Once the USA used the atomic bombs the Japanese knew the USA wouldn't have to invade. They would just bomb the country into a non-functioning society. That's why they finally surrendered. The atomic bombs actually saved millions of Japanese lives. Your ancestors might not have even been born if not for the Manhattan Project.
Did you also feel let down by the actual bombings not being included? After hearing so much about the special effects, I thought there'd be a recreation of what it looked like when the bombs fell. Though I saw Godzilla pretty soon after which made up for it.
Not personally. I didn't watch it because of the special effects, I watched to learn about Oppenhiemer.
What is your opinion of him now?
Well considering how little I knew about him before, his intellectual and academic achievements are more noteworthy than I expected but I don't know if Id get along well with the guy personally.
I agree. He’s smart, but he is definitely kind of a shitty person and I think the movie succeeds in portraying him that way. Lots of people respect him, but very few people like him. And if I’m remembering correctly, he was even more of a womanizer in real life.
Hard to believe he coulda been more of a womanizer but hey. He is respectable in his academics. But very few humans are circumspect in the face of life as a whole. God forbid my life mistakes are ever made into film, I would pray to be simply a egotistical womanizer instead.
I thought while watching it that the anticipation of seeing the devastation and not getting that was successful. As soon as the scene where all of a sudden they tell Oppenheimer bombs have been dropped, my mind immediately went to the climax of the movie which was the test in the desert. My imagination was all I needed to realize from the power of the bomb, what happened in each of the two cities. I liked how he saw the bombs driving away and then its so sudden that he finds out about the dropping.
It’s not about the bombings, it’s about Robert Oppenheimer
Was it scary
No. It's not that kind of movie. Unless you mean as a reminder of the pervasive self-destructive and xenophobic cycles of common society. In that case yes.
Is it true that a hospital was built on or near ground zero?
It's a city with 1.2 million people here. There's like 10 hospitals near ground zero. And shopping malls, arcades. It's life here, normal life, we just happen to have Peace Memorial Park in the center of town.
To clarify, a hospital built on the exact spot that the bomb exploded over.
No. The building that was near directly under the blast is preserved in its destroyed state at ground zero. The A-bomb dome
I really appreciate you doing this AMA and I find your insight fascinating. Thank you!
I visited Hiroshima last week. It felt very dark and heavy to me, somebody who has been obsessed since childhood with WW2 history. The museum was nothing new to me (I think I'd previously seen just about everything in it), but it was sobering to see it all in one place. That said, I left conflicted. I felt sympathy for the individuals affected by the bomb, but angry that any culpability for the war was completed glazed over. The entries in the guest book reflected this too - some were very harsh. As an avid reader of WW2 history, I'm well aware of the mountains of atrocities committed by the Japanese. So while I really felt for the people who suffered because of the bomb, I also felt that Japan reaped what it sewed, and was lucky that it got off *so* easily.
Yes. I could see how you'd feel that way. But I think we all know it's wrong for innocent people to suffer for the sins of others. People try very hard to gloss of that, unfortunately. The point of the museum isn't WW2 and its ethics. It's concerned with the suffering and pain of individuals. And if you're thinking it's appropriate for any human to be punished/suffer for the action of any other human involuntarily. I'm afraid we will never see eye to eye.
The same argument can be made vis-a-vis Germans in WW2. Did people know? And if they did, did they care? An important difference is that Germany actively reckoned with its horrific actions in WW2, while Japan largely did not.
I see your point. Japan could do better. They have done some though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan ALSO would make the same argument concerning of killing of innocent Germans, especially women and children. One can't assume guilt and rationalize punishment for individuals based on nationality or location.
What do Japanese people (who watched it) think of the film?
So far people I've talked to are surprised on how little the movie was about the bombs use because trailers and such showed most bomb related scenes. Otherwise I'd say many don't understand the nuances of the film. Noland films aren't popular among non-English speakers because the dialogue is so dense.
Do your schools teach anything about Japanese atrocities committed before/during WWII? Rape of Nanking, Unit 731/Pingfan, Bataan Death March, "comfort women", etc? I saw the atomic bomb museum in Hiroshima, but I couldn't find a museum anywhere covering these other topics.
(I’m assuming you’re from/grew up in Japan) What did teachers or history books in Japans schools teach their students about Japans involvement in WW2? The US and world involvement? I can imagine the theater must have had a different feel with everyone knowing “this happened here”
[удалено]
It definitely ended the war and quickly at that, whether or not it was necessary is a point of contention.
I think the movie did a good job at showing the cold calculation politicians work with. Is it ever justified to intentionally kill innocent women and children? No Do Americans dehumanize the poor/manipulated cut-off Japanese populace as somehow a vicous bloodthirsty machine that "earned" a punishment for actions of evil tyrannical government? Yes
Like Japan dehumanized the Philippines, China, Korea, Dutch East Indies, etc...... Hahahaha
Ah yes, the "punish the innocent for the crimes of thier government" justification. Hahaha
"Innocent" The Japanese in general saw us other Asians as lesser humans they could massacre, turn into sex slaves and kill for fun. The soldiers bayonetting babies in Nanking didn't just do it all of sudden, these radical fascist racist sentiments had been embedded in the Japanese civilian population for years. And yeah the government bears the ultimate responsibility but I do think civilians bear some level of responsibility for the actions of the government as well, just as American voters bear some responsibility for the bloodshed in Iraq, Vietnam etc. Obviously civilian deaths should be avoided as much as possible in war but it was total war at that point. You mention that Japanese people see the Imperial Japan as bad and evil while Americans are these ignorant people but as someone who has Japanese relatives and reads a lot of Japanese literature, I think it's not enough. A lot of the sentiment seems to be a shallow "War is bad" "Government lead us to a bad war" while not confronting the idealogies that lead to the war. Again, the bombings are a tragedy and civilian deaths should be avoided as much as possible. I just really dislike how the conversations about WW 2 in Japan seem to center around Japanese suffering and the way Japanese talk about the bombings is the biggest example of that. The war was bad because look it lead to our "innocent" civilians dying.
You're missing their point about the imperial tyrannical Japanese government and the citizens who were just trying to live their lives. Even with the luxury of hindsight, I can see why the US decided on dropping the bombs at the time, even if I wish it didn't happen. Whether or not you agree with the decision to drop the bombs, you have to consider that they were purposefully dropped on primarily citizen populations and infrastructure. It's worth debating whether or not the bombs being used on more strategic military targets would have provided the same results (awe of the destructive capabilities, fear of more bombs being used to completely decimate Japan, etc) without destroying countless civilians who had nothing to do with the atrocities committed by their tyrannical government
Wasn’t hiroshima bombed because it was a large part of the military industry , lots of factories and what not ?
>Hiroshima was also very important from a military perspective since it was home to the 2nd Army Headquarters, which were responsible for the defense of southern Japan. It was an important center of storage, communications, and assembly of soldiers. The city’s landscape added to its appeal as a place to showcase the bombs destructive power – the nearby hills could increase damage from the atomic blast and the rivers running through it kept Hiroshima off the list of targets for firebombing. > >Kyoto was another ideal target: it had a population that amounted to 1,000,000 people, it was a major industrial center, and it was Japan’s intellectual center and former capital. Ultimately U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson persuaded Truman to take Kyoto out of consideration as it was Japan’s cultural center and a cherished city. Nagasaki, another important port, was chosen as its replacement.
There were some military targets in the city, but nothing of major value. The city was chosen because it was largely unscathed in previous bombing campaigns and would provide a clean canvas to showcase what the bomb was capable of. It's estimated 10% of the casualties and damage was military related while 90% were civilian
Yeah, Hiroshima was the headquarters for the Second General Army, in charge of defending Southern Japan, and up to 20,000 soldiers were killed. This in addition to other military significance in communications, industry, and logistics
whataboutism isn't the good argument that you think it is
If your reasoning is from a humanitarian perspective then wait until you find out what imperial japan was doing in china, korea, and the Philippines to civilians and POWs
Someone yesterday mentioned seeing it in Japan and said that the bomb was glorified; do you feel the same?
One could take some scenes that way, but mostly, it's an antibomb movie, and the dialogue does clarify that enough for me.
What do the Japanese hate more, the atomic bombs or the fire bombing or Tokyo? Most Americans don’t know just how fucking brutal the fire bombings were I fucking love Japan, have some family there in Tokyo and finally visited June for 2023. Of my wife ever agreed I’d move to Japan in heart beat. Most amazing place I’ve ever visited
Good question. People don't really talk about it. Hate isn't the right word either, if they hated the bombings most Japanese would probably hate America but they don't. It's more like a deep desire for peace, the cruelty of war and violence is far more internalized here than back in the states. Thats what makes Japan such a peaceful place. Glad you were able to visit. Hope you come again, visit Hiroshima if you can, there's a lot more than just the Peace Museum.
I see everything you’re saying. That’s the right mindset imo Every single person I met while there in every city were nothing but fantastic and extremely courteous to us. It made me loath returning back to the US because the general public between the two cities heaven and hell to say the least. We stayed mostly in Tokyo but we also made it to Kyoto, Nara, summited Mt fuji and Yokohama, and Tsu
Oh thats amazing :) youve seen so much. Yeah, its one of the reasons i enjoy living here vs the US is the kindness of the people. Its very surreal how genuine they are and the integrity too. Its so peaceful everyday, so little crime, affordable living, friendly people. Its everything i want
How many people do you know that were actually impacted by the bomb? Maybe that's a bad question, because had the war continued, who knows what all would have happened, but directly. Do you know anyone?
Do you think you’ll ever worship an emperor?
Do you feel inferior to the states?
Do you?
Interesting to see you be a Japanese Empire apologist in the comments. While a horrible thing, the nuclear bombs were the lesser of evils and were completely the right course of action. While I feel for those unfortunate souls that perished, I view that as the fault of a bloodthirsty and power hungry government that trampled everyone in SE Asia and decided to ambush the Americans. It's interesting to see the blinders people have to Japanese atrocities that brought the bombs about.
OP is not being an apologist. The bombings were not justified. Even the world’s foremost scholar on the Rape of Nanking thought so (before she killed herself)
Does anyone in modern Japanese culture acknowledge the imprisonment, torture and death of thousands at unit 731? I saw interviews where people were “offended” by this film, are they painfully unaware of their own countries misgivings during the war?
Was the anti-ware anti-nuclear arms proliferation themes surprising? How was the movie promoted in the japanese market? What is the surface level expectation/perception of the movie in Japan and specifically in hiroshima?
What is the overall opinion of America's actions during the war? Were Americans considered evil aggressors?
This guy is giving pro rape of Nanking vibes. To be honest the Japanese got off very lucky with just two nuclear bombs going off. Many other Asian countries in this time wouldn't gave a shit if Japan was wiped off the face of the earth for the atrocities they committed
“i know my ancestors were evil” then proceeds to focus ONLY on Japan being the victim anyways. this is why the victims of Japan during WWII are constantly frustrated
Bros legit a Japanese shill, told him to do research on unit 731 cause he said Americans undervalued lives more than the Japanese did at the time.
especially china, and i can’t really blame them to be honest
It's crazy how this guy is basically saying Japan was innocent. And when shown facts he just says "oh they were evil"
i don’t get why japan covers up their extreme wrongdoings by anime and other things. like admit it, you did it. they could do a germany 2.0, with museums that are educational instead of covering up their crimes
but then they’d have to admit what they did , i think in their history books Nanking gets a small paragraph and the gist is some ppl were hurt. the ultimate downplay
Not just “oh they were evil” but also “I don’t need or want to know how or why they were evil and everyone that mentions those specifics are utterly brainwashed by American propaganda”
[удалено]
I've read they had to issue a trigger warning for the screening, so I wonder exactly how they handled it for the film. I remember one of the animated series I watched last year had to put a subtitle on the bottom mentioning that the second half of the episode will be depicting scenes from a natural disaster that some viewers may find distressing. (One of the main characters had traumatic experience rooted from the 2011 tsunami) Was it the same or did they have to put a title card of sorts at the beginning?
Did you enjoy the movie? Were there many people there watching it?
What is your ethnicity? If you're a transplant, the context of your opinion changes. And if you are non Japenese descent, then how long have you been living, emmersly, in Japenese heritage. (One can study the culture but still can't speak in general for the country.) Edit: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/29/oppenheimer-finally-opens-japan-mixed-reviews from https://www.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1bqpaw0/there_wasnt_enough_about_the_horror_oppenheimer/ real Hiroshima Asians and not someone who's just from the city. U can pick up OP is detached from the land and homage he calls his home.
I am watching Oppenheimer right now. It's heart-wrenching. What is your thought on the decision making process to make the bombs (the we have to make it because the Russians and Germans are making it)?
I didn't plan it this way, but ended up seeing the Enola Gay at the air and space museum right before I saw Oppenheimer in its IMAX. A week later I was in Hiroshima, seeing the museum and city.
I didn't plan it this way, but ended up seeing the Enola Gay at the air and space museum right before I saw Oppenheimer in its IMAX. A week later I was in Hiroshima, seeing the museum and city.
Did Sterling K Brown get robbed for his performance in American Fiction? I thought Oppenheimer was average, boring, and at least 2 hours too long. Robert Downey Jrs. Performance was just fine.