70

Self defense? Only on the battlefield? Only to achieve a ‘noble’ end?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MimicJar@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

My point is that it's an absurd argument.

Let's talk real world, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Do you think a reasonable argument can be made that those bombings made sense? If not, what about in 1945?

I'm not asking you to agree, just to understand the argument. It's a discussion worth having, even if you disagree with the answer.

[-] arthur@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

I don't think it made sense, even at that time. Those cities were mainly built with wood, and US used a lot of fire against Japan.

The use of nuclear power against Japan was more like a test and a message, it was not needed to win the war. (At least this is what I remember from this documentary )

this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
70 points (98.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43800 readers
737 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS