this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
602 points (96.2% liked)

People Twitter

5210 readers
2071 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
602
It's important to live by a code (startrek.website)
submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
47 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I don't think it matters whether you're labelled a Nazi or not, when the country that ~~hires you~~ you defect to puts the weapons of mass destruction you were helping to research to practical use.You're assisting horrible people, one way or the other.

The Nazis were most definitely planning on doing the same thing had they gotten the chance, mind you, but I cannot fathom one using the weapons of mass destruction that the evil of the world planned to use, on not one, but two cities containing mostly civilians, and then call oneself a "hero" or the "good guy".

[–] [email protected] 37 points 9 months ago

In some cases these scientists are why the Nazis didn't get nukes because they were quietly sabotaging the program by pursuing known dead ends. Scientists in the US were actually baffled by the lack of progress, since German scientists were publishing good theoretical work.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Classic trolley problem exposed here. Nuke 2 cities or invasion level casualties.

Choose.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I choose a secret third option:

https://youtu.be/RCRTgtpC-Go

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Sometimes (aka almost always) there is actually a third (or fourth) solution to a trolley problem.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I choose an infamous fourth option:

https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Japan would have surrendered without the atomic bombs dropping or a ground invasion. Saying it was necessary to prevent a ground invasion or to finish the war early is a common argument that makes sense at first glance, but if you look into it then it's not actually accurate.

My favorite video on the subject is Dropping the Bomb: Hiroshima & Nagasaki by Shaun. It is 2h 20m long, following the story of the relationship between America, Russia, and Japan, and the circumstances that led to the bombs ultimately being dropped. Highly recommend.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

You're wrong, and I'm not able to articulate even a single point as rebuttal, but just watch this two hour video!

Please. Use your words and summarize the important points if you want to argue.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If I remember my history right, Japan would've surrendered conditionally without the bombs and that was only after bleeding the allies and soviets a bit. The condition here was Japan gets to keep the pacific holdings that weren't already liberated. It doesn't take a genius to see why that was unacceptable.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

They would also still be an authoritarian imperialist state and probably would've never produced some of their most culturally relevant pieces of art from the 20th century.