Viewers are divided over whether the film should have shown Japanese victims of the weapon created by physicist Robert Oppenheimer. Experts say it’s complicated.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Literally part of the film is him realising this, did you leave after the bomb went off in testing or what?

      • ormr@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Typical aggressive online SJW behaviour. Preaching absolute truths and spitting condemnations as if no one had thought about it before. Obviously, the world can be best explained without any nuance or shades of grey ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    • kayjay@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      His reasoning was if the US didn’t make it, the Nazis would, and that would be even worse. He never wanted to make the bomb, it was just the lesser of two evils.

        • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The US was never trying to exterminate the Japanese race and culture, so no it wasn’t genocide. It was a fucked up act of war, maybe you could even call it an atrocity, but calling it a genocide is wrong by definition.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t use a weapon on a nation, you can only use a weapon on a nation’s population.