this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
304 points (96.3% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2315 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 42 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Almost... Another way to see it is they burdened future generations as an expedient measure to save the lives of the people now in the past. Another another way to look at the bomb is preventing another world war.

An interesting historical point is Japan had largely been defeated by the time the bombs were dropped. And they had the option to bomb an uninhabited (or very lightly) part of Japan's territory as a show of force. But, instead they specifically chose to irradiate civilians.

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

They burdened future generations?

[–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Because future generations have to safehold and not misuse extremely destructive knowledge. We have a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons, but do they have the ethics to use them responsibly, understanding their full potential? Do the other countries with nuclear bombs have that ethical responsibility, especially over generations? Cuz that big red button is going to be around for a while.

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

If it weren't the USA, it would have been the Nazis or Russians who invented it.

[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

One would argue given enough time some kind of civilizations ending event is an inevitability. With nukes we're just increasing that risk.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I always like to think of it more as a race between evolution and extinction.

[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yes, I would say the threat of dying in nuclear hell fire (if you were lucky) a bit of a burden.