Not a new revelation, but the article pulls from good sources and it’s nice to see this myth repudiated in a mainstream outlet.

  • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The Japanese were already negotiating to end the war. The sticking point was over the U.S. demand for unconditional surrender vs. the Japanese insistence on preserving their emperor in some form. The eventual surrender did keep the emperor, so the atomic bombs didn’t impact that issue.

    • Assian_Candor [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Vaporizing 200,000 civilians over semantics

      JK it was to show the Soviets we had the bomb and were willing to use it

      Both completely deranged sentiments

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        The Western Allies slowed their approach into Germany because it was agreed between them and the Soviet Union on what the occupation zones should have been prior to the invasion.

        In a humanitarian gesture, should the Western Allies have accepted a German surrender in which Germany surrendered only on the condition that they would be occupied by the Americans?

          • Omniraptor
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Do you mean like from a moral perspective or from a self interest perspective? A surrender to the west and solely western occupation would not have been accepted by the soviets, with good reason.