Dropping the Bomb: Hiroshima & Nagasaki 

I would love to put this on for the 3rd graders I teach at Sunday school

@@tombuell2782 Shawn's a tad bit too much for 3rd grade. hell, he is a bit topo much for most people my age and beyond :D

SCREW YOU GUYS IM GOING HOME

"But I don't wanna learn about the politics surrounding the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at a sleepover-" "NO! You will watch the skull and enjoy it!"

I see you're as good at making/keeping friends as me; wanna spend two hours learning why everything you were taught is a lie?

Answer is "listen to it for two hours". Did I pass the Voight-Kampff? 😄

it's okay though because he said hello so nicely :)

I'd rather find a talking skull than a non talking skull tbh

Okay this one got me

Unless it says "Look out! Behind you!"

good thing that one guy hoeny mooned there and said no

Ooh, what a marvel in the sky, that sure is threate- *ka-boom*

You know, my skin is melting off and I’m suffering nuclear burns but damn that is a nice bomb!

*moments before atomisation* "i can tell this is signific-"

"Now, if you pay attention to the speed with which this bomb is hurtling towards the school, you can already tell-"

What a fucking "I told you so" that woulda been though

A shame Kafka wasn't around to write a novel about this, it sounds so kafkaesque

​@@micha0585 as most modern tragedies do

​@@jackferdinger4180use a different word.

The US were intercepting the discussions between diplomat Sato and Togo of the Big Six - these are known as the magic transcripts , and are posted on the US National Archive Site . ...The discusses go on and on and on .... Sato very methodically paints Togo into corner . Then Sato says to Togo those are “pretty little phrases devoid of all connection with reality,” “If the Japanese empire is really faced with the necessity of terminating the war, we must first of all make up our minds to terminate the war.” Then Sato asked for peace terms , yet Togo would not offer any terms . The US were listening in the whole time . .

@Your future president instead of just accepting that we are asking why “life is just like that”. it doesn’t have to be

@Your future president oh I see what you’re saying. I would agree

@Your future president I very much believe that people in power are behaving like that today, outside of harrowing war condition, as well. I want to push back a bit against "Life is just like that", because as bagelmaster already said, it doesn't have to be, and I would also say, it shouldn't be like this. People in power need to be accountable for their decisions (and thus have valid reasons for them in the first place). And when they're not, that's something to look out for and call out. Otherwise we can't call the governing structures that we have in developped countries proper democracies.

@Your future president Where do you get the idea that I'm talking about Syria or any such country? I said developped countries in my last comment. There are plenty of shit decisions made in developped countries, *even in peacetime.* I'm really not sure why you want to talk about Syria. Because I don't. I wanted to talk about irrational or uninformed decisions made by people in power, regardless of wartime or not. I guess the only overlap of my comments and yours is that, yes, people in power in Syria are, with a high probability, also making whimsical decisions. But that is a very small subset overall. I don't live in Syria, and unless you live in Syria and want to know what to do about Assad (to which I don't have a satisfying answer), all we can do is focus on the countries we do live in and call out politicians making decisions based not on evidence, but on their personal preferences. I can't solve Syrias crisis. Franky, I'd love to, but I can't.

I think if the japanese miltarists actually visited china and understood their 3000 year old culture. They would have figured out they can never be conquered.

LMAOOOOOO me tho

Me

I've never been able to finish Interstellar, I always get to the bit where Matt Damon shows up and I get bored and go to bed. I've sat through the full length of every long-ass video by Shaun / Hbomb e.t.c

@@musicdev fr

..... that hit hard XD

Yeah, it gives so much insight into how they thought about what they were doing. A mere visit was enough to turn Kyoto from an optimal target to one that he would fight tooth and nail to avoid bombing. Why would we believe that the others would be any different had one of the other generals vacationed there?

@@jamescharles5907 Please watch the video you're in the comments section of. All of what you said is addressed.

@@jamescharles5907 If you really watched the video, you've already heard the answers to these questions and decided you don't like them.

@jamescharles5907 No, I don't think you're here in good faith after you opened with a comment about Kyoto not being a high priority target because it wasn't of military importance. I think you're either trolling or have already made up your mind. Either way I'm not going to waste my own time.

​@@jamescharles5907They were already in talks and working towards surrender. It was effectively a coincidence that the second bomb was dropped during that talk, and it plainly did not affect their eventual decision. That much is clear if you had watched the damned video.

Taiwan is china.

This was a tragic roller-coaster of a ride to read and I wish nothing but peace to those harmed. Cause. Damn. This hit different.

@@durshurrikun150 Wrong. Mainland China is rightful KMT land

@@DogeickBateman My dear liberal, you're wrong. Most of the world recognizes the PRC as the legitimate government of China, only 16 countries do recognize the ROC as legitimate. You're practically alone against the world.

I live in Japan and work as a teacher. I skimmed the Japanese history textbook for 1st year senior high school students, and the section on WWII is about 6 pages (though there are another 4 or so pages dedicated to the lead-up). It mostly covers the Nazis and bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; it doesn't seem to touch on Japan's war crimes or occupation at all. On a political level, no prime minister has apologised, and Shinzo Abe in particular was notoriously against doing so (though I would note he was also part of the Nippon Kaigi, a group that wants to reinstate Japanese military and is supportive of the old Japanese empire. While not wanting to admit to the crimes to "save face" is a common thought in the Japanese government, actively wanting to bring back the empire is a more fringe idea).

WTF almost fell down of my chair. But thats the real world - lots of stupid decisions taken on subjective preferences. And I say this about every human on earth.

History is crazy like that.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are both still there.

@@lucasoheyze4597 'still there' is a way to put it, certainly. the cities were not abandoned, but the vast majority was entirely laid to ruin and had to rebuilt. kind of a question of "if you replace all but one brick in a wall, is it still the same wall?" if the same had been done to Kyoto, yes, it'd probably be 'still here' as in probably rebuilt, but much of its cultural history would be lost.

It was firebombed.

Comment (with preceding context) at around 1:29:53

@@Cheerios100 now 3

@@Cheerios100 literally "no notes"

...morale bombing of totalitarian militaristic states, yes. That is to say, it might work with states that are governed differently. Not saying it's a good idea

This is a hauntingly effective summary, and has stuck to me since I first saw this video couple of years ago.

What are you talking about? It’s a good human practice to keep a diary. Cuz ya know our written history is largely what separates us from animals

The idea that foreign intelligence would attack Military general’s homes and search for their… journal…. For tactical reasons is utterly laughable

Even more astonishing is that they're later published.

Good for historians

​@@thedapperdolphin1590 you know, that considered, oftentimes they are probably doing this intentionally to control the narrative of their legacies.

But they didn't destroy their documents. They handed them over to the Americans when they invaded where the US gave all the war criminals from Unit 731 immunity and new identities in the states. Still think the US are the good guys? They bought worthless research with the blood of Chinese civilians. Happily so. McArthur was all about it.

@@marishiten5944 It’s a well known fact that the Japanese government destroyed thousands of documents related warcrimes. The Foreign Ministry started burning documents after the nuking of Hiroshima.

The Marketplace Of Free Ideas^TM doesn't favor what is right, just what is appealing and easily repeated.

@@joemomma3648 it's really difficult to condense thousands of words of the truth and its context into one snappy meme.

@@ctographerm3285 also the fact that repeating a lie too much tricks the brain.

@@ctographerm3285 Here in two words: "elite panic".

Easy to condense the common orthodox mode of thought that has persisted for years and say 'its a lie' then claim you have to produce a new truth

I was looking forward for Shaun of the Sheep to join the Shaun of the Dead franchise. I like it that in this version the mindless zombies looking to cause endless death are the politicians we elect, unlike today of course... Oh wait.

It is Christmas time! Lets take something lighthearted and uncomplicated.

I find this funny because my four year old loves Shaun the Sheep

Lol

Knowing what you know of Shaun this doesn't seem too far off from what he would say if he could speak English, right?

I wouldn't say it's accurate but it does have the illusion of that.

@@bananian wow a free thinker in the flesh.. (digiflesh?) please explain how the bomb was justified. genuinely. change my mind.

@@nev12345678910 The people most heavily impacted were innocent civilians who didn't even want the war in the first place. Did you even watch the video or do you just like the idea of people needlessly dying because of circumstances out of their control that much?

@@gem9535 im just applying Shaun’s own logic here

I guess we didn't watch the same video,. Shaun is such a master of "factoid" manipulation.

I was scrolling through the comments while listening to the video and the instant I read this comment Sato popped onto the screen for the first time!

Goes to show how much power and influence is in the hands of too few petty and egocentric people.

@Your future president Did you... watch the video at all?

It's totally because he was old and white, not because he was a Secretary of War or anything.

@Your future president r/thathappened Was it your friend's or your grandfather after all?

@Hyperion Dionysus probably not, any important political figure was most likely to be an aging white man. But what's your point?

Came here to comment this, but 4/10 not 0

I get that it's a missed opportunity, but not one that should inflict that big a minus.

@@EloquentTroll i think that was a joke

That won't be quite in character... Though I loved how he's voiced the faction of elves in MandaloreGaming's Warhammer review.

@@EloquentTroll it’s a joke

how much do you think the info in this vid will be useful for the movie? does it mainly focus on oppenheimers life/work or does it include the bigger stuff? gonna watch it soon :)

@@midkn1ght231 the movie itself follows mostly Oppenheimer. This video, though, is focused on the bigger things sorrounding the last few months of the war. It mentions Oppenheimer but doesn't go into depth about him specifically, but spends more time on the overarching political pushes and pulls involved in the war. It's not required for the movie, but it will help understand just how complex it all was. I hope you enjoy the movie! I'd recommend watching this video regardless, really--it's still very informative.

@@samf4112 sry i wasn't clear i just finished the video but your comment answered my question so thanks anyway.

Yes, I'm doing the same! This is the best follow-up to Oppenheimer, and a reason to finally watch this video after 2 years...

What are the historical inaccuracies?

Congratulations for this comment 👏👏👏👏

Me. And I wore blue on behalf of all the Ken supporters 💙💗💙💗💙💗💙💗💙

😂😂😂😂😂yes

Yup lol

better video about WW2 than Oppenheimer

But the death penalty video was only 7 months ago. And really has anything interesting happened in that time?

I like your your banner lol

he posts videos about twice a year depending on whats going on in the world

@@littlesnowflakepunk855 I know, sorry it was a joke 🐙

@@lohierlutchano9433 thank you!

Ayo

It changed my mind to nukes were inevitable for an unconditional japanese surrender. Im still contemplating the importance of completely crushing a fascist regime especially one as belligerent as the japanese. I mean to take 2 nukes and not budge an inch... fuck me.

One counterexample: Iwo Jima I wrote basically a whole essay in another comment about this, but Iwo Jima would have made it pretty clear that America would either need a major show of force or the deaths of millions of its own men to overcome Japan.

I've thought it was unnecessary for forever and I A. Think the bomb itself is incredibly cool and B. think nuclear winter is a load of hooey.

@@MrNoobthenub I disagree. If Truman and Burns had put the lives of the Japanese civilian population above their desires to try and get re-elected and just openly accepted a conditional surrender in favour of the Moderates (the Emperor stays, that's it) which is what they wanted anyway, they could have prevented Hiroshima and Nagasaki entirely. Instead they wrote their names in the history books at the cost of hundreds of thousands of innocent lives including mass murder of elementary school children.

Mine has been Hello Future Shaun. I watched this, as well as Hello Future Me's video "The US Covered Up Japan's Worst Warcrime. Here's How." It's a great double feature! Highly recommend!

@@Strogman25 i've been waiting for that one to drop for a long time and this is how i found out it dropped haha

@@Strogman25I fell asleep to the war crime one , and I woke up like an hour or 2 later and I heard unspeakable things😭 I don’t think that videos for me

It gets me excited every time he says it!

I've started saying "however" the way Shaun says it when I'm arguing with myself.

Ikikik

I can hear it now lol

@@johnchessant3012 Arguing with myself in Shaun voice is actually so good I get to the point much quicker and I have fun

that's... Actually kinda a good quote from Carl Sargon. Broken clock, I guess Edit: I'm fucking illiterate holy shit.

@@puffinatheart5565 hey now he also said "to make a delicious apple pie we must first create the universe"

@@puffinatheart5565 pls tell me this is some advanced shitposting

That’s rich :)

@@puffinatheart5565?????????

Real

History repeats itsself 🍉

I admit, that was probably the most incredible part of this sad story.

This comment SENT ME! Thanks for the laughs after this depressing video

hold up the entire viedeo says no nukes should have been droped but why ? it would have costet far more lives to put out an complete invasion and far more atrocitys from japanese and american side would have been commited ?

@@nicolai8820 did you miss the part where japan was willing to surrender?

@@soupalex I think they missed the whole video

Nowadays its considered offensive

"hello everyone" hmm sounds collectivist

Indeed. They're very unfriendly.

Well some patreons could've disliked this earlier, but i doubt that's the case

He didn’t include animals and objects like forks or cars. Instant dislike.

Halfassedly misrepresenting the truth for 2 hours to blind morons with words words words isnt very hard work

@@MagikarpBeast like what?

@@nrsrymj Like what?

@@MagikarpBeast thanks for the thorough response.

Some people just enjoy learning about history

that's just nuts. What is this weird historical revisionism?? Japan was not an innocent bystander in the war.

@@user-eq5vy4he7w Who said Japan was an innocent bystander in the war?

His name’s even Harris!!

I feel like not getting him to read that guys quotes in this video is a missed opportunity, but that might be just me...

lol I'm rewatching this and was going to make a similar Hbomberguy joke so I searched the page and thought "damn this guy beat me"

@@DGarrettR You played yourself.

It's ok it's definitely short for "HBO Member Guy"

Histort CAN be really interesting, the problem is that it requires a lot of specific knowledge and academic honesty/nuance so it can be quite boring at times. Behind all that are some really interesting true stories about humanity

@@JohnDoe-mj6cc that and a lot of people use WWII era history as an excuse to fawn over weaponry and nazi regalia

@@Tuxfanturnip weaponry is really cool though, even if war is fucking horrible. Even if I wish they didnt exist, I gotta admit that tanks are pretty friggin sweet.

I'd like to recommend Dan Carlin's "Supernova in the East" podcast series for anyone who wants a little more background on the circumstances of this war. It's not quite complete and hopefully the next (probably final) episode will examine some of these issues Shaun discusses.

@@dckuha I'm pretty sure Carlin did a standalone episode on the Atomic Bombs were he seemed in favor of dropping them. It's been a few years since I've listened to it so I could be wrong.

You mean the bomb that could end the world was used in the only war in which its use would not end the world? Fucking crazy.

How can you say the bomb hasn’t been necessary in any conflict since? It pretty clearly shaped the geopolitical relationship of US-USSR relations for the next 50 years.

@shanepaulryanalexander2934 You're conflating 'necessary to have' with 'necessary to use'. The video makes it clear that it was not necessary to use an atomic bomb on Japan, and it didn't work better than any of the other tools that the US was using to force Japan's surrender. If you want an analogy, it's like the tool in my car that cuts my seat belt and breaks my window. Yes, it's a necessary tool, but I don't use it to get out of my car

Uh no, not really it ended the only war it could end in such a way. If such a war between 5 of the largest militaries on the planet were to happen today, they would all have atomic bombs. You can’t really use a gun to end a fistfight when your opponent also has a gun. You’re saying this as if MAD doctrine hasn’t shaped geopoliticals for over half a century at this point.

@@Zoinkski Japan didnt deserve negotiation

I'll be flamed for saying this, but oh well. Your story supports the idea that there is no such thing as a "non-combatant" in an industrialized war. Every person (willing or not), every railway, factory and hammer is a tool for a nation to fight a war. If you destroy a factory and the enemy has the population and means to rebuild and restart that factory, what have you really accomplished (see North Vietnam)? In a modern industrialized war a "city" is as valid a target as any other. The Germans, as with many losing nations, were drafting old men and young boys into the army by the end. The Japanese would have done the same. My personal feelings are we should put an end to warfare as a species and go explore the galaxy together, not look foolishly to find ways to make it more humane.

​@@countsdooku and how do we simply put an end to war as a species? I'd like that too but it's something no one has really figured out yet historically. Helluva social contract to get the killings to stop and as long as they happen I think it's fair to think they're unjust

@@Shmethan I never said it was simple or easy, but a worthwhile endeavor to me nonetheless. We can have the society we choose to have. Humans created the concept and we can make it what we want.

Holy shit I didnt expect you to be here

based and redpilled

Love your videos!

Really cool to see you here! You also make great videos!

A suprise to see you here, but a welcomed one

I always wondered if hbomberguy chose his nickame in reference to that guy...

Oh my God

Fighter Harris is ok.

@@ratopretotm8698 It was H Bomb, but because that nickname was taken at some site he added the "er guy"

He ruled actually. Shaun is just such a lib that he thinks fighting fascists makes you just as bad as them

People tried bombing factories and railways. At some point you have to decide: kill some German civilians or let the German state murder more Slavs and Jews and Poles etc.

oh god

It feels a lot different when your country and people are under very real existential threat of being taken over by super hardcore genocidal fascists, I assure you. We can all look back with hindsight and say 'that was wrong', but that's easy. The people dealing with this situation at the time were under the kind of pressure no human beings should ever have to deal with.

@maynardburger wait are you saying that we should bomb civilians? It's still wrong man it's not like the corpse of dead children are gonna change the minds of the generals up top

Well, I suggest you complain to whoever invented war. Civilian deaths are part of the package when a nation quarrels with another. It's been like that since the dawn of human thought.

hi bluejay

Nah

I had to split it up into 2 sessions, but it was worth every minute.

His videos are of such a high standard of quality.

@@katiecat9353 agreed, it’s a shame RU-vid doesn’t reward such a format

Yeah, because he actually does the research instead of talking out of his ass as many "woke" channels do.

@@189Blake Such as?

this is the godfather 2

He's extremely lazy... He doesn't do his own research, scripting, or video editing... Honestly he skates by on the bare minimum, his content isn't especially high quality... yet he has a lot of followers...

@@William-Morey-Baker literally what are you basing this on?

Not fact that’s for sure.

@@William-Morey-Baker stop whinning

As someone studying history, fuck yes. I barely stay awake when my professors are discussing yet another fucking endless string of wars and weapons. The reason I love history is because it's the biggest wealth of information we have about people - the almost infinite variation in how they live, what they value, how they think, how they act, how they organise themselves, etc.

@@AliceDiableaux absolutely! That's the very reason Im studying Art history. While the political economical enviroments certainly are interesting, what really interests me is the people themselves. Their culture, their way of life and thinking - nothing displayes this easier than the art they produced. Stuff like finding out people in the Bronze Age made baby bottles shaped like animals warms my heart and really brings me closer to our collective ancestors and history, as well as the concept of being human. Culture is a beutiful thing.

Well that's not going to move all these copy's of CoD now is it?

@@AliceDiableaux What's up with your professors?! Even in high school, for as much as the material was biased and in many cases outright lied to us, it was about themes, political movements, names, dates, decisions... talking about WEAPONS?! I guess you would be more interested in anthropology or palaeontology, though, which is more my jam as well. Conflict is a major driving force in historical change, so I would expect a lot of wars/revolutions/strikes to be mentioned in history class. Weapons, though. What the heck... is this where you check your transcripts and see it was somehow Jingoism 101 you took instead?

you should read the story about the russian fleet they lost during the russo-japanese war. its funny as shit. its basicly a wonder they even arrived at korea

'Can you ask if they'll help?' "They won't help, you need to surrender" 'But maybe if you ask them harder?' "No, they aren't helping" 'Try one more time maybe?' "They said no, also I think they're going to declare war on us" 'But what if you ask another time? Just once more, with feeling' "They've declared war on us" '...does that mean they won't help?'

The hero of the story Well really the Cassandra, that poor dude

@@helengordon-smith5753 While he was certainly relatable, he was still a fascist lol

@@BurkinaFaso69 Do you actually know his political ideology or do you just call him a fascist on the basis that he worked for a fascist government?

@@f_f_f_8142 bruh, if someone works for a fascist government, splitting hairs over what they truly believe in their heart is pointless. he worked for a fascist regime, he took actions which he believed would serve this fascist regime the best. if he wasn't a fascist, he certainly acted like one, and at that point it's both quicker and no less accurate to say "he was a fascist" than waste time on clarifying and adding asterisks.

I agree with this but i really havent seen much victimization of the japanese government outside of japan itself. I think its accurate to describe the civilians as victimized however.

no shit sherlock

@@SirrahBeats Sherlock? *shakes violently*

He's said himself that this is pure coincidence. Bomber Harris is not the origin of the name Hbomberguy.

Joking aside, Harris's brother gave him the nickname which he used for his channel.

He was called h-bomb by his cousin and if stuck. If it's related to any bomb it's the hydrogen bomb.

Without entirely advocating for the bomb, this is a *huge* misconception. Japanese Imperialism, just like German Fascism, depended heavily on public support. They just had a lower threshold of public support that they needed when compared to a standard democracy. Why else would they seek to cultivate such religious reverence for the Emperor. “Consent of the governed” is operative even if the elite refuses to admit that it is. Ditto morale. A demoralized military is still less effective, even if they are forced to fight. As to “killing poor people,” when a regime does this it is typically either done quietly or done so that everyone knows it who did it and who to fear. Having them fear the enemy more, whilst they still know the regime allowed it to happen, can only injure the regime’s legitimacy. It is never positive.

@@somexp12 While I agree with you about the need for public support I would argue that it is trivial for an authoritarian regime to manufacture support out of the necessity to defend the people against future war crimes. I don't think not being able to avoid the last one would be devastating, you just spin it as such an unbelievably evil move from the enemies.

I'd say that was actually a bit too much of a generalization

@@neomcdoom While I get what you're saying, the whole point of something being quippy is that it is witty, brief, and intentionally or unintentionally lacking in nuance. It isn't a phrase you use in a legitimate good-faith debate, but it does capture the broad strokes of an ideology and that generalization can still be useful to bear in mind.

@@melaustin3305 It’s not “useful to bear in mind” because it’s literally not true. Even authoritarian regimes need people to function. If the regime loses all popular support, even if the reason for that happening is that their people are dying en masse, it will be unable to govern.

Yeah, as an American it's kinda disgusting how people take this as such a national pride thing.

@sword-swinging cat It’s disgusting that this war had to happen at all, but it is not at all “disgusting” that America rose to the occasion, and did all that had had to do, given what we knew at the time, which is magnitudes less than we do today, 80 some years later. We ended the War with what we had available to us then. It doesn’t make sense to call what we did “disgusting” when we today have decades of hindsight and research into the war, that people back then didn’t have. Let’s makes sure no conflict like that ever happens again, and appreciate the heroism of people who lived through it and dealt with it.

@@BizarreIoveTriangle Of course. We were attacked first and had to do what we had to do. We were most certainly on the right side of the war and there was much bravery and heroism. I myself have relatives who fought the Japanese, one of them had his ship sunk and had to escape in a lifeboat. He's a hero for sure. All I'm saying is it puts a bad taste in my mouth when people celebrate and glorify death and destruction, such as with the atom bombings, which there are some people that do.

@@BizarreIoveTriangle Did.....did you watch the video? There's entire sections discussing that the war was effectively over. In fact, the only reason the war wasn't over is because the US were insistent on getting an unconditional surrender. They hadn't even tried peace talk negotiations.

Green & Grey, wish we could get your teachers to go experience the Hiroshima Peace Museum. After going through there myself, I can't imagine anyone keeping such a mindset coming out of there

Every country is like this, the weak ones just can't commit as much evil.

Has been the case since the beginning of "civilization " up till today, and will be for many decades to come. Sadly. Case in point. When Joe Stalin learned of Churchill's failure to be voted in as prime minister in 1945 he could not believe that his old adversary could not simply rig the votes to suit his own agenda. Just like he and many others in non democratic states do on a regular basis.

Some are more evil than others. I don't think any country could top Japan in war crimes and brutality.

I think once you understand that becoming a socialist of some sort is pretty inevitable

​@@deep_cuts2019ah yes the socialist and communist countries have never been evil🙄 If you unironically want to be a socialist you endorse more death and destruction than any nuclear bomb Just look at the historical scoreboard Or better yet ask someone who escaped the communist hell holes It's very weird that escaping Communism is a tried and true trope ..yet it never reverses? Odd...why don't people escape the u.k or the u.s to go Cuba?🤷🏻‍♂️ I had my far left commy loving phase...but then I talked to my grandmother and realized it's a joke But it's fun to pretend it's moral online where you are safe from the net result of death and hunger

Or even just the moderate Japanese council members who were at least trying to negotiate a reasonable settlement with a single condition (i.e. letting the Emperor stay on) the Americans were always gonna accept anyway. Frankly the American leadership should get a lot of blame for the back and forth shenanigans they did to keep up their posturing about "unconditional surrender" when all that the moderates wanted was a single reassurance that the Americans had every reason and intention of giving them anyway. Burns in particular for his stupidity in constantly stonewalling the Soviets even though everybody else knew getting them to attack Japan, particularly their conquered Chinese territories, was crucial to ending the war as quickly as possible.

@@ScorpionViper1001 there is by the way a very similar story in history. After WW 1 Germany threatened to not accept the treaty of Versailles unless the "Germany is responsible for the war" article was dropped, which in itself did nothing but humiliate Germany. The Entente threatened to restart open warfare and Germany gave in.

@@f_f_f_8142 guess we can thank that guy for ww2

Is that profile pic starsector?? Do I have a fellow space smuggler on my hand? Maybe an explorer?

Im pretty sure we know some modern day individuals who are currently suffering through that right now. -v-; 2020 is cursed.

ya. His uttering of "I am become death, destroyer of worlds" wasn't really said in jubilation.

who said this?

Oppenheimer himself, on a speech. look it up it's on youtube

@@macizogalaico i'm asking about the "broken man" quote, not what he said after the trinity test.

@@zingbanana well idk it's allison's friend he might not be famous

When in the video does he say that? I'm a bit confused, haven't seen the video in a while

w😊day

the new❤

That history for you. The more you investigate the more complex it gets. Yeah i know is a joke. XD

I mean, talking about last few months of the war (with the whole 5 years of it, and the leading buildup history since the turn of the century being the broader context) and comprising it all into a little over 2 hours is still an oversimplification ;)

Just goes to show the enormity of the complexity and nuance of the history of all of it.

No mention of the over 10 million Chinese dead from Japanese invasions and no mention that even AFTER Nagasaki members of the Japanese military attempted a coup to prevent surrender. Slanted and ill-informed attempt.

@@hoagielamp6543 may you direct me with some links to said world war II historians?

I agree, and I heard he has awful opinions about Dark Souls.

@@InquisitorThomas Dark Souls 2 isn't a bad game.

@@basilofgoodwishes4138 you're wrong on every level imaginable. You're not only wrong, but you're ignorant.

@@emrekaraman6877 ssst u don't need to be soo wrong

@@emrekaraman6877 Or he just likes the game and you don't and thats okay. :)

Except he lied about America not having plans to invade mainland when it literally has a name, Operation Downfall. And the bomb didn't influence their decision to surrender? Except the *EMPEROR* , God king of Japan literally said in his speech that he didn't want further destruction of his people from this terrible weapon.. I'd say the bombs were pretty influential. And showing a demo of the bomb was dumb argument because they already had the Trinity test footage that they could just send to Japan. Why waste a bomb on another demo?

Why were you angry? Because it puts the US in a bad light it's gone to great lengths to whitewash? I have a secret; The United States aren't the good guys history books say they are. There was no reason to nuke Japan outside of seeing how much destruction it could accomplish and how many people it could kill while asserting the US and the dominate power and influence upon the world. There was no reason to force an unconditional surrender of Japan. None. Germany and Italy didn't have to unconditionally surrender. Even to this day, Germany and Italy no longer have restrictions upon their army or people, but the Japanese do. Japan isn't allowed to have an offensive army EVER. They're NEVER allowed to have aircraft carriers. Why? Because they have the capability of attacking the US? So we punish them more severely? We strip their entire national identity from them, destroy their culture, and ruin generations of their people? It's disgusting what the US did to Japan. There is no excuse for it. None.

If it didn't drop red pills about race/gender and IQ, then it's not a masterpiece.

@@user-fe8gx3ie5v Red pills are only good when they're put down a garbage disposal.

@@Tcrror Last time I checked, disposing of drugs that way is illegal and dangerous. Red pills are based, though.

@@user-fe8gx3ie5v I can't tell if you're joking or not

@@Tcrror Old timey trans people going to transition would disagree. Though these days I heard estrogen comes in different colors too.

Nuclear Boogaloo

The Shaunquel

The Shauning

@@ChinGam3R a great many things

How is this comment 8 hours old when this vid came out 20 mins ago

So what would you have done? Let the soviets take Japan?

@@bananian I’d argue the solution was not irradiating 60,000 civis. Meaning yes! Maybe Russians would get Japan. Oh the horrors….

​@@bananian ... did you even watch the video?

@@ClanWiE No he didn't. Just block the ignoramus.

​​​​@@ClanWiE Yes, and he straight up lied about Americans not having any plans for invasion. And I loled when he said the bomb didn't influence their decision to surrender when the *EMPEROR* God king of Japan came out himself and said he didn't want further destruction to his people. I'd say the bombs were pretty influential. Doing a demo was also a stupid argument, why not just send them the Trinity test footage? And you really think they would surrender over a demo? 🤦 And all you armchair generals criticise and criticise but have no clue what you would do yourselves. The nuclear bombs are immoral? Okay, so are the firebombs, then. Oh and no precision bombing either because radar guided missiles weren't a thing back then. So my question to you and Shaun, RU-vid armchair generals, what would you have done to make Japan surrender?

Thanks to shaun, dunking on PragerU is now an entry level exam for Breadtube while the skull has been taking his arts to a new level

@@chrisbartek7732 what’s bread tube?

@@maximilianbeyer5642 leftist youtube. So people like shaun, hbomberguy, contrapoints, philosophytube, etc The names based on 'the conquest of bread' I think

@@maximilianbeyer5642 Basically the skeptics but left wing. Some people like them, some people don't.

@@chrisbartek7732 completely useless comment, everyone recieves critique.

More like: “That’s bad, anyway they don’t have sealift capabilities.” *ding dong* “Sir the Americans dropped another nuke.” “Well fuck, they’re going to blast us into nothing if we don’t surrender.” Should I mention the coup that was attempted to prevent the surrender?

@@aidanmattson681 Did you.... did you even watch the video?

@@nakenmil What sort of youtube commentor watches the videos?

That's literally the most common piece of trivia associated with the bombings.

If he was, he wouldn’t have gotten that scene so wrong and suggested the US ever contemplated an invasion of Japan

That's the shallow pop culture trivia associated with the atomic bombings, which cover up the real reasons why Kyoto wasn't chosen. Yes, Henry Stimson mentioned something about not wanting to bomb Kyoto because he and his wife went on vacation there once. But that was far from the main reason why Kyoto wasn't chosen. For one thing, until 1869, Kyoto had been the capital of Japan for over 1000 years. It was a very significant cultural and historical site. Trying to bomb Kyoto would've been the equivalent of nuking Jerusalem or Mecca. All you would do is massively infuriate and motivate the Japanese population against the Allies. There were initially five cities chosen to be targets for the atomic bombs, in order of importance: Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokura, and Niigata. Kyoto was ruled out early on by Secretary of War Henry Stimson because of it's historic and cultural significance. Stimson had visited the city when he was Governor-General to the Philippines. Truman concurred, apparently because the city lacked military significance. Hiroshima contained the headquarters of the Japanese Second Army, in charge of the defense of southern Japan. It was also a major army depot and a large port. The hills around the city would both contain and amplify the blast. Because of the rivers, it wasn't considered as suitable for incendiary bombing. Nagasaki was added to the list after Kyoto was removed. It was one of Japan's largest ports and contained Mitsubishi's large manufacturing facilities as well as others. Furthermore, the industry was more concentrated than Yokohama's. With the removal of Kyoto, Hiroshima became the prime target. The city of Kokura was chosen for the second mission's primary target, but due to haze or smoke obscuring the target, Major Charles W. Sweeney in the B-29 "Bockscar" diverted to Nagasaki. ' Not only that, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen for military and strategic purposes. Hiroshima was the headquarters of the 2nd General Army and Fifth Division, with 40,000 Japanese military personnel stationed in the city, and Nagasaki was a major industrial center that housed manufacturing facilities and cottage industries producing war materials and other equipment for the Japanese military. The goal in warfare was to reduce the enemy's capacity to produce war materials to the lower level as possible and to show the Japanese that we have the weapon that could destroy a city with a tick of a clock, in order to send a message to the Japanese government that such weapon would basically put the very end to the Japanese culture. Last but not least, the goal in warfare was to prevent the invasion of the Japanese mainland that was set to start on November 1, 1945, with millions of American military personnel (going to be supplemented by American forces coming from Europe) tens of thousands of warships, and tens of thousands of military equipment to breakthrough Japan's heavy defenses and take control of entire areas that would have been taken over by the enemy. In addition, there were about 1 million Imperial Japanese soldiers in China and they were slaughtering the Chinese en masse. The Allies were bringing the hammer on Imperial Japan in order to help their Chinese allies.

What a stupid comment, fitting for the video i guess

The vacation is Kyoto story is bogus history. Stinson was a very savvy guy and not motivated by sentimentality. His concern was that destroying Kyoto might make postwar reconciliation and rebuilding impossible. Groves wanted to bomb it because he perceived that it would be very shocking to the Japanese. Stinson outranked him and pulled Kyoto from the list.

Confirmation bias much?

@@DeadEndGoosePlease inform me on how this is confirmation bias. I watched the video, I agreed with it, and am wondering if there’s any good rebuttals. I'm literally asking for opinions that disagree with my own.

​@@leafgreensniper13I saw some comments from a person who went on ask historian on Reddit and they said that they didn't like the video and that it was poorly sourced but the guy didn't give any actual rebuttals from the sub reddit.

True

You're the last person I expected to see here

I really like your video on Roman trade with the Axum Empire and The Far Side Ports. Do you have any plans to do a video on Rome's interactions with Nubia?

Danger: ionizing content within

@@aarontavolacci2311 I think he comments on Vaush’s vids as well

you watch it one sitting instead of doing anything else bc theres still a quarantine in place and theres nothing else to do anyway

"Where humanity went wrong: 200,000 years of the alt-right"

Your father is/was a hero.

Your father truly was strong and I applaud his heroic efforts.

Thank you.

There is no good way to fight a war. War is barbaric.

If only he knew USA was terror bombing long before nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki..

Was thinking the same thing. "Why doesn't anyone do this? It makes it so much easier to follow." 😅

@@DavidMyrmidon I suspect because Shaun's videos normally just consist of a cartoon skull unless there's something else, like a transcript of a quote, to pop up. Most people want to use the visual medium of video to show something visually interesting to keep the attention of the more easily distracted, even if it is of tangential relevance. Having the calendar there and just occasionally putting photos or transcripts over it means not making use of the visual channel for conveying information, which creators with different styles would not be willing to sacrifice.

Agreed. I would also have liked to see a permanent noting of August 15th as the date the USSR was meant to declare war originally, I think that would have added a nice bookend and helped to visualize the pressure building on Truman between the Potsdam Declaration and August 15th.

@Jacob Fenrir Funny, in another thread, there's someone saying Shaun "didn't do his homework" and "left out very important points" that Shaun did include, because this guy skipped most of the video to just assume stuff was left out in the comments. You're at a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situation with people like that. If he has a concise version, idiots will claim he didn't mention something that they claim is exculpatory to their position, and if you do make a 2-hour version, they don't watch it to learn the supporting arguments for their conclusion are all objectively false.

If you like this, check out 'The Guns of August', the seminal book about the first weeks of World War One, which is basically a calendar with a bunch of French generals being dumb. 'The Sleepwalkers' is a longer, drier, take on the same period, on how this even in 1870 means this happens in 1911, which means... you have to see the calendar view. A month has become a week has become a day has become an hour in international diplomacy.

27:03 for those wanting to find it in the video

Yeah

I mean, it's Whataboutism at its finest on the part of Axis apologists. Who do you you think did it first? to quote Bomber Harris: they Sowed the wind, so they reaped the Whirlwind.

@@Soundwave3591 Are you seriously suggesting that the allies only bombed as a response? You have to be kidding. You seriously think the allies wouldn't use whatever they had at their disposal to win? Besides, it is not at all whataboutism to properly describe the hypocrisy of labeling the tactic as terror when done by the enemy and strategic when done by allies. That is hypocrisy whether the Axis did it first or not. It would be whataboutism if used to *excuse* such bombing, but that is clearly not what is happening here. So even if we conceed that the allies wouldn't do terror bombing if the Axis didn't do it first, which is based on fuck all, you still wouldn't be correct. Terror bombing is bad when done by the Axis, *and* when done by the allies. This is a morally consistent position, unlike Britain's official position on the matter.

@@dig8634 Sorry are you seriously equating the tactical and strategic decisions made by the axis and allies with regards to morale bombings? In the bombing of Warszawa the Germans handed out maps with markings of the density of Jews living in the various parts to their pilots. The point being to specifically bomb the parts of Warszawa where more Jews lived. This is in no way a strategically sound decision. The Germans went out of their way to bomb strategically insignificant cities with a high civilian population in the Soviet Union specifically to maximise civilian casualties. Such decisions where never made in any way by the allied powers. The strategy behind morale bombings by the allies where specifically made in order to target the civilian populations of industrial centres, or to cause the axis troops to give up strategical cities along the western and eastern advance to minimise allied casualties and expedite the advance on Germany. The targeting of the civilian population was never done to bring about their death or destruction nor was their death or destruction a hindrance to the allies. It was simply not a factor whether they died. The goal was the de-housing of the Axis labour force. The morale bombings of allied powers was completely different in nature from that of the axis powers and Japan. The goal of the axis powers and Japan was to spread terror, death and destruction, whereas the goal of the allies was a collapse of industrial power and breaking the enemy moral, both the military and civilian will to fight. And they where extremely effective. And yes... The German bombing of Guernica is what inspired the whole concept of morale bombing and the Germans would use this extensively throughout the war for years before the allies began conducting morale bombing operations.

Communist Peter 😱

Wasn’t kyoto only spared because it was too cloudy that day?

Yes.

@@ji8044 nice sources

@@mftripz8445 No - Kyoto was spared, much earlier on, - because it was liked as a vacation spot by one of the characters in the story... I don't think the name of the cloudy target was mentioned

I remember watching a BBC documentary (complete with bad dramatization acting) and it being touched on in a scripted segment, where theyre picking the targets and the officer says "Kyoto's out, he likes the temples too much." In a sense, that means I was spoiled for the surprise in this video.

@@HistoryTwistedInc Kyoto - The anagram-lover's Tokyo!

I'm going around dropping the timestamp for those wanting to watch the clip 45:32

@@Dick_Gozinya It's my understanding that Tokyo means 'Eastern Capital', whereas Kyoto means 'Capital of the East';same parts, just rearranged

@@allymog5228 The 'kyo(u)' character in both is the same and does mean capital, but the 'to' (tou, long vowel) of Tokyo is different from the 'to' (to, short vowel) of Kyoto. But yes, Tokyo translates to Eastern capital.

It seems like a very balanced perspective

@@MrCrashDavi That’s fair. If nothing else, the video shows it is more complex than what pragerpoo would have one believe.

@@MrCrashDavi They abstained from the "powerbroker position" because they fucking invaded Manchuria and pushed into southern korea within days. Ready for invasion of the japanese islands within a few more days more, with local defensive forces of the japanese stationed towards the pacific. This happened after the two bombs. This meant two things: 1. The USSR would not mediate any peace. 2. The japanese empire was fucked. And thus Japan surrendered unconditionally.

​@@MrCrashDavi almost no historian (well, legitimate historian; the braindead tankies probably do) takes seriously the contention that the japanese surrendered solely, or primarily, because of the invasion of manchuria. the kwantung army in manchuria had been an elite, prestigious unit in 1931. by 1945, all the effective elements (both manpower and equipment) of it had been long since been stripped away and sent to fight the americans, and it had become a place where they sent incompetents and people of suspect loyalties (if you have criterion channel, the human condition is an excellent film series about a japanese dissident who gets assigned to it and barely survives the soviet invasion). it's no surprise it fell apart as quickly as it did. also, they could never have invaded japan. they were barely able to invade the kuril islands, and then they were only able to with ships we provided (the soviet pacific fleet did not get much of a slice of the budget). the notion of them mounting a massive amphibious assault shortly afterward is intensely ludicrous and disconnected from reality. also there was no risk of revolution and even if there was, the military would have easily nipped it in the bud. communism was always an extremely marginal movement in japan.

@@kazaddum2448 what are you smoking. The Soviet Union had no experience or real capability in amphibious assault. They were most certainly not ready to do what the Americans and British had been doing for years and still having major short falls versus what they perceived they needed. And the Soviets after a blood campgain, yes they smashed the Japanese army but it wasn't cheap in terms of men. How were the Soviets get their men over. How would they supply them. It wasn't going to happen. The Soviets would only be on Japan's soil as part of an invasion if the British and Americans wanted them there which they did not

I am so glad they included that small yet horrifying moment in the movie, because when Shaun mentioned it here it stuck with me forever.

That's the shallow pop culture trivia associated with the atomic bombings, which cover up the real reasons why Kyoto wasn't chosen. Yes, Henry Stimson mentioned something about not wanting to bomb Kyoto because he and his wife went on vacation there once. But that was far from the main reason why Kyoto wasn't chosen. For one thing, until 1869, Kyoto had been the capital of Japan for over 1000 years. It was a very significant cultural and historical site. Trying to bomb Kyoto would've been the equivalent of nuking Jerusalem or Mecca. All you would do is massively infuriate and motivate the Japanese population against the Allies. There were initially five cities chosen to be targets for the atomic bombs, in order of importance: Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokura, and Niigata. Kyoto was ruled out early on by Secretary of War Henry Stimson because of it's historic and cultural significance. Stimson had visited the city when he was Governor-General to the Philippines. Truman concurred, apparently because the city lacked military significance. Hiroshima contained the headquarters of the Japanese Second Army, in charge of the defense of southern Japan. It was also a major army depot and a large port. The hills around the city would both contain and amplify the blast. Because of the rivers, it wasn't considered as suitable for incendiary bombing. Nagasaki was added to the list after Kyoto was removed. It was one of Japan's largest ports and contained Mitsubishi's large manufacturing facilities as well as others. Furthermore, the industry was more concentrated than Yokohama's. With the removal of Kyoto, Hiroshima became the prime target. The city of Kokura was chosen for the second mission's primary target, but due to haze or smoke obscuring the target, Major Charles W. Sweeney in the B-29 "Bockscar" diverted to Nagasaki. ' Not only that, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen for military and strategic purposes. Hiroshima was the headquarters of the 2nd General Army and Fifth Division, with 40,000 Japanese military personnel stationed in the city, and Nagasaki was a major industrial center that housed manufacturing facilities and cottage industries producing war materials and other equipment for the Japanese military. The goal in warfare was to reduce the enemy's capacity to produce war materials to the lower level as possible and to show the Japanese that we have the weapon that could destroy a city with a tick of a clock, in order to send a message to the Japanese government that such weapon would basically put the very end to the Japanese culture. Last but not least, the goal in warfare was to prevent the invasion of the Japanese mainland that was set to start on November 1, 1945, with millions of American military personnel (going to be supplemented by American forces coming from Europe) tens of thousands of warships, and tens of thousands of military equipment to breakthrough Japan's heavy defenses and take control of entire areas that would have been taken over by the enemy. In addition, there were about 1 million Imperial Japanese soldiers in China and they were slaughtering the Chinese en masse. The Allies were bringing the hammer on Imperial Japan in order to help their Chinese allies.

more informative about the bombs than the entire ap us history course too

That's a pretty low standard considering Swamp People and Ancient Aliens.

History Channel is funded by the military industrial complex. A belief that the atomic bomb was necessary(and in general other discourse that favors violence) is very beneficial to them

@@generalfred9426 Tempted in the first place, but he also showed reasons why it wouldn't be necessary at the end.

@@generalfred9426 All the things you mentioned rely on the assumption that an invasion would be necessary if the bombs weren't dropped. However, I don't believe this to be true. As mentioned in the video, Japan's sole goal was a conditional surrender. That's what they were fighting for. If the US had been willing to accept a conditional surrender, neither an invasion nor the atomic bombs would have been necessary. What makes this especially egregious is that even after the bombings, the US accepted a conditional surrender anyway (in regards to the Emperor at least).

You should look up how the nukes ended up saving more people than it killed. A lot more

@@davids.3584 I- uh- did you watch the video? Like, you've got to be an obvious troll but it's just so bizarre

@@ellentheeducator Even Japan admits they would never have surrendered had we not dropped the bombs. You have any other argument besides calling someone a troll for speaking their opinion. The disrespect..... Look up "did the nukes on japan save more people" and you're see something interesting. RU-vid deletes the comment if I attach the link It will say that it saved 32 million people.

@@davids.3584 if you posted this elsewhere, I would not have called you a troll. But you posted this as a comment on a video about how japan would have surrendered without the bomb, with tons of sources. Like, did you watch the video? If so, argue with it bro

@@ellentheeducator No, I didn't watch this 2hr and 20 minute video posted by a very left leaning individual because I trust Google and websites more than him that say the exact opposite.

More people have died to Covid in the US than civilians died in Japan, and we still don't have a second relief package... Yeah, entirely believable.

It does make me wonder how this video would have hit before 2020? Did people used to believe that leaders cared about their citizens 'just because'? I know that I did at some point in my life, but I don't remember when I let go of that hope.

i let go of that hope after 9/11 and it let go of me after the invasion of iraq

​@@NaraMouse101 I've pretty much always been of the opinion that, for those in a position of power above direct accountability for the lives and experience of their subjects, altruistic sentiments are rarely ever genuine. Save for genuine self-delusion about whose interests their actions really serve, I guess. I lost my faith in general humanity's regard for honor and ethics on principle alone as soon as I realized how rare it was for me to not be the only one pointing out when my peers were being cruel. That sense of cynicism was cemented in stone as soon as I developed the level of self-awareness necessary to realize that I was guilty of the same kind of bullshit. I tend to respect overt prejudice and hatred more than the selective hypocrisy we're all privy to on a daily basis. This social dance of feigned virtue is exhausting me, both in action and observance. I wish people cared more about making sense than looking desirable. but I guess it's a lot easier for most people to just look the other way when the world or they, themselves, are evil. To tie the delusion of a virtuous world to the hope for a better one is erroneous, though. In giving up the former you open yourself to the latter- I lost my faith when I was a kid, but I refuse to ever give up hope, because if I did that I don't think I could afford to be honest with myself

@@beansworth5694 The world has gone mad, might as well sit back and laugh along.

... Which is why it boils down to "Stories, told by the winner"

@@stevecarter8810 I've grown increasingly dissatisfied with that way of framing things. It is often taken to imply that victory decides who historians regard as the "goodies" and "baddies" which is effectively arguing "might makes right" in reverse. Neo Nazis and neo confederates use it to argue that the side they're glorifying were not the morally inferior side when they fucking well were. There's also the case of people like the Vikings who didn't record their own histories despite being the "winners" in many conflicts and expanding very successfully around Northern Europe.

@@theomegajuice8660 its not that the winner is the only thing that determines who was right, just that the side who won ends up having the most influence over the narrative of history. their version might be correct, sure, but even in cases were their version is incorrect it usually ends up being the one people are most familiar with. the saying also refers more to the popular perception of history, not so much an actual historians take on it. and nazis who use it to justify themselves fail to provide any evidence for their "alternative takes" (i cannot possibly put enough quoatation marks around that so i wont try) on history, so despite what they might think simply pointing out that history is writen by the winner does nothing to demonstrate their version as true (because its fucking not). also i dont understand your point about the vikings? the fact that some people don't record their history has no relevance to to behaviours of people that do.

Winners writing the history is a laughable ahistorical maxim ignored by all professional historians. Only in edge cases where a civilization totally destroys another which lacked the historical record to record itself is there no counternarrative, and even then it is the historian’s job to strip away biases and narratives from primary sources before serving them to a general audience.

@@luxborealis you, like many, are missing the point of the statement because you are using a different definition of the word history than the saying. The saying is referring to "history" as in what becomes the most popular perception of the past, not the academic study of it. Sure, real historians might not be influenced by the popular narrative of history, but they are only a small number of voices that form the general perception of history. There are plenty of popular perceptions of history that we have known to be false, or at least extremely unlikely, for decades or even centuries, but knowing them to be false has not stopped them from being so absorbed into most peoples mind to the point that the average person believes them to be true. The point is not that winners choose how the historical record is written, but often they are the ones who have the most influence over what the narrative of history becomes.

While I do agree that you are right that a lot of nuance is lost in the perception of Japan in relation to WWII, I completely disagree that compartmentalization of the bad guys as Nazis divorced Germany’s war crimes from its national identity. I have spent a significant time in Germany and I have not met a single German proud to be German. Exceptions exist on the extreme right, but for the general populations there are constant reminders of their faults in detailed schooling, war debt, cobblestones, museums, global perception etc. Germans do have a Memorial Day, but in contrast to other countries it commemorates victims of violent oppression of all countries. Being the bad guys in WWII is so tied to the nation’s identity, that it’s not surprising Germans do not think they can be proud of being german. Internationally, Germany will always be held to a higher standard and could never get away with the kind of treatment Japan has been giving countries like Korea. When you think of Germany, Nazis do come to mind. In contrast, I would argue that Japan is more commonly associated with cherry blossoms, anime and nuclear atrocities. Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings are tragic, but also present clear evidence of tragedy and victimhood - Japan is not purely ‘the bad guy’ in relation to war.

You must now know a lot about the West. The Germans themselves have been so attached to Nazism in the past 80 years that patriotism is seen as dangerous in much of Germany, and in almost the entire West (including the Slavic nations of Europe) being German was associated with Nazism. This has only calmed down recently (in the last 10 to 20 years). Even today, Germany is synonymous with Nazism in most of America, but most Americans associate the Japanese with anime, ninjas, samurai, and Sengoku Jidai.

I'm sorry, but it's hard for me to have any sympathy for anyone who served in IJA and IJN. Even when I watch jdramas or jmovies set during the war, it's always hard for me to have sympathy for characters who serve in the military. In the back of my mind, there's always the thought: "so what was this character doing in China between the years 1931-1945? Sure, they're conscripted, but what did they do to Chinese or Korean or Filipino civilians?" For example, I recently watched the movie "Fragments of the Last Will", about Japanese POWs held in Soviet gulags. We are supposed to feel sorry for these POWs being used as slave labour well beyond the end of the war. And I did. But even then, the back of mind went, "how exactly were POWs and civilian prisoners treated in Japanese camps?" I agree that we cannot hold an entire group of people responsible for the actions of their political and military leaders. But I feel like you're going too far into the whole "Good German" argument but with the Japanese empire. absolving all of Japan by saying they were just following orders. How eager was the Japanese public to invade Manchuria in 1931? How did the Japanese public feel about all the war crimes commited by their soldiers - their own brothers, sons and husbands - during the war years? Bc people def knew about it. People in Japan knew what was being done in their name in the occupied territories. But it was okay, because it was being only done to non Japanese subhumans. And soldiers didn’t rape or murder simply bc of orders, it was due to the mindset of the time. Even to this day, the anti war sentiment in Japan seems to be based not on the idea that invading your neighbours is wrong, and more about “the leopards started eating my face” idea.

Nobody feels any pity for you people. Stop trying to be the victim. You people sure loved war when you were sticking Chinese babies on bayonets. After you were bombed to rubble you suddenly didn’t like it anymore. Strange!

@@dylanrodrigues not to menmtion the prince leading the rape on nankin who was entirely absolved of any wrongdoing which is extremely disgusting to me

Especially if you're in Gaza.

except for the american civil war, pretty much everything leads back to slavery and the south wanting to protect it at all costs

@@taloob493 I guess the exeption rule I guess, and even there you would have people that probably thought of it more from the economical perspective than the racist one in the south.

@@0Clewi0 well yeah there are those that think that but the economy was tightly bound to the racism

@@taloob493 Not really, as Lincoln didn't abolish slavery until like four years later ^^ Although slavery was an important piece of the conflict, especially as he dragged on, there was a more profound separation between the North and the SOuth economically. The North was industrialized and was producing manufactured goods that they destined to their home market, so they were very protectionnists and wanted that the South industrialize too to sell them those goods (like machines to replace slaves). The South was mainly in the production of basic goods, for exportation. So, they didn't want protectionism and wanted to be more open towards Europe (reason why France and Britain, although neutral, favored South), and they were already against North. Lincoln and his abolitionist position was just the droplet of water that overflowed the casket ^^

also the rise of the NAZI party in the Weimar Republic is another exception, sort of, since there were complicated factors that made it NAZIs specifically, but under the treaty of Versailles some extreme totalitarian regime would have likely risen.

Like Shaun who is Bernie or bust, saying he couldn’t vote for Biden over Trump? 😹 (if he was able to)

The German proletariat did actually rise up and occupy factories in the final days of the war, in anticipation of the arrival of the Red Army. The Soviet military administration told them to go back to work and returned to their legal owners

@@wisetrollman how is that in any way relevant?

@@CTOOFBOOGLE its not its what we like to call a red herring or mentioning a relatively irrelevant thing that seems related to something else but isn't and is just a distraction.

@@Salt0fTheEarth lmaooo, the soviets are hilarious, its like they reveled in destroying the idealism of socialists and workers

It seems like the thought process for saving thousands of lives is about as frivolous as the thought process that kill them.

Kyoto had over a million residents at the time, about three times the (pre-bombing) population of Hiroshima. That they were saved is something I'm glad of, but that it happened because some guy in the government bureaucracy liked the sightseeing there and was more comfortable levelling a city he'd never visited . . . that makes my blood run cold.

They had already destroyed the city with firebombz

Even more fucked up that Kokura was an intended target and escaped being obliterated because it was too cloudy

@@casematecardinal Kyoto was never heavily firebombed during the war

Now that’s what I call a good time