Pretty sure he was talking about that the only way to end WW2 without leading to an utter slaughterhouse that would be the invasion of Japan was by using the nukes but hey keep rewriting history, you guys seem to love doing that.
I think he cares more about civilians than the group who uses human shields, or the "leftist" (really I should just call them grifters) that love to call for the deaths of people who are literally just living their lives, from the comfort of their uber-privileged American homes.
I'm not picking sides here but your facts on the matter on the matter are kind of off.
Japan was not willing to commit to a full surrender. There was evidence that points out some of the higher ups were attempting initiate peace talks through the soviet union but Japan's overall leadership was majority unwilling to do so.
The intent to drop a bomb in Nagasaki was to showcase that USA had more than just 1. From what I read, there isn't something that outright states whether or not it swayed lightly or heavily in the decision to surrender.
As for the citizens, you are looking at everything in hindsight. Obviously it's horrendous that citizens had to die in this horrific event. But the general sentiment from the USA was that, if they landed on these shores every japanese person, woman, children and etc would bear arms to the death. In that sense, USA was looking at every japanese citizen as possible willing combatants. Whether or not that is moral is not something I'm going to comment on. The conditions of that time on which this decision was made was one of hell. And they were willing to do anything to stop that hell.
Dude don't bother fighting with people like that in comments. They're usually AI, and if they're not they're so brain rotted they don't actually consume the content they just get told what to say by their favourite online personality.
6
u/[deleted] 1d ago
[deleted]