Not a new revelation, but the article pulls from good sources and it’s nice to see this myth repudiated in a mainstream outlet.
Not a new revelation, but the article pulls from good sources and it’s nice to see this myth repudiated in a mainstream outlet.
What part of US did not care about how many civilians would die are you having trouble understanding. Go read up on what US proceeded to do to the civilians in Burma, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and other countries in Asia right after the war. Ask yourself what Burmese victim of the invasion, let the US go on killing and raping?
Sounds like you’re saying that the Japanese raping and killing was justified because of the American killings that occured later.
Because I’m still not seeing an actual number.
I’ll posit my thought experiment one more time.
It’s August 1945. You’re a Burmese who escaped and made it to Washington. Harry S. Truman confides in you that he has a terrible weapon that will wipe out an entire city in an instant. He offers you the option. Drop the bomb and end the war instantly, or let the raping and killing go on while the Japanese dither about surrender. You can’t see into the future. How many months do you tell Harry to let the atrocities go on.
I just want to see one number.
The fact that you lack cognitive capacity to understand the concept of two wrongs don’t make a right is really phenomenal!
So, explain why it would be “right” to let the Japanese Empire continue to kill and rape civilians when there was a way to stop it.
I already did in several different ways, but it’s clear that you lack the mental facilities to understand the explanation.