[krageon]

> Please don't.

Please don't what? I was offering a different view to the same issues, along with a plea to view complicated situations in the same way that the people subject to them at the time did: As complicated situations. Reducing it to this one-dimensional "everyone was innocent" reasoning is demeaning to the people making those hard decisions. They have to sleep too, and that's hard enough when the situations in question are viewed as they are, let alone when they are oversimplified by people who were only alive after the fact.

> It hosted no military equipment of any significance

Given that there were a number of "work camps" within spitting distance of those targets, it seems a little disingenuous to claim that there wasn't anything there. And even if that was the case, someone pulled the trigger in the way they did - it behooves us to think about the why of that decision in manner that doesn't reduce them to imperialist caricatures of what they were. That way, we'll never really understand why their decisions were made in the way they were. If we don't understand them, it will be harder to choose to avoid their reasoning ourselves.

Even if we eventually arrive at the conclusion that this was entirely the wrong decision, we owe it to every victim (both the people dying and the people doing the killing) to understand the situation properly so what they went through teaches us the right things.

[eeZah7Ux]

> Please don't what?

Please don't try to sneak in a justification for genocide and paint it as a necessary evil.

> I was offering a different view

Your "different view" came with the unwritten implication that the actions of a terrible government justify genocide:

>>> Japan was an extremely bad actor. They had death camps just like the Germans did at that time. One can imagine that the German victims wished someone dropped a few nukes so Germany would back off a bit quicker.

This sentence does not mention a specific military strategy.

You are clearly implying that a being an "extremely bad actor" is enough to justify retaliation against unarmed civilians.

> we owe it to every victim ... to understand the situation properly

...

[krageon]

I'm not sure what to tell you, except to try to emphasise to you that understanding what other people think (or arguing for the things they might think as a rhetorical device) doesn't "imply" that that is what is right. I don't presume to tell other people that they are flat wrong and they need to think something else and I would appreciate it if you could extend me the same courtesy.