[eitland]

Sadly, in many ways, that’s true.

They entered the Second World War as allies of Nazi Germany. When Germany inevitably turned on them, it was we—the collective West, with my own country playing a significant and costly role—who helped drag them out of the mess they’d enabled.

And yet, not long after, they turned on us. They occupied Eastern Europe, ruled it with an iron grip, and spent the next 80 years constructing a narrative in which they were the heroes—and that they’d done it all on their own.

[egorfine]

I have to agree, it's technically true. And tbh even more than technically.

Still, it's as correct to speak about the end of WWII in that terms as it is to describe love as four letter word.

[hedora]

Saying they turned on us is misleading. They were never on our side, but Hitler was the bigger threat.

The US nuked Japan post surrender (go look it up - the documents were declassified a decade ago) as a bluff to convince the Russians that they could not win a war where they attempted to take all of Europe.

[boulos]

"Post surrender" is misleading. https://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2022/05/06/did-the-japanese-... has good coverage of what's known here. There were definitely factions within Japan that wanted to surrender, but there doesn't appear to have been a formal attempt.

As is, there was an attempted coup to overthrow the government due to the first (conditional) surrender.

[hedora]

That's only citing evidence that's been public since the 40's (which was inconclusive, but suggestive). The author apparently didn't hear about the recently declassified stuff, which says the offer came through diplomatic channels (which typically happens before public, formal surrenders), and the White House knew, but ignored the message.

The thing you linked cites a source that had access to the actual message and published it in August 1945. Then it tries to debunk its now-verified authenticity.