Viewers are divided over whether the film should have shown Japanese victims of the weapon created by physicist Robert Oppenheimer. Experts say it’s complicated.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    Agreed, but that is not what the movie is about.

    He did say (no one knows what he believed) that just having the bomb would mean world peace…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        Literally part of the film is him realising this, did you leave after the bomb went off in testing or what?

        • ormr
          link
          fedilink
          -5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Typical aggressive online SJW behaviour. Preaching absolute truths and spitting condemnations as if no one had thought about it before. Obviously, the world can be best explained without any nuance or shades of grey ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      • kayjay
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        His reasoning was if the US didn’t make it, the Nazis would, and that would be even worse. He never wanted to make the bomb, it was just the lesser of two evils.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          Making the bomb was a good decision, dropping two over civilians after the war finished was genocide.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            The US was never trying to exterminate the Japanese race and culture, so no it wasn’t genocide. It was a fucked up act of war, maybe you could even call it an atrocity, but calling it a genocide is wrong by definition.