stonedemoman

From what I understand this is not the main point of contention among historians. That Imperialist Japan, like all Axis powers, was a cancer that demanded amputation was not the justification for the deployment of nukes. Rather, the debatable justification was their leadership's inability to surrender unconditionally.

Three things:

-This is moving the goal post of the argument that I was replying to and irrelevant to this conversation.

-Theorizing about the consequences at stake in the war doesn't assume anything retrospectively. The decision to deploy nukes was not made with the knowledge we possess after the fact.

-It's very likely that any other option that would finally result in the complete cessation of an enemy as ideologically tenacious as Imperial Japan would've far exceeded a price that was able to be paid that late into the second world war.

I disagree. The proliferation of Fascist ideology, in Asia alone, would've far eclipsed the devastation of two nuclear payloads.

Nonlinear narrative is not necessarily a bad thing, and neither is complicated exposition.

Very well written comment that will no doubt be under appreciated lol

You made an implicit assumption

I don't even know how to continue this conversation. I didn't have to assume anything about Imperial Japan's reception to alternative methods of prompted surrender to arrive at the conclusion that the theoretical devastation of Fascism proliferating is at all comparable to the nuclear bombs that were deployed.

There's not enough users on this platform for that to be a viable option. It should also be no wonder why it's dying.

This site's mods have very quickly turned into Reddit mods

I legitimately thought this at one point, and it quickly developed into a conflicting feeling. That being the reason I left reddit - the march towards enshittification that most recently resulted in third party API lockout - started to seem less egregious to me as Lemmy's top instance condones just as much censorship.

This means that most communities I visit are rooted in .world, and stifle free discourse. It's extremely discouraging, even being that I was free to leave the instance and join another one.

? Choose your battles more carefully.

You've solved my secret username puzzle.

Also, yes.

If you want to strawman my argument and put words in my mouth, you can go infect some other comment thread with your smooth brain. The concept of genocide requires more criteria than just "the death of innocents". Get a clue.

It should be pretty clear when I say loaded terminology.

genocidal

This is not an accusation to throw around lightly. If it was, we could say that Palestinians were once genocidal, for instance, while they were targeting Jews with violent campaigns. As terrible as it is, urban combat is going to produce unintended casualties. It's an extremely complicated, tangled mess to uncover genocidal intent amid an active war.

colonial

The Ottoman Empire (yeah, this was so long ago that those were still around) collapsed, the British Protectorate sanctioned the country of Israel, land titles were sold to the JNF, the Palestinians besieged Jerusalem in a bid to starve all of its Jewish inhabitants to death, and Plan Dalet was spawned to rid neighboring villages of potential combatants during an active war with a stated goal of allowing anyone non-hostile to remain. Doesn't sound very colonial to me, especially given that there was Jewish owned territory in the region, long established before this conflict, and there were no other Jewish countries.

ethnostate

Israel allowed Palestinian refugees to return. The surrounding Arab nations didn't and don't. What else is there to say?

But here not so much.

Completely disagree with this opinion. The title of the movie is Oppenheimer. It would stand to reason that the film would include an introspective character study into the incredibly conflicted mind of a tortured physics genius.

In other words, it's bloody obvious that the narrative was going to get dense.

The nonlinear storytelling was a deliberate device used to build suspense regarding the two contradictory imperatives tearing at the man's morals, and I never once found the setting of any particular scene unable to be deduced by context.

Had to leave the .world instance because of biased moderators censoring my opinions and admins not giving a shit. If not for Lemmy having a system in place for dealing with ineffective staff I would've left this platform already.

Edit: Never seen so many people rush in to defend a dictatorship. Sickening to be honest.

Yes, it is absolutely the highest standard of military forewarning and you've failed to provide anything that confirms otherwise (and you will never be able to). No amount of head-empty baby rage is going to change reality.

Incorrect, the country was sanctioned by the region's protectorate and land was procured legally through the sale of deeds. The first war started with "Palestinians" besieging Jerusalem. Go ahead and do more research than reading social media.

coping techniques

What an ironic statement. Unless you have some kind of evidence to refute my original statement your comments are going to be a pathetic display of zero self-awareness, but keep at it if you must.

I'm not hearing a counterpoint.

I'll never understand why people have completely made up their mind on this issue and discard all nuance. Everyone should know by now how much disinformation encircles this debacle. There's only two primary sources here for 99% of the information that gets reported- Hamas and the IDF.

I've also seen far too many people retrospectively hold modern Israel accountable for actions that occurred 80-120 years ago. This was long enough back that there were still Empires and colonies in existence.

If you fill a sentence with enough loaded terminology I hear it makes it more true

Edit: If you downvote a sentence enough I heard it makes it less true

There's something about the response: "there's nobody stopping us from being tyrants" that doesn't sit well with me...

Downvote me, hate me, and quietly move on. The language of those that can't face the cognitive dissonance of a contradictory, inarguable fact.

The developers do not control who to defederate from.

Duh.

You don’t need to be on a populated instance

You can just as easily access content from a small instance

Which instance do you think has the majority of the content/users....

If you guessed the same one that I'm criticizing for censoring me, you'd be correct.

How exactly is it that you imagine the Lemmy developers would even enforce such a CoC?

Ideally you would enforce these policies collectively by de-federating an instance, "that's the beauty of a decentralized system". The problem thus far with Lemmy is how terribly it has failed this goal. Too many are nonchalant about letting autocracy fly no problem. Meanwhile the .world instance, which suffers from this problem of absolutism, is where most of the sub members flock. There's such a tiny user base here (probably because of the tendency for staff to smother the part about social media that's most important: inclusivity of ideas and perspectives) that I'm sort of on the fence about leaving entirely if the only populated ones are essentially closed off to me.

You better believe I'm going to criticize this terrible system. The idea of creating a place for voices, except they're all the same voices, is a remarkable failure.

I highly doubt developers would be working with a different ethical set than instance staff. That makes 0 sense. What would be the point of making the software inclusive if all of the instances can just ignore it and exclude?

Roof knocking, phone calls to the building, and leaflets. Did you know that all three of these warning operations are conducted before the IDF drop a bomb? It's the highest standard in history. If you think these are intended casualties you're clearly brainwashed.

Don't buy it, sorry. What would be the point of applying a set of ethics to one group of people involved with a project and not another group of people involved with that same project? That doc addresses users, admins, moderators, and developers.

Edit: It literally says this in the same Code of Conduct section:

<Moderation These are the policies for upholding our community’s standards of conduct

The alternative is forcing every community to abide my the same policies regardless of what they want to build

They literally do this. Or at least, are supposed to do this. https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html

We are committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all, regardless of level of experience, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion, nationality, or other similar characteristic. Please avoid using overtly sexual aliases or other nicknames that might detract from a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all.

I don't think the statement "you could create a community where you just ban everyone from the community that you dislike" is compatible with a 'welcoming environment for all'.

as long as they don’t go against server rules.

That's the thing though, it's in direct opposition to Lemmy's code of conduct, not to mention it's completely off putting to be so blasé about infringements on such an inalienable concept as free speech.

Respect that people have differences of opinion and that every design or implementation choice carries a trade-off and numerous costs. There is seldom a right answer.

I didn't ask.

Believe whatever you want in the privacy of your own mind, but the land wasn't stolen and the persecution was perpetuated mutually.

Unintended casualties is an unavoidable side effect of urban combat. Use your brain.