oof and the lone warrior breaking down how the atom bombs did nothing and getting downvoted to hell by ameribrains
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
33 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15909 readers
62 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm banned from reddit so can't add the citation, but the US Strategic Bombing Survey is the source of information on the effects of every bomb dropped in WWII, and states in no uncertain terms that surrender would have come without any further action - no bombing, no land invasion, no nothing.
This is super interesting. And people will find it way more compelling considering its from the US gubermint. It might be rhetorically effective to start with the soviet invasion caused surrender in the short term then pivot to this in a very as a matter of fact type way.
My reaction to this
Typical tankie!
And where would the allies have been without Russian troops?