KBF
Model X owner (formerly Cdn Signature Model S)
It's key to keep focused on who is the aggressor, for sure.Indeed, in WW2 the Empire of Japan conducted a sneak attack on American territory w/o a prior declaration of war. The USA ended that conflict 3.5 years later with 2 atomic weapons used on Japanese territory.
If one were to follow his analogy, what Putin is saying is that Ukraine would be justified in using atomic weapons on Russian soil to put an end to this long slog of war. Let's be clear who was the aggressor, and who was the target of that attack.
So not what Puttie had in mind I think, but he is completely nuts. So there's that...
The attack on Pearl Harbor is one of the biggest tactical blunders in history - definitely Japan's, at least (Hitler attacking the USSR was also ill-advised - but lucky for non-fascist democracy). Until that moment, there wasn't a politically acceptable threat to American freedom.
Adding nuance, though - the atom bombs weren't necessary to end the war, despite the propaganda afterwards. Some scholars suggest it was more a warning/signal to the USSR (and the beginning of the Cold War) than to create an effect on WW2. Germany had already surrendered, Japan was basically under siege and factions were already discussing surrender (the article I linked it goes into some excellent nuance).
The USA was already firebombing larger cities with greater loss of life, and from decoded Japanese communications the leadership barely paid any attention to the atom bomb - they were focused more on avoiding a soviet invasion (which turned out very poorly for Germany). If anything, the ethical mindset of the USA was likely that if any country deserved to be demonstrated on, it was Japan - so perhaps a retributive element at most. But already they could see that the USSR was a greater threat than the remnants of Japan.
Last edited: