Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 187

Thread: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    22

    Default Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Are war crimes and guilt determined by the winner?

    The United States was into firebombing entire cities, killing tens of thousands at a time in the process - not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki which were really just "bigger bombs".

    Was it proper for the Allies to firebomb entire cities while claiming they were valid military targets? When your bombs are killing civilians and children in bulk, isn't that the very definition of a war crime?

    And while I'm at it, is dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of people justified by saying "We prevented a full scale invasion of the Japan mainland, thus saving millions of lives"?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?


  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    22

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Is it acceptable to bump a thread in 2005 and last posted to in 2008?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Paramilitary wing of CAMRA
    Posts
    4,099

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Better that than starting an entirely new one - that way the amount of repetition is reduced.
    I have neither the time nor the inclination to differentiate between the incompetent and the merely unfortunate - Curtis E LeMay

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rochard View Post
    Is it acceptable to bump a thread in 2005 and last posted to in 2008?
    In a history forum the past is of primary relevance.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    I bumped it, in the British forum...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Up in the land of the Yoopers.
    Posts
    4,313

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Quote by Rochard: "And while I'm at it, is dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of people justified by saying "We prevented a full scale invasion of the Japan mainland, thus saving millions of lives"?"
    The short answer is yes, it was justified, and you can see all of the thoughts, arguments, and sophistry conjured by that question by following the link below.

    http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/show...a-and-Nagasaki

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    201

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Poster appears to have overlooked the London Blitz and other significant bombings by axis forces.
    The big difference was with their inability to sustain them.
    They continued to do as much harm to civilians as they were able.
    The German withdrawal after the insane Ardennes '44 offensive and the Japanese in the Phillipines comes to mind.
    Simple fact is they started the immense debacle that was WW2 and we fried a bunch of their asses.
    War sucks.
    Last edited by Nickdfresh; 05-16-2011 at 11:51 PM. Reason: Oops! Hit the wrong button, fixed it though!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Quote Originally Posted by forager View Post
    Poster appears to have overlooked the London Blitz and other significant bombings by axis forces.
    ...
    Or Warsaw, Rotterdam, the strafing of French refugees, bombings throughout the Soviet Union, etc.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    45

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Yeah, firebombing was a war crime. They killed hundreds of thousands of innocents children & women in Dresden, Colonia, Leipzig, etc, without having many stratageic sucesses. At hiroshima & nagasaki, they did the same, the quote that they killed thousands but saved millions is a lie, because even after these 2 bombs, japan didn't surrender, the USA had to make a demonstration of power, flying donzens of thousands aircrafts through the clear skies of tokyo. Maybe, if they did this air demonstration before, Japan could have surrendered. Even if not, Soviet Union had just invaded Manchuria, only the fanatical japanese MILITARY didn't want to surrender. The USA just wanted to save the lives of THEIR men, because they could have droped these bombs in military bases, HQ's. I still do not agree with those bombs, no matter what anyone says.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Up in the land of the Yoopers.
    Posts
    4,313

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Aside from the many other reasons, the U.S. did wish to save the lives of American soldiers, right along with those of the other Allied Nations. you may think what you like, thats your right, but you may find yourself in a decided minority.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    45

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Well you said it, thats my opinion, but I don't care be part of a minority

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Republic of Texas, now part of the USA
    Posts
    1,042

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Der Toten Kaiser View Post
    The USA just wanted to save the lives of THEIR men
    Of course the USA wanted to save the lives of OUR (or allies) men. With the losses in the island hopping campaign, they estimated something like 500,000 casualties invading Japan itself. Why put that on yourself as a country when you have other means to end the war? Why would we save the lives of our enemies? The USA didn't start the war with Japan, THEY started the war with the USA and they got the consequences of their actions.
    "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same." - Ronald Reagan

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Up in the land of the Yoopers.
    Posts
    4,313

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Der Toten Kaiser View Post
    Well you said it, thats my opinion, but I don't care be part of a minority
    Well, this entire question has been done to death in other threads, so I will not contribute to its rehashing here.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: Firebombing: Are war crimes decided by the victors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Der Toten Kaiser View Post
    Yeah, firebombing was a war crime. They killed hundreds of thousands of innocents children & women in Dresden, Colonia, Leipzig, etc, without having many stratageic sucesses.
    Quite an arguable point. While I personally think that the Allies pissed away valuable air assets in the campaign and perhaps needlessly killed more civilians than they might have, I don't think anyone objectively studying the campaigns would come away with the idea that there were no "strategic successes." For instances: the fact that the Luftwaffe had to create a massive air defense network substantially weakened them on virtually every other front, Panther tank production suffered as the result of several airstrikes, German industry had to be dispersed resulting in production difficulties and transportation complications, etc...

    At hiroshima & nagasaki, they did the same, the quote that they killed thousands but saved millions is a lie, because even after these 2 bombs, japan didn't surrender, the USA had to make a demonstration of power, flying donzens of thousands aircrafts through the clear skies of tokyo. Maybe, if they did this air demonstration before, Japan could have surrendered. Even if not, Soviet Union had just invaded Manchuria, only the fanatical japanese MILITARY didn't want to surrender. The USA just wanted to save the lives of THEIR men, because they could have droped these bombs in military bases, HQ's. I still do not agree with those bombs, no matter what anyone says.
    If the U.S. had invaded in Operation Downfall, they inevitably would have dropped bombs on Japanese targets, all the bombs that could have been produced. And some in the military did want to surrender, some didn't. But you can't distill the Japanese Imperial Gov't down to a monolith when in fact there were numerous factions that indeed wanted a peace, even if that didn't mean "unconditional surrender." And if the "fanatical" Japanese didn't surrender from the atomic bombings, then what made them surrender?

Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •