Why was Germany and Japan stopped from doing evil but not America?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

It must be nazi friend Irving. Thats whole " UK start bombing" is neonazi propaganda.

[Mayer]

Muammar Al-Gaddafi, the leader of Libya made a speech at the UN about the tyranny of the victors of WW2 and the unequality of nations. 2 years before the NATO criminals bombed his country into the stone age and he died a gruesome death by terrorists who afterwards dragged his body through the streets.

Address by Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi, Leader of the Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
The President (spoke in Arabic): The Assembly will now hear an address by the Leader of the Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi, Leader of the Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, was escorted into the General Assembly Hall.
Colonel Al-Qadhafi (spoke in Arabic): In the name of the African Union, I would like to greet the members of the General Assembly of the United Nations, and I hope that this meeting will be among the most historic in the history of the world.
In the name of the General Assembly at its sixtyfourth session, presided over by Libya, of the African Union, of one thousand traditional African kingdoms [trans.] and in my own name, I would like to take this opportunity, as President of the African Union, to congratulate our son Obama because he is attending the General Assembly, and we welcome him as his country is hosting this meeting.

This session is taking place in the midst of so many challenges facing us, and the whole world should come together and unite its efforts to defeat the challenges that are our principal common enemy — those of climate change and international crises such as the capitalist economic decline, the food and water crises, desertification, terrorism, immigration, piracy, man-made and natural epidemics and nuclear proliferation. Perhaps influenza H1N1 was a virus created in a laboratory that got out of control, originally being meant as a military weapon. Such challenges also include hypocrisy, poverty, fear, materialism and immorality.

As is known, the United Nations was founded by three or four countries against Germany at the time. The United Nations was formed by the nations that joined together against Germany in the Second World War. Those countries formed a body called the Security Council, made its own countries permanent members and granted them the power of veto.


We were not present at that time. The United Nations was shaped in line with those three countries and wanted us to step into shoes originally designed against Germany. That is the real substance of the United Nations when it was founded over 60 years ago.

That happened in the absence of some 165 countries, at a ratio of one to eight; that is, one was present and eight were absent. They created the Charter, of which I have a copy. If one reads the Charter of the United Nations, one finds that the Preamble of the Charter differs from its Articles. How did it come into existence? All those who attended the San Francisco Conference in 1945 participated in creating the Preamble, but they left the Articles and internal rules of procedures of the so-called Security Council to experts, specialists and interested countries, which were those countries that had established the Security Council and had united against Germany.

The Preamble is very appealing, and no one objects to it, but all the provisions that follow it completely contradict the Preamble. We reject such provisions, and we will never uphold them; they ended with the Second World War. The Preamble says that all nations, small or large, are equal. Are we equal when it comes to the permanent seats? No, we are not equal.

The Preamble states in writing that all nations are equal whether they are small or large. Do we have the right of veto? Are we equal? The Preamble says that we have equal rights, whether we are large or small.

That is what is stated and what we agreed in the Preamble. So the veto contradicts the Charter. The permanent seats contradict the Charter. We neither accept nor recognize the veto.

The Preamble of the Charter states that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest. That is the Preamble that we agreed to and signed, and we joined the United Nations because we wanted the Charter to reflect that. It says that armed force shall only be used in the common interest of all nations, but what has happened since then? Sixty-five wars have broken out since the establishment of the United Nations and the Security Council — 65 since their creation, with millions more victims than in the Second World War. Are those wars, and the aggression and force that were used in those 65 wars, in the common interest of us all? No, they were in the interest of one or three or four countries, but not of all nations.

We will talk about whether those wars were in the interest of one country or of all nations. That flagrantly contradicts the Charter of the United Nations that we signed, and unless we act in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to which we agreed, we will reject it and not be afraid not to speak diplomatically to anyone. Now we are talking about the future of the United Nations. There should be no hypocrisy or diplomacy because it concerns the important and vital issue of the future of the world. It was hypocrisy that brought about the 65 wars since the establishment of the United Nations.

The Preamble also states that if armed force is used, it must be a United Nations force — thus, military intervention by the United Nations, with the joint agreement of the United Nations, not one or two or three countries using armed force. The entire United Nations will decide to go to war to maintain international peace and security. Since the establishment of the United Nations in 1945, if there is an act of aggression by one country against another, the entire United Nations should deter and stop that act.

If a country, Libya for instance, were to exhibit aggression against France, then the entire Organization would respond because France is a sovereign State Member of the United Nations and we all share the collective responsibility to protect the sovereignty of all nations. However, 65 aggressive wars have taken place without any United Nations action to prevent them. Eight other massive, fierce wars, whose victims number some 2 million, have been waged by Member States that enjoy veto powers. Those countries that would have us believe they seek to maintain the sovereignty and independence of peoples actually use aggressive force against peoples. While we would like to believe that these countries want to work for peace and security in the world and protect peoples, they have instead resorted to aggressive wars and hostile behaviour. Enjoying the veto they granted themselves as permanent members of the Security Council, they have initiated wars that have claimed millions of victims.

The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of States is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. No country, therefore, has the right to interfere in the affairs of any Government, be it democratic or dictatorial, socialist or capitalist, reactionary or progressive. This is the responsibility of each society; it is an internal matter for the people of the country concerned. The senators of Rome once appointed their leader, Julius Caesar, as dictator because it was good for Rome at that time. No one can say of Rome at that time that it gave Caesar the veto.

The veto is not mentioned in the Charter.

We joined the United Nations because we thought we were equals, only to find that one country can object to all the decisions we make. Who gave the permanent members their status in the Security Council? Four of them granted this status to themselves. The only country that we in this Assembly elected to permanent member status in the Security Council is China. This was done democratically, but the other seats were imposed upon us undemocratically through a dictatorial procedure carried out against our will, and we should not accept it.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Seriously Gaddhafi?

And still: Germany started the bombing of undefended cities, immediately at 01. September 1939 in Wielun.

And at 24. August 1940 Luftwaffe bombed eastern suburbs of London while attacking the Themse havens.

Stop rewriting the history of my country Germany and victimizing Nazi Germany...

Edit: Grammar

[Mayer]

Seriously Gaddhafi?

He was assasinated because he spoke the truth, he was denounced as dictator and the rebels(literally Al-Qaida) were cherished as heroes by the West. I was thoroughly disgusted by the intervention in Libya and its "humanitarian" justification, Libya is not even a functioning state anymore but a lawless region for terrorism, human smuggling and slave trade. One of NATO's greatest crimes.

And at 24. August 1940 Luftwaffe bombed eastern suburbs of London while attacking the Themse havens.

And the RAF bombed Dortmund on May 10, 1940

Stop rewriting the history of my country Germany and victimize Nazi Germany...

History is always rewritten by the victors. I just question the narrative that Germany is the ultimate evil and the Allies have done no wrong. And germans were victims of firebombing.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Bombing Oil plants and Blast Furnaces is bombing military targets, i would say. And they attacked on 15/16 May 1940 at the Ruhrgebiet after the destruction of Rotterdam. I don't know, that the Netherlands bombed Germany... With what? Fokkers of WWI?

@all:There is a nice anecdote about the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe Göring:

"If a single enemy bomber appears over Berlin, I wanna be called Mayer/Meier."

Herman Göring, Commander in Chief Luftwaffe

After 25. August 1940 he was only called Mayer/Meier in the population...

[Mayer]

Is it so funny that the Luftwaffe was overconfident and the british bombers broke through to bring death and destruction? Hahaha germans burning to death...

[Morifea]

Well, at least the bombed population found it funny enough to make jokes about it.

Also, the alarmsirens were called "Meyerhorn" afterwards

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Because "Et Hermännche Meyer", who was very fat, was also the "Reichsjägermeister" (Minister of Hunting^^).

Göring was also the one, who let hordes of facemasked thugs migrate to Germany.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

He established as "Reichsjägermeister" 1934 the Racoons in Germany, who now rampage through german garden...

[Mayer]

And Churchill was a fat, smoking alcoholic.
Let's return to the topic at hand: The Crimes of the US and its allies.

How about the intervention in affairs of Venezuela? US likes to coup governments it doesn't like.

[conon394]

Muammar Al-Gaddafi

Umm what part of the preamble or the charter validated his invasion of Chad? Or is there its OK to kill black people most white people can't find on a map clause if you are brown?

How about the intervention in affairs of Venezuela? US likes to coup governments it doesn't like.

Back in the day lots a nations decided they did not like the South Africa ran its internal affairs - problem for you that intervention? You would have approved of Greater Serbia at whatever cost they chose to inflict?

[Just answer the question]

Let's return to the topic at hand: The Crimes of the US and its allies.

No, they don't want that. They want to change topic, they don't like their crimes exposed.

[Mayer]

Gaddafi killing blacks is a true falsification of history, and you are purposefully ignoring the civil war in Chad and French/US involvement. Muammar al-Gaddafi founded the African Union to further political cooperation and economic integration of african states. He was crowned King of Kings of Africa by a cerermony of 200 african tribal rulers. He wanted to establish an african currency to break free from the Dollar. His contributions to the african continent are numerous.
The anti-black racists were the rebels in Libya, supported by the US, who claimed that Gaddafi was using black mercenaries to oppress the libyan people which was a racist lie, and who reintroduced the black slave market.

[TheLeft]

a racist lie

And you would know about those being a champion of bigoted, nonsensical Eurabia theories...

[conon394]

Gaddafi killing blacks is a true falsification of history, and you are purposefully ignoring the civil war in Chad and French/US involvement. Muammar al-Gaddafi founded the African Union to further political cooperation and economic integration of african states. He was crowned King of Kings of Africa by a cerermony of 200 african tribal rulers. He wanted to establish an african currency to break free from the Dollar. His contributions to the african continent are numerous.
The anti-black racists were the rebels in Libya, supported by the US, who claimed that Gaddafi was using black mercenaries to oppress the libyan people which was a racist lie, and who reintroduced the black slave market.

And his support for Idi Amin's attack on Tanazina?

Muammar al-Gaddafi founded the African Union to further political cooperation and economic integration of african states

Just a bolt from the blue... Not really just a collection of various organizations that had been kicking around for decades.

He wanted to establish an african currency to break free from the Dollar.

Greece should demonstrate what a fantastically bad ideal that would have been. Unless you just mean the Petro Dollar myth. Nobody in the US would loose sleep over Libya or anyone else trading oil in any other currency. Personally I favor the Yuan - let the President for life eat the cost of currency demand.

[Mayer]

And you would know about those being a champion of bigoted, nonsensical Eurabia theories...

Why are you rambling inane Offtopic stuff? Has the left become a tool of US imperialism?

[TheLeft]

Why are you rambling inane Offtopic stuff?

Just pointing out the massive, glaring hypocrisy of your statement, accusing others of racism given your blind devotion to the completely discredited and racist Eurabia theory.

Has the left become a tool of US imperialism?

Absolutely, because historically, socialists have always been the biggest champions of US Imperialism. [/sarcasm]

Now who's rambling inane off-topic stuff?

[Diocle]

Why are you rambling inane Offtopic stuff? Has the left become a tool of US imperialism?

Yes of course she has.

Seen their ideological bankrupt with Stalinism, the leftists have recycled themselves (as usually people do with garbage, but actually Leftist ideology is nothing else than garbage), in the role of champions of Israeli-Saudi-American/Obamite ideology, so, they supported the bad taste joke known as "Arab Springs", they supported the Israeli-Saudi-Obamite mercenaries attacking the legitimate government of the Republic of Syria, helped by the husband of Carla Bruni (beautiful woman!) they attacked and killed Gaddafi, turning Lybia into the we know today, from which hordes of illegal immigrants come in Europe at millions, they supported the Obamite fully retarded concept of abolishing the national borders, in support of the slave trade at planetary scale, with the help of the failed German politician Angela Merkel they supported the Nazi coup in Ukraine, starting a new fake and retarded Cold War with Russia, sadly for them, all their efforts failed and, once again, they went bankrupted alongside Hillary Clinton and her pedophile net!

Since that my naive hopes in some kind of American restoration by Donald Trump, perished alongside the victims of the crazy missile attacks in Syria, I think that the absolute incapability at international level to enforce a policy not in contradiction with the human values ​​of which they qualify themselves as legitimate bearers and enforcers, is making the whole American foreign policy a pretty sad and annoying total failure.

[Mayer]

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Yes, I am a nationalist. Can we talk about the evils of America and why they are not stopped? Half the thread is people arguing that victims of allied firebombing in WW2 had it coming.

[Diocle]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Yes, I am a nationalist.

Yeah, me too! Congrats (to both)!

Can we talk about the evils of America and why they are not stopped? Half the thread is people arguing that victims of allied firebombing in WW2 had it coming.

In my opinion three are the main evils of America during WW2:

1- The indiscriminate bombings of German towns.

2- The use of two nuclear bombs against unarmed Japanese civilians.
3- Having sold half Europe to Stalin at Yalta, so that East German, Polish (those to protect whom the Allies fought WW2 .. ), Czechoslovakian, Hungarian, Romanian and Baltic citizens, have been forced to spend half a century under the tyrannic rule of one of the worst mass butchers mankind has known, in my opinion not better than Hitler.

After the war:

Just the first that come to mind without any strict order: the massive use of chemical weapons in Viet Nam, the two useless Iraqi wars, the Arab springs, the indiscriminate bombing of Serbia, the war in Syria, the support of many Sunni terrorist groups such as ISIS and Al Qaeda and the Chechen butchers, twenty years of useless Afghan war with thousands casualties among civilians for getting .. NOTHING, just to push Russians out of the region, allowing nuclear proliferation in countries such as Israel, India and Pakistan, having involved NATO in supporting the Nazi terrorists in Ukraine and supporting the Nazi-Fascist regimes in South America.

Why nobody stopped them? Because anyone had his own convenience in the PAX AMERICANA and nobody wanted to annoy the big boy!

[conon394]

2- The use of two nuclear bombs against unarmed Japanese civilians.

You have a better alternative?

3- Having sold half Europe to Stalin at Yalta, so that East German, Polish (those to protect whom the Allies have fought WW2), Czechoslovakian, Hungarian, Romanian and Baltic citizens, have been forced to spend half a century under the tyrannic rule of one of the worst mass butchers mankind has known, in my opinion not better than Hitler.

Better alternative?

1- The indiscriminate bombings of German towns.

Your right Germany having declared total war should get the luxury of the US and UK and Russia fighting with Queensberry Rules?