Why was it okay for America to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

I'll give you that satisfaction when you admit the crimes of the british and finally accept that aerial bombardment is a war crime.
Until that day comes, i stay silent on the matter, because according to your own definition they were not. An eye for an eye...



???
Leningrad '41: 1000
Stalingrad '42: 955
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civili...ategic_bombing

I very much doubt that the Luftwaffe had the planes and the fuel to bomb 1/2million people in the USSR. The source for the 500,000 claim is from the leftist Spiegel magazine quoting a british historian trying to justify Dresden, biased.


I believe, the active defense of these cities late in the war was practically nonexistant, some towns were targeted which never had a anti-air defense to begin with.

And your claims are nothing more than neonazi propaganda. Spiegel is more credible than any of your NPD revanchist nonsense.

[Just answer the question]

Fact is, the twin towers where a legitimate target, a commerce centre and icon.

Finally, something we agree on.

But then why did they retaliate?

Japan never retaliated, Vietnam never retaliated but when they get bombed they retaliate?

[conon394]

Finally, something we agree on.

But then why did they retaliate?

Japan never retaliated, Vietnam never retaliated but when they get bombed they retaliate?

Japan never retaliated? Umm You do realize they did militarily against the US for the US embargo efforts to stop/halt /reverse the Japanese invasion of China. They also of there own accord allied themselves with Germany in a global total war. I not sure of what point you are making on Japan. Japan's governemt started war over non military policies of the US.

Nice picture show and again you post w/o context. An 'I don't picture'. What exactly does that mean? In what context? Have you ever actually you know read an academic paper. The tricky bit is you have to source things . That so somebody can read or see what your source is. Or you can try minimize your or fail to provide sources and than your paper or book will be called BS... What we have here is BS picture posting. Unless you provide me the links.

[Just answer the question]

The op's premise tries to hold America to a higher moral standard......

And here we go again......

No, what I'm trying to do is give the people it has hurt justice! And no, it should never be put to a higher moral standard. As I've mentioned again and again..... why is it okay to punish weak nations but never okay to punish the big ones? Because they've got money? They've got power?

If we were to compare the same with people then it should be okay for a rich man to kill people because he is rich and powerful.

There is no "Was it ok for the Japanese to rape women with bayonets in Nanking.".......

If you want, you can make threads about it but for me, they already paid for those war crimes.

[tgoodenow]

why is it okay to punish weak nations but never okay to punish the big ones?

"By 1945, the Kwantung Army consisted of a mere 713,000 personnel, divided into 31 infantry divisions, nine infantry brigades, two tank brigades, and one special purpose brigade. It also possessed 1,155 light tanks, 5,360 guns, and 1,800 aircraft."

That meets your definition of a weak nation?

If you want, you can make threads about it but for me, they already paid for those war crimes.

Did they? There are still lawsuits going to this day
https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Nikk...uth-Korea-ties

[PointOfViewGun]

The whole point of the op is to try and demonise America, it's quite stupid really. The op's premise tries to hold America to a higher moral standard than any other nation and tries to imply American actions are in isolation.
There is no "Was it ok for the Japanese to rape women with bayonets in Nanking." No "Was it ok for the soviets to use scorched earth tactics in Afghanistan." No "Was it ok for China to annex Tibet."
This is not a rational, fact based debate on the merits of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The op has pretermined that America was wrong and taken his usual moral stance of conveniance in yet another "I hate America and because i hate America so does the rest of the world" post.

Your premise is quite false. The statements you list are already accepted for not being OK. They were demonized for those acts quite a lot. The same can not be said for USA and it's use of nuclear bombs. So, its only natural that this subject keeps coming up. The opening poster has every right to start a thread with a preconceived conclusion. We all do. However, your post comes across as more prejudiced than the opening post.

[conon394]

No, what I'm trying to do is give the people it has hurt justice! And no, it should never be put to a higher moral standard. As I've mentioned again and again..... why is it okay to punish weak nations but never okay to punish the big ones? Because they've got money? They've got power?

And you have failed to respond when confronted with other nations Great and Small that are not punished for various bad - odious actions. You labor under the delusion the US is alone to avoiding consequences. Why could Stalin let the red army rape a pillage on its way through Eastern Europe and Germany, seize land and equipment, impose governments stand by why the Polish home army died, send thousands of civilians off to die in gulags? How come Britain is never punished for not try to stop the Bengal Famine? Why were no trials of any of their generals or leaders? Because they and the US won the war - period, and they were all three of them at the point in time 1945/6 the strongest nation on earth. You may not like that fact but is more or less how the world works and has for a very long time. Why could Sparta fight a war for the freedom of the Greeks even why holding tens of thousands of Greeks as helots (perpetual slaves) and hand Ionia back over to Persia. Because it was powerful and won its war in 403 BC.

Also another charge you do keep making is odd - that the US is built on stolen land. Which is sort of silly point to make without demanding the dissolution of all countries in North and South a America and Australia, and New Zealand, freeing Tibet, removing most dissolving Israel and removing most Jews, giving Germany back its part of Prussia it occupies, moving Poland, ejecting Russia from Finnish lands... That's just a quick list of recent theft and all the European theft from First Nations. But if I thought you respond credibly I'm sure I could find more examples over the centuries from 1492 to now. Essentially this charge is pointless unless you plan to have a lot people pulling up tent stakes and move people all over the world. Although I suppose that would be a boon for map illustrators assuming they were not refugees. [Edit I feel free to reply to all your posts so far as just variations on the same theme and so consider them one]

------------------

If you want to break german dignity, you better try to fight us again, this time without allies.

Given the state of the German armed forces the UK could win handily. You do realize just how tiny German ammunition stocks are?

[Mayer]

The ultranationalist view of americans:

"Obama’s shameful apology tour lands in Hiroshima" by John Bolton
https://nypost.com/2016/05/26/obamas...-in-hiroshima/


The japanese also have a strong opinion:

[conon394]

The japanese also have a strong opinion:

And yet Abe is the PM, for quite some time now.

Going on a monologue of how great America is, totally avoiding the issue of the bombing of Hiroshima.

So you are saying I can't find blind nationalism in most countries?

In any case you still have not defined a better way to end the war quickly and and in a way the Imperial army and navy would accept absolutely.

[Mayer]

So you are saying I can't find blind nationalism in most countries?

America is the worst, bacause they did extreme crimes against humanity, and always got away with it. Victor's privilege.

[conon394]

America is the worst, bacause they did extreme crimes against humanity, and always got away with it. Victor's privilege.

Vs everyone else as well. I'm sorry i missed the world trial of China or the USSR for Mao or Stalin.

[95thrifleman]

Vs everyone else as well. I'm sorry i missed the world trial of China or the USSR for Mao or Stalin.

I missed the memo regarding the trials for Germany, France, England and Spain for their crimes during their various histories aswell.

I think mayer is just jealous that Germany is the only nation that was stupid enough to conduct a war of genocide and lose.

[Mayer]

Vs everyone else as well. I'm sorry i missed the world trial of China or the USSR for Mao or Stalin.

There is an enormous difference between famine in your own country, and indiscriminately bombing civilians of other nation. The latter is forbidden in international war.

I think mayer is just jealous that Germany is the only nation that was stupid enough to conduct a war of genocide and lose.

It sounds to me as if you agree that other nations conducted genocides and the victors got away with it.

[95thrifleman]

T
It sounds to me as if you agree that other nations conducted genocides and the victors got away with it.

I am a student of history, that statement is a given. Human history is the history of killing each other, the only difference is scope and scale.

Germany got away with the Herero and Namaqua genocide did you not?

[conon394]

There is an enormous difference between famine in your own country, and indiscriminately bombing civilians of other nation. The latter is forbidden in international war.

In this context its useful to point out neither Japan nor the USSR had ratified the Geneva convention while WW2 was on. Also its actions had certainly violated the Hague Convention of 1907. If your enemy is not playing by the rules its hard to expect the same from the other side.

[Mayer]

I am a student of history, that statement is a given. Human history is the history of killing each other, the only difference is scope and scale.

What is the argument? Because war crimes are prevalent, they should not be put on trial? Do you believe the main fault of the axis was to lose the war?

Germany got away with the Herero and Namaqua genocide did you not?

Germany formally recognized the Herero genocide and paid tribute.
Where is your recognition of Hamburg and Dresden?

If your enemy is not playing by the rules its hard to expect the same from the other side.

Ah, the claim of equity. Wrong, because the japanese have not made a offense like Hiroshima and Nagasaki toward the US.

[conon394]

Ah, the claim of equity. Wrong, because the japanese have not made a offense like Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the US.

There are what some 6 million (mid estimate) of civilians from the GEACPS who might beg to differ if they were not been killed by Japan. You got to like them comfort women as well.

[95thrifleman]

W


Where is your recognition of Hamburg and Dresden?

Where is your recognition of London and Coventry? I can play this tennis game all day.

[Mayer]

When you say sorry for 600,000 germans burned to a crisp, i'll pay due respect for the 40,000 killed in the Blitz.

[95thrifleman]

When you say sorry for 600,000 germans burned to a crisp, i'll pay due respect for the 40,000 killed in the Blitz.

I neither wan't nor expect your respect or tribute. However I'm curious why you refuse to call the bombing of British cities a warcrime while claiming it is a warcrime when someone does it to your cities?