Quote:
Originally Posted by T@T
The real war crime was attacking Pearl Harbor without declaring war first. One could say that was a gutless war crime.
What did your two nobel winners say about the fire bombings 6 months before the atomic bombs? In one night over 100,000 died in Tokyo and the Emperor still wouldn't surrender. Weren't the firebombings that killed over 200,000 civilians considered war crimes in their brilliant minds?
Personally I'm not even sure the 2 atomic bombs ended the war, I think the Emperor was more afraid when the Soviets declared war on them than anything else.
I think Japan was lucky to have a country after the crap they did during and leading up to the war against the USA, war crime my arse.
|
Japan is lucky to have a country?
I would say the USA is lucky to have escaped the ICC.
History won't be kind to the USA and their war crimes that's for sure. From Hiroshima to abugraib there will be volumes of books written on it. Believe you me.
Admiral Husband E Kimmel. A member of the US navy had this to say in May 1940
Quote:
|
"I feel that a surprise attack (submarine, air, or combined) on Pearl Harbor is a possibility, and we are taking immediate practical steps to minimize the damage inflicted and to ensure that the attacking force will pay."
|
Many many people have come out and said they are suspicious of the fact the whole naval fleet was moved from San Diego where they always stayed, to Pearl harbour, basically on a platter for the Japanese. A number of navy personnel resigned over this matter.
Not to mention the Japanese attacked a navy. They didn't drop an atomic bomb on Kansas City and St.Louis.
You are clearly completely ignorant on this topic. It was a war crime, as it is today, to target civilians, especially since Japan was literally screwed and so close to surrender.
I know many of you are familiar with the other side. However the fact you speak of dropping a nuclear weapon on a civilian population as a justified act of mercy that saved millions of lives is laughable and provokes a response from any compassionate human being. It's cute how you throw in "the theory" that dropping the bombs wasn't nessicary. Yeah - that theory is called diplomacy Einstein
I honestly don't care if some trolls on a sports forum didn't like what I had to say. I didn't say it for the likes.
I am a bit arrogant when it comes to topics like these. You know, obviously ludicrous crimes against humanity that some people were taught to think of as heroic.
PepsiFree, I post on a number of forums, and my posts usually reflect who and what I am talking about or to. If I'm talking to a ignorant troll it's different than when I am talking to a polite MENSA society level scholar. If I'm talking about the flames it's different than if I'm talking about war crimes. Also what you are saying sounds a lot like, wow crumpy makes some great points, I kind of agree with him, but since he insulted people who kind of insulted him first, I disagree.
Ok mate, up to you.
It's who I am, I'm a passionate, opinionated, crumpy-gunt. But the sweet thing is you don't have to like it or agree with me
LMFAO Corsihockeyleague - you seriously regard Noam Chomsky as a fringe lunatic conspiracy theorist? Care to explain why ?
And Wimbledon your main point is Japan had millions of people, we only killed 300,000 we could have basically killed way way more.
DERP.
So because more could have been killed, and weren't - it isn't a heavy handed response, a war crime, but a justified act to end the war?
Well.. I have nothing to say about logic like that. I mean how can you argue with sound logic like that. You've just converted me to believing what you believe.
So Wimbledon. Is Canada apart of the western world?
Or are you going to continue copy pasta from the Internet on how many people lived in Japan in the 1940s and how they all could have been killed, but weren't.
Anyhow I love how butthurt some people in this thread are.