Screw history. Let you be the judge. Japan's imperial spirit

[Atheist-Lite]

Yeah, the study of "what the fuck happened at Dresden" actually kicked off that field of study.

All these years later it is possible to say we were led by sociopaths and are sorry. At the time just like now we had the wrong people at the helm. Probably the same with Nagasaki with you?

[Coito ergo sum]

The only thing they're sorry for is losing.

[Coito ergo sum]

Yeah, the study of "what the fuck happened at Dresden" actually kicked off that field of study.

All these years later it is possible to say we were led by sociopaths and are sorry. At the time just like now we had the wrong people at the helm. Probably the same with Nagasaki with you?

Absolutely not. Neither the Brits nor the Americans have anything to apologize for relative to Dresden or Nagasaki. That blame lies with the Germans and the Japanese too.

Dresden was a tragedy and regrettable, but Britain was under no obligation, moral or otherwise, to incur more casualties to avoid the total war that the Germans and Japanese started.

It's easy to say, from an armchair, that so and so was a sociopath for ordering Dresden or Nagasaki. But, frankly, neither the Germans nor the Japanese had quit at the time of those bombings. They were made to quit by efforts like that.

Dresden and Nagasaki are cause for apologies, yes, but those apologies need to come from the Germans and the Japanese, respectively. They created the need to do that. They started the total war and they would not have stopped at anything to destroy the UK and the US. We were not in any position that they were "done anyway" or "on the verge of surrendering." That is historical armchair revisionism coupled with 20-20 hindsight viewed through rose colored glasses.

[tattuchu]

We've got ours, they've got theirs. What's a few war crimes between friends.

[Coito ergo sum]

We've got ours, they've got theirs. What's a few war crimes between friends.

False equivalence.

Being forced into a total, existential war and doing what one has to do to end it is not a war crime. Starting that war is, among other things.

[Atheist-Lite]

We've all got wounds. The cost of being top dog is somewhere there's someone nursing wounds.

[tattuchu]

We've got ours, they've got theirs. What's a few war crimes between friends.

False equivalence.

Being forced into a total, existential war and doing what one has to do to end it is not a war crime. Starting that war is, among other things.

Who said anything about equivalence? My war crime is bigger than your war crime. If you show me yours, I'll show you mine

[FBM]

Japanese Americans remember internment apology

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/J ... 273666.php

List of war apology statements issued by Japan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wa ... d_by_Japan

East Germany Apologizes : Message to Jews Accepts Nazi Atrocity Reponsibility : New Gov't. Asks Israel to Forgive

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-04-12/ ... st-germany

[Clinton Huxley]

Dresden was "terror bombing". It may not have been illegal but nor was the deliberate targeting of civilians necessary. The "well they started it" argument doesnt really cut any ice with me.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Dresden was "terror bombing". It may not have been illegal but nor was the deliberate targeting of civilians necessary. The "well they started it" argument doesnt really cut any ice with me.

They have a term for the side that doesn't use everything it can to win a war. (With the caveat that both side may refrain from using certain weapons, presenting a null situation.)

[Clinton Huxley]

Dresden was "terror bombing". It may not have been illegal but nor was the deliberate targeting of civilians necessary. The "well they started it" argument doesnt really cut any ice with me.

They have a term for the side that doesn't use everything it can to win a war. (With the caveat that both side may refrain from using certain weapons, presenting a null situation.)

I think that is a bit glib. Ethically, sounds like a race to the bottom to me.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Dresden was "terror bombing". It may not have been illegal but nor was the deliberate targeting of civilians necessary. The "well they started it" argument doesnt really cut any ice with me.

They have a term for the side that doesn't use everything it can to win a war. (With the caveat that both side may refrain from using certain weapons, presenting a null situation.)

I think that is a bit glib. Ethically, sounds like a race to the bottom to me.

Clinton, I killed a guy with a screwdriver once, stuck it in his eye to the handle. No half-stepping.

[Coito ergo sum]

It's easy to talk of such things when we're not in the existential crisis.

The UK could have lost in the Blitz. The Allies overall were uncertain of victory even in early 1945. Had the Soviets been held in eastern Europe, which was possible, the war might drag out longer than if the Soviets could break through. Dresden, a large manufacturing and transportation hub, would put a large dent in the Germans' remaining defenses and would help assist the Soviet breakthrough in the east, ultimately shortening the remaining war.

To empathize with the British position, I would think that anyone who helped dig folks out of the rubble of London during the Blitz would have a fairly strong memory of same. The British leaders would have spent many sleepless nights wondering whether their people would become subjects of the Reich shortly. Every town, and almost every family, lost someone in the war to German aggression.

Faced with the choice -- (a) let Dresden be, because German industrial might was hiding behind civilian shields, or (b) do what needed to be done to finish it. I have no problem with the Brits choosing b.

[FBM]

Clinton, I killed a guy with a screwdriver once, stuck it in his eye to the handle. No half-stepping.

Did you kill him just because he had a screwdriver? Because that's just not nice.

[Coito ergo sum]

Clinton, I killed a guy with a screwdriver once, stuck it in his eye to the handle. No half-stepping.

Did you kill him just because he had a screwdriver? Because that's just not nice.

I hope he at least let the man finish his drink.