American War Crimes in WW2

Black_Wolf

Black_Wolf

Newbie
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
327
Reaction score
0
I think we all know that war itself is a crime,I wonder why the US Military was never put in front of a tribunal for crimes against german civillians,anyone else wonder?
Im also sure they did some sick shit against Japanese.





edit:lets not forget Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well.
 
oh come on war is not a crime its a method of negotiation when all other avenues are depleted. we werent tried against since we won. one of the pitfalls of modern warfare is that theres bound to be civilian casualties. blame technology though, before things like automatic rifles and other advancements, war was noble, military leaders would meat just before battle to try and avoid war and civilians would stay out of it. but ever since the seven years war things changed. now the whole state is the enemy
 
Winners don't get tried for war crimes. It's as simple as that. Victor's history.

If Germany won, how many NDSAP officals would have been hung at Nuremburg? Zero.
 
I do see what Black_Wolf is saying, but as has been said, you can't get tried for bieng the winners.
Its to late to change anything but Horishima and Nagasaki were uncalled for.
 
well..I was looking over some pictures of Corpses in Dresden....it aint pretty.
why did they bomb Dresden?
it doesnt make much since from a military stand point
 
0mar said:
Winners don't get tried for war crimes. It's as simple as that. Victor's history.

If Germany won, how many NDSAP officals would have been hung at Nuremburg? Zero.
Click to expand...

This is true.

Plus, almost noone knows of warcrimes committed by allied forces- the media and propaganda was so widely controlled by both sides, that the true history of a lot of things were never even recorded or were changed immediately.

Its too old to do something so controversial (eg the allies are the "good guys")
 
want me to post pics of burnt corpses in Dresden?
my Grandfathters friend was there,and thats for me is reason enough.
 
he, if the Americans should be trialed for warcrimes against German civilians, heh well than the Russians are gonna have alot of "crap" to be trialed against.
Read on the rapes of Berlin for instance.
They justify it as: "well the Germans inflicted 23+ million casualties on us, alot of those were civilian, this is retribution".
 
Lets not forget the Romans that raped and pillaged Britain.

"Where there is blame, there is a claim"
 
People tend to ignore the UN when they overpower it...
 
or when they so undermine it that it ceases to function properly
 
To late to do anything about it now.

But they should have been punished.
 
They should have punished the soldiers who took part in the Christmas Day football armistice, for warcrimes such as goodwill, humility and neighbourliness towards enemy nationals.
 
kirovman said:
They should have punished the soldiers who took part in the Christmas Day football armistice, for warcrimes such as goodwill, humility and neighbourliness towards enemy nationals.
Click to expand...
No they shouldn't.
 
The Japanese were the real sons of bitches, some were trailed, yes, but many got away unnoticed. Maybe the reason the Americans weren't so keep to follow up the crimes was because they hadn't been committed against the American people, but against the Koreans and the Chinese.
 
Yeah, the Koreans and Chinese are still angry to this day. Just ask Numbers.
 
heh, war + nobel never mixed well.
Before the "invention of rifles and that crap" people still sacked cities, mass-raped and murdered civilian populations.
Read what happened to big cities being sacked like Constantinopel, Jerusalem, even Rome and how "nobel" the viking warfare was.
They might be less-effective at it, though the Christian sacking of Jerusalem cost 70.000 lives, and thats just 1 example of Medievel "nobelness".
When Memmet II conquered Constantinopel from the Christians, he autherized mass executions and several days of free-rape.
Even in the Greek and Roman times things werent very "nobel".
:p
 
Yeah, in the stone age where they clubbed each over the head, that was pretty noble.
 
I really dont think the past justifies the present ..I like to think we've evolved/become more civilized since then
 
Well I just keep asking myslef WHY Dresden?
The brits and the US knew it was full of refugees.
 
Black_Wolf said:
Well I just keep asking myslef WHY Dresden?
Click to expand...

Why not?

Anyway, it would be interesting to get an unbiased account of war crimes commited by all nations during WW2. While I'm sure the Allies (especially the Ruskies) commited a number of atrocious acts (which is inevitable really), it certainly wouldn't hold a candle to the atrocities commited by the Germans and Japanese. Of course winners write the history books, but even so the tables would still be turned heavily in our favor if everything was laid out on the table.
 
Does anyone have any statistics comparing relative number of warcrimes of Russians to other Allies to Axis?
 
smwScott said:
Why not?

Anyway, it would be interesting to get an unbiased account of war crimes commited by all nations during WW2. While I'm sure the Allies (especially the Ruskies) commited a number of atrocious acts (which is inevitable really), it certainly wouldn't hold a candle to the atrocities commited by the Germans and Japanese. Of course winners write the history books, but even so the tables would still be turned heavily in our favor if everything was laid out on the table.
Click to expand...



They knew it was full of refugees,its not like they had a SS Tank Division there.
 
dude,you haven't posted one constructive thing in this thread.
Why dont you ask a mod to ban you again?
 
Nobody likes Black_Wolf.

Edit: God damn you ab. Beat me.
 
Many people I know are fully aware of and acknowledge the extent of the war crimes committed by the Western Allies. Then again, many people I know are history students.

We've got indiscriminate-ish bombing, total horror and crazyness from both US and Japan in the far east, Russians raping and pillaging, Americans putting first and second-generation Japanese (and even Chinese and other easterners) in concentration camps for the duration of the war...then there's Hiroshima and Nagisaki which are debatable because while unnecessary from a war standpoint they may have been necessary to stop the cold war turning hot and Hiroshima and Nagi were technically military targets anyway (for the record I believe it was wrong and also mad)...

The thing is, although the Western Allies were often complete and utter bastards - it was necessary to win the war, I believe, though that's by no means a defence of what they/we did - to my knowledge, they never systematically massacred entire populations. They never embarked on full, planned exterminations of millions of people. The closest thing is the incarceration of Nisei and Issei by the US government, but I don't think that comes anywhere near.

Remember that in criminal law the motive, or mens rea, is very important. Murder without the intent is manslaughter; intended murder is as bad as actual, consumated murder. For this reason, I would consider the extermination programs of the Germans and Japanese worse than most of the crimes committed by Allied forces. They set out with the aim of killing millions of people, and not as a means to the end of the war, either.

Note that I'm not including Stalin's Great Purge as it was finished by 1939 AFAIK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
CptStern
Dying Vet's letter to GW Bush and Dick Cheney
Replies
10
Views
4K
KoreBolteR
KoreBolteR
CptStern
Call of Apathy: Violent Young Men and Our Place in War
Replies
14
Views
2K
repiV
repiV
V-Man339
UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
Replies
0
Views
1K
V-Man339
V-Man339
unozero
Col. Lewis Millett, Who Led ‘Bayonet Hill’ Charge, Dies at 88
Replies
13
Views
1K
Warped
Warped
Back
Top