[Heyworth]

Heck, even unintended civilian casualties in a war can, in certain times, be tolerable so long as you are making a conscious effort to minimize them in every way possible (kinda like Bush did in Iraq). But intentionally going out of ones way to wage warfare upon innocent civilians like Lincoln and his henchmen did is out of the question.

Interesting. So by that argument, HIroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and the rest of the strategic bombing of cities during WW2 would be war crimes. Is that what you're saying?

[GOPcapitalist]

Interesting. So by that argument, HIroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and the rest of the strategic bombing of cities during WW2 would be war crimes. Is that what you're saying?

Each must be considered individually. A "war crime" is a further subdivided category entailing specific charges against specific persons for specific acts of unnecessary brutality. It differs from an "unjust" act of war in its specificity and relative isolation around a single perpetrator or set of perpetrators to the event.

I will say though each of the cases you mentioned falls, at minimum, into that gray area between just war and unjust practices in a war. And in saying that I'll even concede that they were strategically convenient and generally helpful to winning WWII. One thing is certain though - not one of them may be clearly cited as a morally just act, which places them all among the less-than-stellar events of WWII as opposed to countless other clearly defined and clearly just actions taken by the allies.

[MrsJockoManning]

bookmarking

(keywords are of interest too.)