I never thought I would see the day when so many FReepers would raise their voices in agreement with Hanoi Jane.
And yes, that’s exactly what they’re doing.
I never thought I’d see the day when so many FReepers would sign on a total rejection of everything the West, Christians, and Americans have ever said about ius in bello.
Not everything is justified in war. Those on this thread who are offering arguments from Dresden’s role as a rail nexus and industrial center are staying within the Christian and Western and American moral tradition.
Those arguing either (1) that anything, absolutely anything, goes in war or (2) the Germans did it first (Mommy, Mommy, he started it) have left behind any shred of traditional morality.
And those denouncing those standing up for ius in bello, for limits and rules about warfare as whiney bleeding hearts or even traitors (Hanoi Jane), they are the biggest cheap shotters of all.
Argue about whether the bombing of Dresden was justified by the rules of war or not but don’t assert that there are no rules, whatsoever. That reasoning is not only lazy but hellish.
They’re doing no such thing, and equating the questioning of what Jane Fonda said regarding our actions in Vietnam to the actions of the allies in WWII is intellectually weak. Anything Jane Fonda ever said is completely irrelevant to this conversation.
No one here is celebrating the Nazis, or celebrating the Japanese. They’re questioning the morality of incinerating thousands of civilians when that action would have no impact at all on the conduct of the war. I think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified. It helped the Japanese realize they couldn’t win. Dresden? I think the case is not nearly so clearly.
Your “bomb them all and let God sort them out attitude” is, quite frankly, boring.
I find disturbing the number of FReepers casually tossing out statements like 'they had it coming, all of them,' 'it was okay because they probably would have done the same to us,' 'war is war, kill them all.'
Aren't they tough.