Nothing in this book about the German Blitzkrieg or the Russian bombardment of Polish cities? Nothing at all about the German bombing of the Vatican and Castle Gandolfo, the Pope's personal residence where 500 Jews being hidden there were killed by Nazi bombs? The fact is that this "author" forgets that the U.S. bombing of Dresden was in response to the Nazi WAR CRIMES and atrocities. This is just another trashy book seeking to defile history by taking facts out of historical context and by judging the events of a particular time period against modern thought.
Now that the Crusades have finally been vindicated as necessary defensive wars, after decades of anti-Christian and anti-Catholic "historians" calling them "Brutal papist wars fought for the purpose of subjugating and converting muslims to Christianity", they have to continue on with their quest of revising history to make evil appear good, and good appear evil. These twisted times we now live in will no doubt be judged by honest historians as the era that sought to murder all truth and that attempted to elevate evil to God's throne. File this book in the maneur heap of dispicable lies and twisted insinuations along with the Davinci Code hogwash.
"Was the American Bombing Campaign in World War II a War Crime?"
Well, General Curtis LeMay, the architect of the strategic bombing campaign in the Pacific theater, was concerned about this question. He once remarked that, if the US were to lose the war, he expected to be tried for war crimes.
The fire-bombing of Tokyo targeted civilians; it was strategic only in the sense that it terrorized civilians. Tokyo's residential sectors were constructed with wood, so LeMay selected incendiary munitions rather than explosives. In the 2-1/2 hours of the March 9, 1945 Tokyo firestorm, the US killed 100,000 Japanese civilians -- mostly women, children, and old folks -- in their homes. This and similar firebombings in Japan are estimated to have "scorched and boiled and baked to death," to use LeMay's words, over a million Japanese civilians.
"There are no innocent civilians, so it doesn't bother me so much to be killing innocent bystanders." - Curtis LeMay on the March 9, 1945 firebombing of Tokyo.
"LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he's right. He ... and I'd say I ... were behaving as war criminals." - Robert McNamara
It's not an idle question, nor it is inherently unpatriotic or naive to consider the limits in the application of violence.
That scumbag A. C. Grayling was born after the war. The SOB didn't have Nazi bombs raining down on his damned head, easy for him to make judgements.
Not so, Mr. Grayling.
Germany announced that they were giving a war and wouldn't we like to come.
We accepted their gracious invitation.
Terrorism is where there is an indiscriminate attack, like what happened at the twin towers or Pearl Harbor. Quite a difference.
ping
On the same vein: Had the Japanese won the war then the Rape of Nanking would not have been a war crime. Had the Germans been victorious then their atrocious extermination of the Jews would have been looked at under a differently (let's say people wouldn't have been condemned to death at Nuremburg). In the same manner, had we LOST you would have definitely seen the events of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the fire-bombing of Tokyo, brought up by the victors.
Anyways, did the stuff we did fall under war crimes? Nope! It most certainly did not. We won the war (and by the way nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably saved many lives ....including Japanese lives .....since an invasion by Allied troops into Japan would have cost far more American, and Japanese, people since the Japanese were planning for every man woman and child able to fight to take up gun/rake/stick/stone). Anyways, we did not commit war crimes, and our enemies committed many. However had THEY won and WE lost, then we would have done the war crimes and they (with their mass murders and gas chambers and child skewering) would have not have done any criminal behaviors (and they would have come up with reasons, as well, why what they did was not criminal .....maybe the Japanese would have said the Rape of Nanking 'saved Chinese lives overall' or something equally ludicrous).
No. The allied fleets were the only way to carry the offensive to the enemy. How was this different from the ravaging of Eastern European cities by German Armies or, for that matter, what we did to Normandy during the "liberation" of France. (The majority of French did not want liberation)
bttt
It would have been wonderful if Germany and Japan had surrendered in 1943 when the war was decided. But they didn't. It was total war, and they lost. But good. Easy to make decisions about morality years later.
Mark for later reference
Should we ever see a war like WWII agin, we will be bombing civilian targets. When it comes to survival, "nice" will not be a concern.
Every day the legions of degenrates dedicated to the death of western civilization grows. And they are birthed in the belly of academia. A region that sucks at the public teat and spits on those people that make their cozy little womb possible.
When will academia demonstrate a sense of responsibility to the culture that supports them.
Parasites the lot of them.
There is only one law of war
YOU WIN IT
Since we won, no. If we would have lost, it would have been a war crime, sure.
In the eyes of revisionist pacifist the whole war was a crime.
Pacifism is a cancer that eats away the national guts.
Don't we owe reparations to someone?..../s
Times, as well as standard of conduct change.
Only losers are war criminals.