Will Trump be a war criminal like Truman?

[gipper]

The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb: Arguments in Support

Very good breakdown of how and why the decision was made.

From the article:
Despite Roosevelt’s “appeal” in 1939, he and the nation had long crossed that moral line by war’s end. This fact perhaps reveals the psychological effects of killing on all of the war’s participants, and says something about the moral atmosphere in which President Truman found himself upon the President’s death. On February 13, 1945, 1,300 U.S. and British heavy bombers firebombed the German city of Dresden, the center of German art and culture, creating a firestorm that destroyed 15 square miles and killed 25,000 civilians. Meanwhile, still five weeks before Truman took office; American bombers dropped 2,000 tons of napalm on Tokyo, creating a firestorm with hurricane-force winds. Flight crews flying high over the 16 square miles of devastation reported smelling burning flesh
below. Approximately 125,000 Japanese civilians died in that raid. By the time the atomic bomb was ready, similar attacks had been launched on the Japanese cities of Nagoya, Osaka, and Kobe. Quickly running out of targets, the B-29 bombers went back over Tokyo and killed another 80,000 civilians. Bomb supporters argue that, although this destruction is distasteful by post-war sensibilities, it had become the norm long before President Truman took office, and the atomic bomb was just one more weapon in the arsenal to be employed under this policy. To expect the new president, who had to make decisions under enormous pressure, to roll back this policy—to roll back the social norm—was simply not realistic.

Apparently killing innocent civilians gets easier, as more of it is done...is that a veiled justification for Truman's criminal act?

 

[gipper]

Questions Gipper refuses to answer:

Is it ever legitimate to kill 'innocent' civilians in pursuit of military targets?

If yes- then this is not a war crime. There were legitimate military targets in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If no- then every countries leader who has ever ordered strikes against their enemies are probably equally 'guilty of war crimes'.

Man up- answer the questions.

They were not military targets. There were no military bases in either city, which is why neither city had yet been attacked. Were there military personnel in both cities? Of course, Japan was at war.

The wanton killing of innocent civilians, which is what Truman did, is immoral. There are no exceptions for the USA.

 

[namvet]

...and Truman was most certainly a war criminal and a liar. Let's hope Trump does not follow in his footsteps.

From the great Ralph Raico....the truth...you might not like it.

Harry Truman and the Atomic Bomb
Great controversy has always surrounded the bombings. One thing Truman insisted on from the start was that the decision to use the bombs, and the responsibility it entailed, was his. Over the years, he gave different, and contradictory, grounds for his decision. Sometimes he implied that he had acted simply out of revenge. To a clergyman who criticized him, Truman responded testily,

Nobody is more disturbed over the use of Atomic bombs than I am but I was greatly disturbed over the unwarranted attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor and their murder of our prisoners of war. The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them.2

Such reasoning will not impress anyone who fails to see how the brutality of the Japanese military could justify deadly retaliation against innocent men, women, and children. Truman doubtless was aware of this, so from time to time he advanced other pretexts. On August 9, 1945, he stated, “The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians.

This, however, is absurd. Pearl Harbor was a military base. Hiroshima was a city, inhabited by some three hundred thousand people, which contained military elements. In any case, since the harbor was mined and the US Navy and Air Force were in control of the waters around Japan, whatever troops were stationed in Hiroshima had been effectively neutralized.

On other occasions, Truman claimed that Hiroshima was bombed because it was an industrial center. But, as noted in the US Strategic Bombing Survey, “all major factories in Hiroshima were on the periphery of the city — and escaped serious damage.”4 The target was the center of the city. That Truman realized the kind of victims the bombs consumed is evident from his comment to his cabinet on August 10, explaining his reluctance to drop a third bomb: “The thought of wiping out another 100,000 people was too horrible,” he said; he didn’t like the idea of killing “all those kids.”5 Wiping out another one hundred thousand people … all those kids.

Harry Truman’s Atomic Bombs - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

pussy alert here

^^^

Dumb Alert.

when/where did Trump drop one numb nuts?? oh my there goes the comparison. you're the only one bombed on here

 

[namvet]

Questions Gipper refuses to answer:

Is it ever legitimate to kill 'innocent' civilians in pursuit of military targets?

If yes- then this is not a war crime. There were legitimate military targets in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If no- then every countries leader who has ever ordered strikes against their enemies are probably equally 'guilty of war crimes'.

Man up- answer the questions.

They were not military targets. There were no military bases in either city, which is why neither city had yet been attacked. Were there military personnel in both cities? Of course, Japan was at war.

The wanton killing of innocent civilians, which is what Truman did, is immoral. There are no exceptions for the USA.

yes there were. you're to fuckin' stupid to look it up

 

[gipper]

...and Truman was most certainly a war criminal and a liar. Let's hope Trump does not follow in his footsteps.

From the great Ralph Raico....the truth...you might not like it.

Harry Truman and the Atomic Bomb
Great controversy has always surrounded the bombings. One thing Truman insisted on from the start was that the decision to use the bombs, and the responsibility it entailed, was his. Over the years, he gave different, and contradictory, grounds for his decision. Sometimes he implied that he had acted simply out of revenge. To a clergyman who criticized him, Truman responded testily,

Nobody is more disturbed over the use of Atomic bombs than I am but I was greatly disturbed over the attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor and their murder of our prisoners of war. The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them.2

Such reasoning will not impress anyone who fails to see how the brutality of the Japanese military could justify deadly retaliation against innocent men, women, and children. Truman doubtless was aware of this, so from time to time he advanced other pretexts. On August 9, 1945, he stated, “The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians.

This, however, is absurd. Pearl Harbor was a military base. Hiroshima was a city, inhabited by some three hundred thousand people, which contained military elements. In any case, since the harbor was mined and the US Navy and Air Force were in control of the waters around Japan, whatever troops were stationed in Hiroshima had been effectively neutralized.

On other occasions, Truman claimed that Hiroshima was bombed because it was an industrial center. But, as noted in the US Strategic Bombing Survey, “all major factories in Hiroshima were on the periphery of the city — and escaped serious damage.”4 The target was the center of the city. That Truman realized the kind of victims the bombs consumed is evident from his comment to his cabinet on August 10, explaining his reluctance to drop a third bomb: “The thought of wiping out another 100,000 people was too horrible,” he said; he didn’t like the idea of killing “all those kids.”5 Wiping out another one hundred thousand people … all those kids.

Harry Truman’s Atomic Bombs - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

pussy alert here

^^^

Dumb Alert.

when/where did Trump drop one numb nuts?? oh my there goes the comparison. you're the only one bombed on here

Go away. You don't know anything. Please stay out of my thread.

 

[gipper]

Questions Gipper refuses to answer:

Is it ever legitimate to kill 'innocent' civilians in pursuit of military targets?

If yes- then this is not a war crime. There were legitimate military targets in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If no- then every countries leader who has ever ordered strikes against their enemies are probably equally 'guilty of war crimes'.

Man up- answer the questions.

They were not military targets. There were no military bases in either city, which is why neither city had yet been attacked. Were there military personnel in both cities? Of course, Japan was at war.

The wanton killing of innocent civilians, which is what Truman did, is immoral. There are no exceptions for the USA.

yes there were. you're to fuckin' stupid to look it up

I don't like dumb people....so please leave.

 

[namvet]

Questions Gipper refuses to answer:

Is it ever legitimate to kill 'innocent' civilians in pursuit of military targets?

If yes- then this is not a war crime. There were legitimate military targets in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If no- then every countries leader who has ever ordered strikes against their enemies are probably equally 'guilty of war crimes'.

Man up- answer the questions.

They were not military targets. There were no military bases in either city, which is why neither city had yet been attacked. Were there military personnel in both cities? Of course, Japan was at war.

The wanton killing of innocent civilians, which is what Truman did, is immoral. There are no exceptions for the USA.

yes there were. you're to fuckin' stupid to look it up

I don't like dumb people....so please leave.

ill hold the door for ya child

 

[namvet]

...and Truman was most certainly a war criminal and a liar. Let's hope Trump does not follow in his footsteps.

From the great Ralph Raico....the truth...you might not like it.

Harry Truman and the Atomic Bomb
Great controversy has always surrounded the bombings. One thing Truman insisted on from the start was that the decision to use the bombs, and the responsibility it entailed, was his. Over the years, he gave different, and contradictory, grounds for his decision. Sometimes he implied that he had acted simply out of revenge. To a clergyman who criticized him, Truman responded testily,

Nobody is more disturbed over the use of Atomic bombs than I am but I was greatly disturbed over the attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor and their murder of our prisoners of war. The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them.2

Such reasoning will not impress anyone who fails to see how the brutality of the Japanese military could justify deadly retaliation against innocent men, women, and children. Truman doubtless was aware of this, so from time to time he advanced other pretexts. On August 9, 1945, he stated, “The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians.

This, however, is absurd. Pearl Harbor was a military base. Hiroshima was a city, inhabited by some three hundred thousand people, which contained military elements. In any case, since the harbor was mined and the US Navy and Air Force were in control of the waters around Japan, whatever troops were stationed in Hiroshima had been effectively neutralized.

On other occasions, Truman claimed that Hiroshima was bombed because it was an industrial center. But, as noted in the US Strategic Bombing Survey, “all major factories in Hiroshima were on the periphery of the city — and escaped serious damage.”4 The target was the center of the city. That Truman realized the kind of victims the bombs consumed is evident from his comment to his cabinet on August 10, explaining his reluctance to drop a third bomb: “The thought of wiping out another 100,000 people was too horrible,” he said; he didn’t like the idea of killing “all those kids.”5 Wiping out another one hundred thousand people … all those kids.

Harry Truman’s Atomic Bombs - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

pussy alert here

^^^

Dumb Alert.

when/where did Trump drop one numb nuts?? oh my there goes the comparison. you're the only one bombed on here

Go away. You don't know anything. Please stay out of my thread.

thread?? this is a cartoon starring you

 

[Syriusly]

Questions Gipper refuses to answer:

Is it ever legitimate to kill 'innocent' civilians in pursuit of military targets?

If yes- then this is not a war crime. There were legitimate military targets in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If no- then every countries leader who has ever ordered strikes against their enemies are probably equally 'guilty of war crimes'.

Man up- answer the questions.

They were not military targets. There were no military bases in either city, which is why neither city had yet been attacked. Were there military personnel in both cities? Of course, Japan was at war.

The wanton killing of innocent civilians, which is what Truman did, is immoral. There are no exceptions for the USA.

Gipper still displaying his lack of cojones

Questions Gipper refuses to answer:

1) Is it ever legitimate to kill 'innocent' civilians in pursuit of military targets?

2) If yes- then this is not a war crime. There were legitimate military targets in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

3) If no- then every countries leader who has ever ordered strikes against their enemies are probably equally 'guilty of war crimes'.

Man up- answer the questions.

 

[Syriusly]

Snowflakeslove xalling people what THEY are:

Barry is a war criminal becauae...


2. He jilled people in Syria wihout the US being offically, Constitutionally in an approved war

Then of course- as you know- that means that your Dear Leader- President Snowflake himself- is a war criminal.

Since President Snowflake did the exact same thing.

But hell- you know you would rather cut off your imaginary right nut than criticize President Snowflake.

 

[namvet]

President Snowflake. ain't that rich LMAO

 

[Freewill]

The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb: Arguments in Support

Very good breakdown of how and why the decision was made.

From the article:
Despite Roosevelt’s “appeal” in 1939, he and the nation had long crossed that moral line by war’s end. This fact perhaps reveals the psychological effects of killing on all of the war’s participants, and says something about the moral atmosphere in which President Truman found himself upon the President’s death. On February 13, 1945, 1,300 U.S. and British heavy bombers firebombed the German city of Dresden, the center of German art and culture, creating a firestorm that destroyed 15 square miles and killed 25,000 civilians. Meanwhile, still five weeks before Truman took office; American bombers dropped 2,000 tons of napalm on Tokyo, creating a firestorm with hurricane-force winds. Flight crews flying high over the 16 square miles of devastation reported smelling burning flesh
below. Approximately 125,000 Japanese civilians died in that raid. By the time the atomic bomb was ready, similar attacks had been launched on the Japanese cities of Nagoya, Osaka, and Kobe. Quickly running out of targets, the B-29 bombers went back over Tokyo and killed another 80,000 civilians. Bomb supporters argue that, although this destruction is distasteful by post-war sensibilities, it had become the norm long before President Truman took office, and the atomic bomb was just one more weapon in the arsenal to be employed under this policy. To expect the new president, who had to make decisions under enormous pressure, to roll back this policy—to roll back the social norm—was simply not realistic.

Apparently killing innocent civilians gets easier, as more of it is done...is that a veiled justification for Truman's criminal act?

Unfortunately it is true, the killing of civilians gets easier. Now, in a regime supported by the people, people who are willing to die for their Emperor, are there any truly innocent? Your diatribe would be better if you said non-combatants. That is what you really mean but that doesn't have the same punch as "innocent civilians." As if the innocent civilians were being held captive.

As I said early in the thread, up to WW2 non-combatant deaths were held to a minimum, wars were fought in the field. That changed when the allies in desperation attacked German cities thus distracting the Germans from military targets. After that, everyone was fair game. So yeah it must get easier.

But I still refuse to judge them by the reality of today's world. FDR set up the conditions that became Nagasaki, Truman just didn't stop the momentum.