• Quebec beekeeper accused of Nazi war crimes
    316 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;35744505]there is literally no way they could know if japan would have kept fighting or if a land invasion would have even been necessary or blah blah blah. they 100% knew that if they dropped 2 nuclear bombs on 2 cities full of people they would kill shitloads of people are you really trying to act like this was the lesser of two evils?[/QUOTE] It was a world war and had already cost millions of lives, people generally don't want to stall on the possibility that they MIGHT give in and potentially lose more troops. I don't think the US just decided to nuke them for fun.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35744698]It was a world war and had already cost millions of lives, people generally don't want to stall on the possibility that they MIGHT give in and potentially lose more troops. I don't think the US just decided to nuke them for fun.[/QUOTE] uh yeah medal of honor taught you history well
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;35744695]Okay yeah lets allow the war to continue on for years and for millions to die, not to mention turning Japan into a giant crater or even just nuking it several times over.[/QUOTE] hmmmm, lets see, germany was beaten, japan had lost its fleet and the majority of it's pacific holdings with the forces of the allies ready to stomp their asses, and you think the war was gonna continue on for years and millions would die? on an assumption that it could go for longer? hmm i'm not sure that i agree with the nostradamus school of military tactics. haha
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;35744676]you belie your title my friend[/QUOTE] The fuck is that supposed to mean? I disagree with you, you argue. I agree with you, you're still not pleased.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;35744653] Oh god, this happens way too often.[/QUOTE] rofl ace you stupid idiot xD your poor because your dumb and not because you were simply not lucky at all! all poor people are stupid!!!!! seriously I don't know why this has to be common, very saddening to see it.
[QUOTE=s0m3_guy;35744736]uh yeah medal of honor taught you history well[/QUOTE] Never played medal of honor, most of what I learned was in history classes.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35744698]It was a world war and had already cost millions of lives, people generally don't want to stall on the possibility that they MIGHT give in and potentially lose more troops. I don't think the US just decided to nuke them for fun.[/QUOTE] ok well you may have reasons for why the US did it but frankly none of them are justified but to be honest i literally don't think there is anyway nuking people can be justified [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=AceOfDivine;35744765]The fuck is that supposed to mean? I disagree with you, you argue. I agree with you, you're still not pleased.[/QUOTE] i thought belie meant like, you make a lie of your title as in i was saying you're not a dumbass jeez. i only used it cause i remember one of the dudes from dawn of war being all like 'your wisdom belies your years'
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;35744785] i thought belie meant like, you make a lie of your title as in i was saying you're not a dumbass jeez. i only used it cause i remember one of the dudes from dawn of war being all like 'your wisdom belies your years'[/QUOTE] Oh sorry, I thought you just misspelled "believe". I never heard the world belie before so yeah. And the title wasn't put up by me (obviously).
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;35744785]ok well you may have reasons for why the US did it but frankly none of them are justified but to be honest i literally don't think there is anyway nuking people can be justified [/QUOTE] It was estimated that around 1.7 million allied causalities would have occurred along with 5 to 10 million Japanese casualties had Japan not surrendered and the invasion had happened. So yes while it was not exactly the ideal solution, it was far better than what would have happened.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;35744827]Oh sorry, I thought you just misspelled "believe". I never heard the world belie before so yeah. And the title wasn't put up by me (obviously).[/QUOTE] that's the first time i've ever used it i think. and yeah lol, starpluck what a card he is
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35744783]Never played medal of honor, most of what I learned was in history classes.[/QUOTE] the history of how usa saved the world
[QUOTE=s0m3_guy;35744904]the history of how usa saved the world[/QUOTE] I'm from the UK so no.
the history of how uk saved the world
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35744845]It was estimated that around 1.7 million allied causalities would have occurred along with 5 to 10 million Japanese casualties had Japan not surrendered and the invasion had happened. So yes while it was not exactly the ideal solution, it was far better than what would have happened.[/QUOTE] the big hint is would have, so do what a good history student would and compare that to a similar situation where a nuke was not dropped
[QUOTE=The mouse;35730267]I like how noone ever acknowledges allied war crimes, but pursue single 90year old axis soldiers.[/QUOTE] We did not commit nearly as man atrocities as the Nazi's. I don't think people should go after very old criminals, like those old guys the government arrests and calls Mobsters, but I think in the situation of the Nazis, they should be thrown in jail. They committed an atrocity that the world cannot forgive. They tried to wipe a whole group of people off the face of the earth with horrible tactics just because they worshiped differently.
[QUOTE=s0m3_guy;35744945]the big hint is would have, so do what a good history student would and compare that to a similar situation where a nuke was not dropped[/QUOTE] There hasn't really been a war on the scale of WW2 since to compare it to. [editline]28th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lachz0r;35744927]the history of how uk saved the world[/QUOTE] Nope we did very little on the UK, most revolved around other countries.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;35744008]You ether have bad information or are pulling stuff out of your ass. Both of the city's that where bombed where pre planned bombing targets. Its true that Kokura was the first choice for the dropping of Fat Man but due to cloud coverage it was decided to change targets to Nagasaki, which was the second choice to Kokura. Kyoto was never intended to be the target of ether bombing missions.[/QUOTE] uhm no they both were not pre-planned Truman expected them to surrender after the first bomb, but the Japanese government tried to call a bluff and say that the U.S. had only created one, so Truman dropped the second one several days later. They were going to bomb military targets until they said fuck it let's kill civilians instead. [QUOTE=BusterBluth;35743796]It was a necessary act of evil considering the millions of people who where projected to die if an invasion of main land Japan was to happen. Which is why people defend it, not because it was okay because we did it, but because it was unfortunately necessary.[/QUOTE] "Necessary" evil my fat mexican ass. Everyone who has ever committed an atrocity has always tried to pass it off as "necessary." What makes us so different? [editline]28th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=carcarcargo;35744845]It was estimated that around 1.7 million allied causalities would have occurred along with 5 to 10 million Japanese casualties had Japan not surrendered and the invasion had happened. So yes while it was not exactly the ideal solution, it was far better than what would have happened.[/QUOTE] Pure conjecture and shameless rationalization. You can talk about what "might" have happened all you want. It does not change what DID happen, and it doesn't make it any better.
[QUOTE=crackberry;35744965]We did not commit nearly as man atrocities as the Nazi's. I don't think people should go after very old criminals, like those old guys the government arrests and calls Mobsters, but I think in the situation of the Nazis, they should be thrown in jail. They committed an atrocity that the world cannot forgive. They tried to wipe a whole group of people off the face of the earth with horrible tactics just because they worshiped differently.[/QUOTE]There's two kinds of nazis. The ones who did it because why not and the ones who were forced to do so. Most low rank nazis like guards and soldiers were mainly from the second group. Disobeying would result in death so they didn't have much choice. I disagree with imprisoning these people, especially when they're 90. It achieves nothing. The still alive nazis don't expect forgiveness, they just want to live their last years peacefully. Imprisonment imo should only be used for rehabilitation and/or removing dangerous criminals from the streets. This old chap does not need rehabilitation and is not danger to anyone. Just because they did something terrible during war does not mean you should hold the grunge against them. How about instead of throwing old geezers in jail, we actually fill the empty cells with actually dangerous criminals? Sounds like a better solution to me. Stop living in the past, live in the future without the mistakes done in the past.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35745050] Pure conjecture and shameless rationalization. You can talk about what "might" have happened all you want. It does not change what DID happen, and it doesn't make it any better.[/QUOTE] What other possibilities were there? The Japanese wouldn't surrender despite being asked to, an invasion was inevitable and would have cost far more lives.
God that's horrible. He probably did horrible things, yeah, but it's not like he had a choice either, and even if he did have a choice it was 60 years ago. This isn't justice. [QUOTE]Asked how he felt about having his name on the list of worst surviving Nazis, Katriuk paused. He reached into a box and pulled out a piece of a beehive: "You see?" he said. "Here they have started to make the royal cell [for a queen bee]."[/QUOTE] Also sounds like he doesn't really want to talk about what he did either.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35745121]What other possibilities were there? The Japanese wouldn't surrender despite being asked to, an invasion was inevitable and would have cost far more lives.[/QUOTE] No. You can't pull this "it could have been worse" shit to justify it. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and the greater does not vindicate the lesser.
[QUOTE=Fatman55;35745124]God that's horrible. He probably did horrible things, yeah, but it's not like he had a choice either, and even if he did have a choice it was 60 years ago. This isn't justice. Also sounds like he doesn't really want to talk about what he did either.[/QUOTE] Of course he doesn't want to say he did it, otherwise he'd be giving himself away.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35745121]What other possibilities were there? The Japanese wouldn't surrender despite being asked to, an invasion was inevitable and would have cost far more lives.[/QUOTE] you have literally no idea what would have happened with an invasion, and even then literally how many times do i have to point out that by the time of the bombings japan was a island nation with like no fleet there was never any need to invade
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35745000]There hasn't really been a war on the scale of WW2 since to compare it to. [editline]28th April 2012[/editline] Nope we did very little on the UK, most revolved around other countries.[/QUOTE] youre pulling off all this "might" and "could be" yet you know fuck all of what even happened gb2school
[QUOTE=Lankist;35745145]No. You can't pull this "it could have been worse" shit to justify it. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and the greater does not vindicate the lesser.[/QUOTE] It was still necessary, it was one or the other, it's more the Japanese leaders fault for not surrendering when asked to. [editline]28th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=s0m3_guy;35745169]youre pulling off all this "might" and "could be" yet you know fuck all of what even happened gb2school[/QUOTE] Ok then what did happen.
did you ever consider if the soviets had a nuke? they could have saved so many of their own men but in turn would have killed many who didnt even believe the same fucking cause do you know what the final statistics were when the soviets went at the nazis?
[QUOTE=s0m3_guy;35745245]did you ever consider if the soviets had a nuke? they could have saved so many of their own men but in turn would have killed many who didnt even believe the same fucking cause do you know what the final statistics were when the soviets went at the nazis?[/QUOTE] Your point?
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35745173]It was still necessary, it was one or the other, it's more the Japanese leaders fault for not surrendering when asked to.[/QUOTE] oh hey its the blame the victim attitude back in style
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;35744845]It was estimated that around 1.7 million allied causalities would have occurred along with 5 to 10 million Japanese casualties had Japan not surrendered and the invasion had happened. So yes while it was not exactly the ideal solution, it was far better than what would have happened.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=s0m3_guy;35744945]the big hint is would have, so do what a good history student would and compare that to a similar situation where a nuke was not dropped[/QUOTE] how old are you?
[QUOTE=Lankist;35745050]uhm no they both were not pre-planned Truman expected them to surrender after the first bomb, but the Japanese government tried to call a bluff and say that the U.S. had only created one, so Truman dropped the second one several days later. They were going to bomb military targets until they said fuck it let's kill civilians instead. "Necessary" evil my fat mexican ass. Everyone who has ever committed an atrocity has always tried to pass it off as "necessary." What makes us so different? [/QUOTE] Yes, they both where pre planned targets. Both of the city's also had military and industrial value, they where not bombed purely as civilian targets. Its different because it was a rational necessity. Japan had already demonstrated a willingness to lose huge amounts of troops for little or no gain. Its no reason to think that the invasion of Japan wouldnt have been a massive blood bath on both sides.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.