ForumGarden

jones jones;1399988 wrote: Ah citizen Bruv ... one of my favorite FG earthlings!
You don't remember me .....do you ?

Betty Boop;1400020 wrote: I do hope you are not referring to me as your 'little cornish hen' ???:yh_sick



Did you finish what you were doing then? Am I missing something here? Only I fail t see the point of raising a quote made by JJ months ago.

He stated he was off for a break. He went for a break and some several weeks later has returned. Why resurrect old quotes?

oscar;1400022 wrote: Am I missing something here? Only I fail t see the point of raising a quote made by JJ months ago.

He stated he was off for a break. He went for a break and some several weeks later has returned. Why resurrect old quotes?


Why shouldn't I, and any way why are you so quick to be jumping at me over jj...

interesting...

Betty Boop;1400024 wrote: Why shouldn't I, and any way why are you so quick to be jumping at me over jj...

interesting...


It just seemed a tad hypocritical Betty. Posting that you're sick of the bickering and then raising months old quotes at the member you were always bickering with. When others have welcomed JJ back and we get some normality back In FG, I couldn't see the point of flaming him again.

If you didn't do It merely to stir the pot then please accept my apologies.

oscar;1400025 wrote: It just seemed a tad hypocritical Betty. Posting that you're sick of the bickering and then raising months old quotes at the member you were always bickering with. When others have welcomed JJ back and we get some normality back In FG, I couldn't see the point of flaming him again.

If you didn't do It merely to stir the pot then please accept my apologies.


It's ok jj and I go waaaaay back

Betty Boop;1400028 wrote: It's ok jj and I go waaaaay back And there was me just thinking you were s.hit stirring. Glad we cleared that up....

So back to the topic,

Today marks the day the other "shoe" dropped.

another day of death.

A single bomb wiped a city off the map, and snuffed over eighty thousand lives.

On the scale of destruction and suffering in the mid twentieth century, this event really was just another day.

Dresden, Hamburg, Wurzburg, Stalingrad, Nanking, Shanghai, Warsaw, ... hundreds of thousands, even millions of civilians killed.

Of course this was unique in that a single bomb could do so much.

It has been argued that the sacrifice of the few hundred thousand lives lost in these two cities was a small price to pay to save possibly millions that might be lost if the Allies were to invade Japan, and so this sacrifice was worth it.

Looking at the civilian tolls paid by the countries at war,

Civilian Casualties of World War Two

Allies:

Great Britain + Commonwealth 60,000

France 360,000

United States Minimal

USSR 7,700,000

Belgium 90,000

Holland 190,000

Norway Minimal

Poland 5,300,000

Greece 80,000

Yugoslavia 1,300,000

Czechoslovakia 330,000

China (from 1937 on) 10,000,000



Total 25,410,000

Axis powers:

Germany 3,810,000

Austria 80,000

Italy 85,000

Rumania 465,000

Hungary 280,000

Bulgaria 7,000

Finland Minimal

Japan 360,000



Total 5,087,000

Total civilian casualties Allies + Axis = 30,497,000

Total civilian + military casualties (Allies + Axis) = 55,014,000

Source Civilian Casualties of World War Two



Japan's civilian casualties were relatively minor, compared to some of the other combatants, until you think about the fact that 80-90% of those were from two single bomb attacks.

It finished the war, but what has been the legacy?

And I am overjoyed that you are overjoyed maam!

You are probably one of the main reasons why I am here my dear! And yes, I have finished and started something new. I do hope you are well my little Cornish sweetie pie!

Hey ... I'm trying to be nice here dude!

LarsMac;1400030 wrote: So back to the topic,



It finished the war, but what has been the legacy? You raise a very Important question there. If the only answer Is that It must never happen again.

Regardless of the OP, there were church services up and down the country here. I attended a small church service and found It very moving.

That we do Bee-Bee ... that we do!

Things people don't like to talk about.

Generally, those things are the things we should talk about. What happens when you bring up things people don't want to talk about? They switch the subject if polite or call you an *******. Hiroshima was a big deal. It's as big a deal as the Holocaust. Try telling someone they're a bigoted ******* for bringing up the Holocaust. It's celebrated all over the world on a daily basis.

I'm not saying the proclamation of an anniversary should be stated in a specific way. You can say it in a way that is ignored or you can say it in a way that gets attention.

crap. I made it to page 2 and apparently jj had moved attention from Hiroshima to himself. I suppose there is a comparison.

koan;1400096 wrote: Things people don't like to talk about.

Generally, those things are the things we should talk about. What happens when you bring up things people don't want to talk about? They switch the subject if polite or call you an *******. Hiroshima was a big deal. It's as big a deal as the Holocaust. Try telling someone they're a bigoted ******* for bringing up the Holocaust. It's celebrated all over the world on a daily basis.

I'm not saying the proclamation of an anniversary should be stated in a specific way. You can say it in a way that is ignored or you can say it in a way that gets attention.
The bigoted ******* isn't a bigoted ******* for bringing up the Holocaust. He was already a bigoted *******. I'm not sure he could have brought it up in any way that would not have gotten a similar reaction.

Making it sound like we were going to have a parade to celebrate Hiroshima was obviously a bad way to inquire if Americans memorialized the event. Big freaking difference and it appeared he worded it that way to be abrasive and incendiary.

SnoozeAgain;1400103 wrote: Big freaking difference and it appeared he worded it that way to be abrasive and incendiary.Damn right I did. I have trouble enough coping with the firebombing of Dresden. Dropping nuclear devices on Japan was a whole new magnitude in moral disgrace. I feel unclean just knowing the UK sent an observer.

spot;1400106 wrote: Damn right I did. I have trouble enough coping with the firebombing of Dresden. Dropping nuclear devices on Japan was a whole new magnitude in moral disgrace. I feel unclean just knowing the UK sent an observer.


I reckon somewhere there was a Brit who is just as pissed off about the first use of the catapult.

spot;1400106 wrote: I feel unclean just knowing the UK sent an observer.


Poor thing. Miracle you don't just end it all ... and sent Anastrophe the bill.

I'm stepping in to prevent spot responding. Shall I close the thread until everyone's calmed down. I think everyone has expressed their opinions now and it's time to stop with personal insults.

"....the Holocaust. It's celebrated all over the world on a daily basis."

Celebrated is not the word I'd use. It brings to mind 2 things: 1-People are still happy about millions murdered; 2-Jews use the word to guilt others so they can keep Israel. Which is it koan? Or is there another option?

koan;1400097 wrote: crap. I made it to page 2 and apparently jj had moved attention from Hiroshima to himself. I suppose there is a comparison.


Ms Koan ... Do you really really believe that this remark is justified and called for? Initially I simply responded to a post in which Oscar mentioned my name and after that your fellow FG members ran with it. I again just responded to their posts. I have been absent from FG for some five months I think and yet for reasons only known to yourself, you make the first reference to me upon my return a personal one. Strange indeed.

I don't find it strange at all. I had no idea you'd been away.

I find it strange that you both show back up about the same time.

Whatsupwitdat? HAH?

koan;1400239 wrote: I don't find it strange at all. I had no idea you'd been away.


I guess that means you didn't miss me:-1 ... damn!

JJ, you were gone from 03-28 to 08-08. I was gone from 03-08 to 08-10.

Unlike you; I don't make a big deal about when I come and go. I don't expect people to miss me. I don't expect them to rejoice when I've returned. I don't take satisfaction in wooing people online. I don't cater to or care about what I'm supposed to say or think. I don't stalk people. I don't pretend to be something I'm not. I actually know who I am. I like who I am.

I think that just about covers our differences

Back to topic:

American mutilation of Japanese war dead - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The atomic bombing of Japan is still debated in moral context. What it did was intimidate the entire world in favour of the United States becoming the "new" world leader because... OMG look what they did to Japan. Aside from getting a little extra income from selling the Germans the machinery they used to count dead Jews, they stayed out of the war until all the other "good" countries were in economic crisis. Then they swoop in, claim the heroics of saving the day and continue to be the largest stockpiler of nuclear weapons.

This is hardly US bashing. It's the unfortunate sequence of events.

If you were to personalize it: I throw a grenade at someone who lives in a gang area I feel threated by and see their limbs tossed in different directions among bloody shrapnel. The grenade is thrown at a civilian. As a result, the whole district in that city is unlikely to attack me because I'm a freakin' psycho. Should I be able to sleep at night? Should I freak out if someone reminds me what I did or should I remind them I live in a dangerous neighbourhood where someone once shot at me?

We should celebrate Hiroshima day in remembrance of all the civilians who lost their lives so one country could shift the balance of power in the world. No one else "won" at the end of that war and somehow the "winner" and leader of the new free world is the country that kept themselves out until the last minute then stepped in with a hideous weapon that no one has ever approved of. We should also celebrate it as a reminder of why owning nuclear weapons is not something to be proud of.

I'm sorry Hiroshima is a scar on American pride, but not as sorry as I am that it happened, and not as sorry as I am it didn't make a whit of difference to whether or not people chose to wield them in the future.

koan;1400413 wrote: JJ, you were gone from 03-28 to 08-08. I was gone from 03-08 to 08-10.

Unlike you; I don't make a big deal about when I come and go. I don't expect people to miss me. I don't expect them to rejoice when I've returned. I don't take satisfaction in wooing people online. I don't cater to or care about what I'm supposed to say or think. I don't stalk people. I don't pretend to be something I'm not. I actually know who I am. I like who I am.

I think that just about covers our differences


It's good to see you back, by the way.

(Not rejoicing, just saying)

koan;1400415 wrote: Back to topic:

American mutilation of Japanese war dead - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The atomic bombing of Japan is still debated in moral context. What it did was intimidate the entire world in favour of the United States becoming the "new" world leader because... OMG look what they did to Japan. Aside from getting a little extra income from selling the Germans the machinery they used to count dead Jews, they stayed out of the war until all the other "good" countries were in economic crisis. Then they swoop in, claim the heroics of saving the day and continue to be the largest stockpiler of nuclear weapons.

This is hardly US bashing. It's the unfortunate sequence of events.

If you were to personalize it: I throw a grenade at someone who lives in a gang area I feel threated by and see their limbs tossed in different directions among bloody shrapnel. The grenade is thrown at a civilian. As a result, the whole district in that city is unlikely to attack me because I'm a freakin' psycho. Should I be able to sleep at night? Should I freak out if someone reminds me what I did or should I remind them I live in a dangerous neighbourhood where someone once shot at me?

We should celebrate Hiroshima day in remembrance of all the civilians who lost their lives so one country could shift the balance of power in the world. No one else "won" at the end of that war and somehow the "winner" and leader of the new free world is the country that kept themselves out until the last minute then stepped in with a hideous weapon that no one has ever approved of. We should also celebrate it as a reminder of why owning nuclear weapons is not something to be proud of.

I'm sorry Hiroshima is a scar on American pride, but not as sorry as I am that it happened, and not as sorry as I am it didn't make a whit of difference to whether or not people chose to wield them in the future.


We were in it for four of the 6 years. Hardly waiting until the last minute.

And it has made a difference.No one has yet actually tried to use one since.

I think we should make certain that every nation has them. Let MAD be the motto of the entire world.

(As the old analogy, everyone standing in a room, knee deep in gasoline, and each one has a box of matches. )

The big countries might try to be a lot more polite to the little guys.

To help, each leader would have pictures of the destruction from Hiroshima, with the faces of their families superimposed on the images.

Well done. I agree. It's the final points: Every nation should have them and every nation should have pictures of what they would do to other humans right next to their triggers.

It's obviously very important to you that we concede to yours and spot's use of the word 'celebrate' in this instance.

cel·e·brat·edcel·e·brat·ing

Definition of CELEBRATE

transitive verb

1: to perform (a sacrament or solemn ceremony) publicly and with appropriate rites

2a : to honor (as a holiday) especially by solemn ceremonies or by refraining from ordinary business b : to mark (as an anniversary) by festivities or other deviation from routine

3: to hold up or play up for public notice

intransitive verb

1: to observe a holiday, perform a religious ceremony, or take part in a festival

2: to observe a notable occasion with festivities


Okay, I can accept that. It's not the word I would have chosen but it works. I think most of the rest of your post is complete horseshit but I don't really care enough to counter it. You win. Yay.

koan;1400413 wrote: JJ, you were gone from 03-28 to 08-08. I was gone from 03-08 to 08-10.

Unlike you; I don't make a big deal about when I come and go. I don't expect people to miss me. I don't expect them to rejoice when I've returned. I don't take satisfaction in wooing people online. I don't cater to or care about what I'm supposed to say or think. I don't stalk people. I don't pretend to be something I'm not. I actually know who I am. I like who I am.

I think that just about covers our differences




Not quite. Actually I couldn’t give a flying fig about how long you were absent from FG as opposed to how long The Chosen has been absent. Ms Koan you and I have a long history of being at each others throats. You will know better than I why this is so. In any event I am sooooooooooooooooo bored with having to joust with you …

So I offer you this solution only if you agree to it. Perhaps a member of FG who dislikes both you and I (I am sure there are many) can post a poll “Who would you like to leave FG permanently … Koan or Jj ?

The member who gets the most votes leaves forever. Are you up for this?

I am.

jones jones;1400461 wrote: Not quite. Actually I couldn’t give a flying fig about how long you were absent from FG as opposed to how long The Chosen has been absent. Ms Koan you and I have a long history of being at each others throats. You will know better than I why this is so. In any event I am sooooooooooooooooo bored with having to joust with you …

So I offer you this solution only if you agree to it. Perhaps a member of FG who dislikes both you and I (I am sure there are many) can post a poll “Who would you like to leave FG permanently … Koan or Jj ?

The member who gets the most votes leaves forever. Are you up for this?

I am.




Why go to such lengths? Koan posted ' I'm back ' In her thread 'Wassup' a few days ago. Rather different than she professed to you. You can not pander hypocrisy JJ... walk away....

There is little doubt that without the use of the atomic bomb Japan would have had to be invaded and the resulting casualties would have been even greater. Not a few soldiers likely to be sent to the pacific were very pleased to see it used In actual fact more people died in the conventional bombing of japans cities where the fire-storm creation techniques developed by the british on german cities were used to devastating effect on the wooden building in japan. than as the result of the nuclear blast It's also arguable that there would have been a continuation of the war in europe as Russia went on to extend it's hegemony in to what became western europe. Japan carried out it's own holocaust on the chinese people up to and including the testing of biological weapons on the chinese population. This was total war and personally I'm glad the allies won. Attitudes at the time were quite simply they started it. To paraphrase bomber harris if the deaths of civilian workers saved even one soldiers' life the price was worth paying. If the destruction of hiroshima and nagasaki saved the lives of the hundreds of thousands of allied soldiers thousands that would have died in an invasion then that too was worth it IMO.

Rather than look back from todays standpoint ask yourself what would you have done as a military age individual in 1939 when the war started? It's not that easy to say this is silly ''m not joining in. It's isn't as though we have learned anything - look at the baying for war after 911. At least the second world war had the dubious virtue of having very real issues that had to be sorted out - left against right, fascism against communism and liberal democracy. The irony being that the allied nations are gradually becoming fascist as our freedoms go to the wall in the name of fighting a war on terror against terrorists they helped create and we're letting them do it. How long before we get involved in Syria? We have Americans frothing at the mouth wanting to attack Iran regardless of the consequences and numpties here as well that think you can have a limited, tidy war where no one really gets hurt that matters. The ones that start the wars are not the ones who have any relatives actually involved

I would vote for gmc for world president...............

Bruv;1400538 wrote: I would vote for gmc for world president...............


I could go for that but he'd have to speak slowly for me to understand his accent.

SnoozeAgain;1400541 wrote: I could go for that but he'd have to speak slowly for me to understand his accent.


Mind you he could turn out like all the other bloody Scots we ever elected.

Bruv;1400542 wrote: Mind you he could turn out like all the other bloody Scots we ever elected.


Now I'm depressed did you have to bring that up?- cameron is like froth on a cup of coffee, outwardly appealing but with little real substance at least gordon brown had the gravitas to make him appear like he knew what he is doing too bad it was because he is intellectually constipated - promising much but giving only misery and oh the relief when he finally went.

William D. Leahy disagrees with you, gmc. He was in a position to know better.

William D. Leahy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Leahy was recalled to active duty as the personal Chief of Staff to President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942 and served in that position throughout World War II, and continued under President Harry S. Truman until finally retiring in 1949. From 1942 until retiring in 1949 he was the highest ranking member of the U.S. military, taking orders only from the President.

....

After the bomb was tested, Leahy was strongly opposed to its use in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In his memoir, he wrote:

"Once it had been tested, President Truman faced the decision as to whether to use it. He did not like the idea, but he was persuaded that it would shorten the war against Japan and save American lives. It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make wars in that fashion, and that wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."

After mediating between the United States Navy and the Government of Puerto Rico over the involuntary transfer of part of the islands of Vieques and Culebra to naval authorities, Leahy resigned in March 1949 and the following year published his war memoirs, I Was There.

So... then there's that.

oscar;1400466 wrote: Why go to such lengths? Koan posted ' I'm back ' In her thread 'Wassup' a few days ago. Rather different than she professed to you. You can not pander hypocrisy JJ... walk away....
As it turns out I posted a week ago and forgot. I also posted in May and forgot.

The search feature on FG doesn't always work and I don't keep track of when I'm here and when I'm not. It was a long time since I posted and actually came back for the next few days. So, sure I might have said "here I am" but I didn't expect anyone to remember. I'm quite flattered you did. Your memory of me is better than mine. lol

eta: apparently I was here in June too. She's in she's out and all people remember is the sweet taste of revenge and no one to take it out on.

eta again: was I here in July oscar? I might have been but I bet I was drunk at the time.

General Curtis LeMay said

"The war would have been over in two weeks. . . . The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all."

LeMay was no apologist.

There's an astonishing story about one Japanese national, Tsutomu Yamaguchi, who survived both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki explosions. Stephen Fry told the story on his QI show some time ago

Tsutomu Yamaguchi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd echo gmc with most of my post but just want to add to it in a couple of ways:

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not isolated incidents, they were the logical result of a process which started many years before in Nanking and Guernica, both of which were openly terror bombed from the air in the mid 1930s by Japan and Germany respectively. The bombing of cities in WW2 for reasons not clearly military happened when the Germans blasted Warsaw and Rotterdam and the British got involved when London was bombed by accident when a German force got lost over Britain and hit London instead of the airfield on the outskirts they were aiming at. At the time everyone was sure it was deliberate after Warsaw and Rotterdam and anyway in a war that couldn't go unanswered so the bombing of Berlin the next night was ordered. No particular target, they'd hit London so we would hit Berlin. Hitler went into one of his tantrums and ordered the Luftwaffe off the airfields, which might have won him the Battle of Britain, and onto London in September 1940 (which certainly helped him lose it). And after the Blitz which followed, with London bombed every 24 hours for the next 57 days consecutively and intensively through to May 1941, absolutely no-one had any concern about bombing any German city at all and I don't blame them.

The greatest of all the fires was directly in front of us. Flames seemed to whip hundreds of feet into the air. Pinkish-white smoke ballooned upward in a great cloud, and out of this cloud there gradually took shape - so faintly at first that we weren't sure we saw correctly - the gigantic dome of St. Paul's Cathedral.

St. Paul's was surrounded by fire, but it came through. It stood there in its enormous proportions - growing slowly clearer and clearer, the way objects take shape at dawn. It was like a picture of some miraculous figure that appears before peace-hungry soldiers on a battlefield.

The streets below us were semi-illuminated from the glow. Immediately above the fires the sky was red and angry, and overhead, making a ceiling in the vast heavens, there was a cloud of smoke all in pink. Up in that pink shrouding there were tiny, brilliant specks of flashing light-antiaircraft shells bursting. After the flash you could hear the sound. (Ernie Pyle, US correspondent later killed in the Pacific)



After that, we were stuck on our island without the Army or kit to make a cross channel invasion, unable to have much direct effect on a continental war with our navy, but needing to hit Germany somehow. Daylight raids by unescorted bombers had been disastrous with near 100% casualties which left only night bombing aiming vaguely at cities. After the blitz no-one was very concerned. Bomber Harris had stood on the roof of the Air ministry watching St. Paul's on the night Mr Pyle described and said to a collegue, "They have sowed the wind, and now they will reap the whirlwind." So the city smashing began with pretty much universal support in Britain anyway, though to their credit at Bishop or two did speak out against it. Those were dark dark days and anything at all that said we were fighting back was important. We were fighting a war, and not just any war, a total war. We absolutely had to win. Had to. If all we could do was support the Russians with bombing and convoys then that's what we would do. So the cities of Germany began to go down in flames along with thousands of RAF aircrew.

Curtis LeMay was a key player in the USAAF contribution of precision daylight bombing (the US had a very good bombsight and the RAF didn't) and saw how the RAF worked. When he was posted to the Pacific he was trying to force a Japanese surrender without the need for invasion, and began the firebombing campaign on the RAF model to try and force that result. My understanding is that he believed he had pretty much done that, and when he says the atomic bombs had no effect on the end of the war, it is because he believed his airforce had already done the job. Which in my opinion is questionable: it needed something that shocking to put the Emperor into a position where he could and had to act.

For the ordinary British or Indian or African soldier, attitudes to the Japanese seem to have been formed by their attitudes to prisoners and civilians, which were not remotely understood. After the first few massacred hospitals and listening to their mates being used for bayonet practice, the attitude was no mercy. Not that the Japanese asked for it. Later, taking a prisoner became a badge of honour, but not in the early days of disaster. And I don't blame them. A description by an ex soldier of what they thought of the Japanese was that they were dangerous fighting insects and not subject to human consideration. Shooting the wounded was a sensible safety precaution, not a war crime, because the wounded usually had a grenade ready to take one with them

I know the US Army had very similar experiences with the Japanese. So when we got to 1945 and everyone was so desperately tired after years of fighting and we were faced with the awful prospect of invading the Japanese Islands themselves...well, I can understand trying everything possible before putting troops into landing craft.

I don't blame anyone at that point, I blame the war. The bombings happened at the end of a set of technical, organisational and strategic developments forced by the war itself which allowed it to happen, at a time when all anyone on the Allied side wanted to do was end the war NOW, and against a country which by its treatment of prisoners had forfeited all sympathy.

We can all look back now and wish things had turned out differently. But they didn't. All we can truly say for sure is that after the second bombing, and assurances about the Emperor's position, the Japanese for the only time ever in the war surrendered en masse.

Excellent post.

Its quite refreshing to read a concise and accurate account of what happened in context of WWII as a whole, rather than in isolation. It puts events in to a completely different perspective.

Agreed. Excellent post

It always seems easy to look back at an event, after the fact, to make a judgment on the decisions made at the time, but to understand the event within the context of its time is much more difficult.

From my perspective, sixty some years later, I do regret that the bombings took place.

But, to take one event out of context and make a judgment on whether it was justified or not is simply wrong, and does a grave injustice to all who, willing or otherwise, took part in the war.

It happened. Our hope must be that in remembering, we can assure that such a thing never happens again.

Snoozeagain, Snowfire: Thanks. It's an appalling subject and I know I'll have upset some people. But I remember an interview with Sir Brian Horrocks - I think it must have been from the World at War series in the 1970's by his age in the film - where he describes commanding an army crossing the Rhine I think. And there in his way was the beautiful town of Cleve, which he happened to know was a jewel but it could be a big problem if held defensively. So when the Bomber lot came and asked him if he wanted it flattened he thought of his men and said yes - because you had to do all you could to give your men the best possible chance. But when the bombers went over he felt like a murderer. And after the war, like many others, he had bad nightmares for years and for him, it was always Cleve.

The point I took from the tale was that sometimes, the choice isn't between good and bad, it's between bad and worse - and even then, it isn't always easy to tell which is which, especially at the time.

It happened. Our hope must be that in remembering, we can assure that such a thing never happens again.


Yep.

A simple question, this - is there anyone here who doubts that, had an Axis nation (that is, either Japan or Germany) been the sole power to have used a nuclear device on an Allied city and then gone on to lose the war, the users of the bomb would have been prosecuted for a war crime?

spot;1400733 wrote: A simple question, this one - is there anyone here who doubts that, had an Axis nation (that is, either Japan or Germany) been the sole power to have used a nuclear device and then gone on to lose the war, the use of the bomb on an Allied city would have been treated as a war crime?


A fact of life. It's the winners who get to decide what was a war crime, and what was simply an act of war.

LarsMac;1400734 wrote: A fact of life. It's the winners who get to decide what was a war crime, and what was simply an act of war.


And there was me thinking we were discussing the ethics involved.