Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

former9thward

(33,424 posts)
107. I doubt Pearl Harbor would be considered a war crime.
Thu Jan 1, 2015, 12:35 PM
Jan 2015

It was a bombing of a military installation. Yamamoto, who organized the attack, was killed in the war so we will never know if he would have be tried for it.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

No doubt they figure they ditched their responsibility for the Gulags Jackpine Radical Dec 2014 #1
Maybe the Russians gladium et scutum Jan 2015 #102
I'm sure that will have all of Washington D.C. on pins and needles bluestateguy Dec 2014 #2
Do they really want to open that can of worms? NuclearDem Dec 2014 #3
Never mind Kyshtym, Chernobyl, "Czar Bomba," etc... Archae Dec 2014 #4
sure they do Duckhunter935 Dec 2014 #5
This isn't unique. Many people, including some in the US, have suggested this for many years. PSPS Dec 2014 #6
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were no worse than, say Dresden... Adrahil Dec 2014 #7
A war crimes case can't be made. You can't make a weapon illegal ex post facto stevenleser Dec 2014 #8
Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse Five" is the fictional treatment of one KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #23
No, crimes against humanity and war crimes were not ex post facto. There had been two iterations stevenleser Dec 2014 #31
I knew about Geneva and its proscriptions wrt POWs and refugees. I was referring instead KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #33
They were still trying to cover their tracks as the war was ending... Historic NY Jan 2015 #80
Oh, yes, the Nazis absolutely exhibited an 'awareness of guilt' in many ways. The 'ex post facto' KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #84
You greatly oversimplify the issue. Vattel Dec 2014 #24
Whether something is ex-post facto or not IS very simple. Glad you noticed. nt stevenleser Dec 2014 #30
No one is suggesting the strawman argument that ex-post facto laws are binding. Vattel Dec 2014 #36
Which combatant in WWII didn't bomb cities? EX500rider Jan 2015 #70
Ikr? One good murder deserves another. Vattel Jan 2015 #91
My point is you can't single out the US for "war crimes" because of bombing if every.. EX500rider Jan 2015 #106
Oh, I am sorry, I see your point now. Vattel Jan 2015 #108
None but the US used atomic bombs. Then or since. WinkyDink Jan 2015 #98
So? Are they somehow worse then the conventional bombing that killed far more? EX500rider Jan 2015 #121
Well, if a litle thing like radiation means nothing to you.... Plus, that "estimate" total is quite WinkyDink Jan 2015 #122
Here is something contemporary Russian leaders have not considered stevenleser Dec 2014 #9
Certainly, evidence from Allied war planners would also need to be considered, since a KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #25
That is correct. By demonstrating the power of the new weapon the war was ended much sooner. jwirr Dec 2014 #43
It's a very disturbing moral calculus, but just to reiterate: the war ending sooner meant not KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #44
I remember how my parents felt about Harry Truman and a lot of it was the very thing we are jwirr Dec 2014 #49
Assuming an invasion was necessary is the error in your logic Bonobo Dec 2014 #56
Hmm, well that's an interesting question you pose. I'm not enough of an expert in the field to KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #65
As to the issue of ensuring against privations... Bonobo Jan 2015 #66
Like I said, it's a damned good question and I'm not well-enough versed in the period to KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #69
I don't think it's silly for Asians to have demanded that Bonobo Jan 2015 #72
Ah, I got you. No, I doubt that the haberdasher from Independence, MO gave much KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #74
Thank you, King. Bonobo Jan 2015 #75
How about the thousands dying daily in occupied countries? hack89 Jan 2015 #123
The Japanese already were determined to fight to the death... Historic NY Jan 2015 #87
The Smithsonian had a great exhibit in the mid to late 90s with the fuselage of the plan davidpdx Jan 2015 #105
Because people were still dying in China and elsewhere in Asia due to the war.. EX500rider Jan 2015 #71
The starvation of Japanese cannot be considered Bonobo Jan 2015 #73
No, but it can be a counter argument to people who say.. EX500rider Jan 2015 #76
Neither do I, but it certainly is not a foregone Bonobo Jan 2015 #81
There was also the matter of how many Chinese were dying every month as the war ground on... EX500rider Jan 2015 #83
Thank you for the link. Bonobo Jan 2015 #85
The desire to end the war quickly is all the rationale needed. MicaelS Jan 2015 #79
And yet the Taiwanese preferred them to the Chinese. Bonobo Jan 2015 #82
Wow, talk about being a true apologist for terrible atrocities. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #88
You've spoken to many Taiwanese? Bonobo Jan 2015 #89
I'm full of shit? What a fucking laugh, and a perfect case of the pot calling the kettle black. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #90
I cited only Taiwan and Manchuria. Bonobo Jan 2015 #92
Oh GMAFB. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #93
I didn't assume, I asked you. Bonobo Jan 2015 #94
Welcome to my Ignore list. I'm done with you. (nm) jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #95
Ignore list is appropriate given your predilection Bonobo Jan 2015 #96
Yawn. Speak for yourself, man. Seriously. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #99
Don't flatter yourself, Mr. David Irving jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #110
Oh, you're gonna get it when dad finds out. NYC_SKP Jan 2015 #135
Let's order pizza. NYC_SKP Jan 2015 #136
Extra cheese, please Aerows Jan 2015 #137
For the record, I am NOT David Irving. Bonobo Jan 2015 #139
I know Aerows Jan 2015 #140
The 25 million dead Chinese figure isn't too far off: EX500rider Jan 2015 #109
The strain on Putin is starting to show. hrmjustin Dec 2014 #10
Really. that's my read, justin. Cha Dec 2014 #13
They want to execute Harry Truman? (nt) Nye Bevan Dec 2014 #11
Or maybe they just want to derail his 2016 electoral campaign. I'm definitely reconsidering Dewey. Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2014 #18
125,000 men, women and children burned to cinders in one night in Tokyo. Bonobo Dec 2014 #12
So were Unit 731, the Nanjing Massacre, the Manila Massacre, and others jdenver_2624 Dec 2014 #40
Ever heard of the 228 incident by China? Bonobo Dec 2014 #54
Please do keep on being an apologist for historical crimes. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #57
Odd that you would interpret it that way. Bonobo Jan 2015 #58
Your reply really says quite a lot about your thoughts on this matter. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #60
The only denial of war crimes I see is yours. Bonobo Jan 2015 #61
When did I ever say those weren't war crimes? jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #62
And when did I ever apologize for Japanese war crimes? Bonobo Jan 2015 #63
"Sputterings of outrage"? Don't make me laugh. jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #64
I think that's best JDenver. Bonobo Jan 2015 #67
Embarrassment? Talk about delusions of self-grandeur! jdenver_2624 Jan 2015 #68
FUCK YOU VLAD davidpdx Dec 2014 #14
I'm for it newfie11 Dec 2014 #15
"There was NO reason to drop those bombs." EX500rider Jan 2015 #111
Read on please newfie11 Jan 2015 #115
How about an investigation into the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? hobbit709 Dec 2014 #16
Or the massacre of Katyn forest. Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2014 #19
Or Holodomor. NuclearDem Dec 2014 #28
Or the Ukrainian famine Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2014 #29
Yeah, Russia is about the last country that should want to go digging up WWII skeletons. cemaphonic Dec 2014 #35
Communists are funny... ileus Dec 2014 #17
Well, you know how long it takes to get the paperwork through the bureaucracy. Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2014 #20
I wonder why they are focusing on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Vattel Dec 2014 #21
By that standard every country in WWII carried out a campaign of mass murder hack89 Dec 2014 #27
I am not saying that the US is uniquely guilty here. Vattel Dec 2014 #38
Ok nt hack89 Dec 2014 #39
It was a nasty war..... Adrahil Jan 2015 #124
Actually, most nations involved in WWII did not fire bomb population centers. Vattel Jan 2015 #133
If you wanna limit yourself to fire bombing.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #134
By that time, the battle of Britain had ended several years before and Britain had already bombed stevenleser Dec 2014 #32
Ikr? Why would I focus on the US populaton bombing in a post about US population bombing? Vattel Dec 2014 #37
No, under an OP about the Russians and a WORLD war II incident where most of the participants stevenleser Jan 2015 #113
Actually, most of the participants didn't do anything close to the sort of fire-bombing Vattel Jan 2015 #120
Because those two cities were selected as the targets for a demonstration. All other bombings by jwirr Dec 2014 #42
There were four citys that had been either not bombed oneshooter Dec 2014 #53
The first bomb went off in New Mexico. former9thward Jan 2015 #78
Not arguing the that it was not a war crime. Was the bombing of Pearl Harbor also a war crime? jwirr Jan 2015 #101
I doubt Pearl Harbor would be considered a war crime. former9thward Jan 2015 #107
I have always wondered. I kind of think that my dad's generation would have considered it so but jwirr Jan 2015 #112
It was absolutely a war crime as it was the opening salvo in an unprovoked war of aggression. stevenleser Jan 2015 #114
Not according to international law. former9thward Jan 2015 #117
Yes according to international law unprovoked war is a war crime and its very easy to research stevenleser Jan 2015 #118
By your own definitions Pearl Harbor occurred before the existence of the UN. former9thward Jan 2015 #119
Yes, that is true there were primary targets picked out with alternatives davidpdx Jan 2015 #104
My first thought is just what is Putin planning on doing? MiniMe Dec 2014 #22
Showboating to Russian nationalists, pretty much. (nt) Posteritatis Dec 2014 #51
Leaders or leader? MannyGoldstein Dec 2014 #26
I'm a little confused by your post Cali_Democrat Dec 2014 #34
I'm not sure what he based that statement on, as the historical record is far more KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #45
I'm generally in agreement with you, but... MannyGoldstein Dec 2014 #48
While Russia has no room to talk I do remember my father explaining the bombings of Japan as jwirr Dec 2014 #41
"just a farmer in Iowa" who helped feed his nation and the world. Hat tip to all KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #46
Thank you. jwirr Dec 2014 #50
There should be an investigation of The Katyn Forest Massacre./NT DemocratSinceBirth Dec 2014 #47
Estimates of those who died under Stalin reach 20,000,000 panader0 Dec 2014 #52
Timing seems a bit strange. Warren DeMontague Dec 2014 #55
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.... steve2470 Jan 2015 #59
Right after the Potimkin Mutiny report is done arely staircase Jan 2015 #77
Sure, I'm fine with it so long as the upward to 2 million women raped by the Soviets is too. herding cats Jan 2015 #86
Pointing out the war crimes of others is not a defense. WinkyDink Jan 2015 #97
in historical context it does highlight the futility of Putin's statement. KittyWampus Jan 2015 #103
They had a new toy and had to try it out. nilesobek Jan 2015 #100
No cause justifies the deaths of innocent people. Albert Camus Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2015 #116
It's lovely that you live in such a black and white world. Adrahil Jan 2015 #125
It must be difficult living in a world that justifies killing innocent people. Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2015 #126
I don't believe in moral absolutes. Adrahil Jan 2015 #127
So, what are some of the causes YOU would kill innocent civilians for? Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2015 #128
Here's one.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #129
Would you pull the trigger? Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2015 #130
First off.... Do you admit that there may be times when.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #131
Not in my mind, when I make it personal. Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2015 #132
This is the most awful string of responses to an OP that I've ever read, anywhere. delrem Jan 2015 #138
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Russian leaders call for ...»Reply #107