Question for the Forum

[SmashMouth]

Originally Posted by WhoDat!656

If after starting WWII, Hitler had not attempted to exterminate the Jews and the other attrocities (sp) that went with it, would he have been convicted of any war crimes?

Is starting a war, by itself, enough to be convicted of a war crime?

Don't ask me what made me think of this question.

So... what made you think of this question? LOL....


Who knows is the likely answer ..... I found it, I guess now, not so eye opening that during my recent stay in Paris there still is an anti-American sentiment amongst the French, and probably in most of Europe... and yes even my father whom was a courier on a bicycle during WWII. How quickly they forget, don't they? I will always remember what my American grandfather said to me once or twice about Finland being the ONLY country that ever repaid the USA for its assistance in freeing all of Europe from this tyrant; a small fact I reminded my father and my step-mother about.

[Crusader]

Originally Posted by SmashMouth

So... what made you think of this question? LOL....


Who knows is the likely answer ..... I found it, I guess now, not so eye opening that during my recent stay in Paris there still is an anti-American sentiment amongst the French, and probably in most of Europe... and yes even my father whom was a courier on a bicycle during WWII. How quickly they forget, don't they? I will always remember what my American grandfather said to me once or twice about Finland being the ONLY country that ever repaid the USA for its assistance in freeing all of Europe from this tyrant; a small fact I reminded my father and my step-mother about.

Not really true, the Anti-american sentiment were a lot stronger during the Bush regime , it usually depend on the current US foreign policy, During the Clinton era USA was really popular in the world.

Most regular europeans enjoy visiting USA and the american culture, books, movies, music, sports etc. the disliking is usually due to pure political reason. Invading Iraq and blaming it on "Weapons of mass destruction" for example pissed off a lot of people, it would have been better to be honest and say "we want your oil".

[saintfan]

Originally Posted by Crusader

Not really true, the Anti-american sentiment were a lot stronger during the Bush regime , it usually depend on the current US foreign policy, During the Clinton era USA was really popular in the world.

Most regular europeans enjoy visiting USA and the american culture, books, movies, music, sports etc. the disliking is usually due to pure political reason. Invading Iraq and blaming it on "Weapons of mass destruction" for example pissed off a lot of people, it would have been better to be honest and say "we want your oil".

Europeans hated Bush to be sure, but I had first-hand experience with the anti-American sentiment in France, Belgium, and the Netherlands as well as other countries over there in 1985. Ya'll HATED Reagan with a passion too. LOL

But I was a bit miffed by how we were treated. Not generally speaking, because generally speaking it was good, but there were times when, I think, people expected a certain arrogance from us that simply wasn't there. It's like we were resented in advance or something - before we were able to dispel what I guess was a common viewpoint which was that we Americans were arrogant bastards that looked down on the lesser living standard of the typical Belgium family. Hell, my grandpa was a poor cotton farmer and I grew up with far less than I think was assumed.

But is was a good trip. I learned a lot and met some very friendly people.

[SmashMouth]

Originally Posted by Crusader

Not really true, the Anti-american sentiment were a lot stronger during the Bush regime , it usually depend on the current US foreign policy, During the Clinton era USA was really popular in the world.

Most regular europeans enjoy visiting USA and the american culture, books, movies, music, sports etc. the disliking is usually due to pure political reason. Invading Iraq and blaming it on "Weapons of mass destruction" for example pissed off a lot of people, it would have been better to be honest and say "we want your oil".

Well .. Europe wants Libya's oil for sure ... kind of a parallel one might say.

[WhoDat!656]

The B-29 fire-bombing raids were targeted at Japanese civilians and killed many more people than both of the atomic bombs.

Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were intentionally not fire-bombed so that when the atomic bombs were dropped on them, the full effect could be seen.

If the Allies had invaded the Home Islands, losses were estimated to be in excess of one million soldiers and Marines.

[saintfan]

Originally Posted by WhoDat!656

The B-29 fire-bombing raids were targeted at Japanese civilians and killed many more people than both of the atomic bombs.

Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were intentionally not fire-bombed so that when the atomic bombs were dropped on them, the full effect could be seen.

If the Allies had invaded the Home Islands, losses were estimated to be in excess of one million soldiers and Marines.

I work with people from all over the world, and opinions vary on the 'morality' of dropping those bombs. A particular fellow I work with - and respect very much by the way - is from Russia and in his opinion the United States was only flexing its muscle by dropping those bombs.

Considering the vibe between our two countries at the time - the paranoia both sides held against the other - I can understand why he would feel that way.

However he's dead wrong. Truman had a very heavy heart when he made the call, and we gave them every opportunity. I can understand them refusing to believe the level of destruction we claimed, at least before we dropped the first one, but the second one is entirely on Hirohito.

We save allied lives, both American AND Russian.