And I also agree that the Japanese did not have exactly the same ethnic policy with respect to the Chinese, although the Emperor did specifically order that Chinese not be treated according to the Geneva Conventions (even though Japan was not a signator).
Do you have a citation for that?
Hey buddy, you're the one who brought it down to that level.
Unlike you, I make no personal assumptions about fellow posters. I go solely by what they post.
The way I responded to your post was the way you (inappropriately) responded to mine, which wouldn't have happened if you'd read a tiny fraction of what I wrote.
This thread is about the "necessity"(?) and morality of Hiroshima. What relevance, really, is what may or may not have been the ideological underpinnings of Mongol military strategy?
We could go back to cases in ancient times when cities were sieged and biological warfare was used when the carcasses of animals were flung into the city to spread disease and when the conquerers ethnically cleansed defeated cultures. Were there any ideological underpinnings to this?
What's the point? What's the relevence here?
Cueball could open a thread that deals specifically with the history of the politics behind military strategy and the targeting of cities and (non combatants) civilians. There would be many stimulating discussions with Webgear, I'm sure.
So you don't think the history of military strategy, and how and why civilians may have been targeted historically has any relevance to a discussion on whether or not the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was moral?
P.S., thanks for derailing what was an interesting thread. Hope you're now satisfied that Cueball isn't a closet worshiper of Hirohito.
As you can see from my post above, I'm trying to keep this thread on topic. It's Cueball who's doing the thread drift.
By placing the bombings in a broader historical context, yes, thread drift. But accusing him of condoning the fire bombings of Germany is staying on topic. Got it.
Frmsldr wrote in reply to Cueball:
Bullshit.
You would have us believe that the reason why Russia was invaded was so the priviledged survivors could enjoy a world remade into an ethnically pure paradise as envisioned by the nazis.
Caissa wonders if frmsldr has read Mein Kampf.
@ theboxman #101
I'm going on a bit of trust, since it is wikipedia. But here is the original source:
^ Akira Fujiwara, Nitchû Sensô ni Okeru Horyo Gyakusatsu, Kikan Sensô Sekinin Kenkyû 9, 1995, p.22
And here is the page I found it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_atrocities
It is in the section on events of the 30s and 40s. I'm not trying to establish Hirohito's personal responsibility - just that such a directive was made.
On the other hand, I am guessing that one can look at the death rates of westerners and non-westerners under the Japanese and draw a similar conclusion, just as one can draw a pattern between how the Germans treated the Russians and how they treated western prisoners.
Closing for length and continuing here.
Closing for length and continuing here.
