You are a military command in war. You must accomplish a military mission, to destroy a group of terrorists.
You can either send airplanes to do it, but then you kill innocent civilians. Or you can send your soldiers, but then you’ll lose some of the soliders.
My question to you: What is the ratio of enemy civilian versus your soldier. That is, how many enemy civilians are you willing to sacrifise in order to save one soldier of yours.
I think I’d go with 20/1.
I am aware of the delicacy of the issue, but these decisions are important in war and must be considered. So what is your ratio?
If you are discussing terrorists, how can the military even determine if they are bombing civilians? Hizbollah has never owned up to losing 1 fighter, and claims all those killed were civilians.
WWII:
Doolittle Raid killed many civilians
Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed 200,000 + or- civilians
Dresdan, unsure of the exact numbers, but many allied POW’s died too.
Much of the southern part of England was bombed to rubble
9/11
7/7
I could go on.
My point is that the enemy targets civlians, and many of enemy’s “civilians” support, aid and abet the terrorists. Either, they shape up, or they will also be nailed along with the terrorists, just as they nailed us on 9/11, 7/7, Lockerbee, the 72 Olympics, The Archille Laurel.
Now, other posters will claim that the above statement reduces us to the level of the terrorists. Nope, when the West fights, the West wears uniforms, and warns civlians regarding the upcoming bombings, just as we did when we hit Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The terrorists deliberately target civlians and you know it. They only fight they military when forced to, as they know they will ususally lose.
Guess what, the Japanese military forced the civilians to stay in the targeted area. I wonder if something similar also occured in Lebanon.
So much sympathy for the terrorsists, and those who want us dead is really a sad statement regarding how many have their head stuck where the sun don’t shine.
Aspacia, You’v really nailed the problem. I entirely agree.
However I see there is not a big participation in this poll, and thats exactly what I expected.
What you don’t realize is that Israel is facing this question every day, 100 times a day. Daily we knowingly sacrifise our soldiers so that more Palestinian civilians will be spared.
In the last war with Lebanon, about 100 soliders were killed because we couldn’t allow Lebanese civilians to be killed instead. We could have spared most of the 100 lives, but then another 1000 Lebanese civilians would have been killed.
And iits not just dry statistics after the war, beleive me, it was made of real time decisions of our commanders every day, every hour of the day.
How many soldiers I am allowed to spare so that this or that Lebanese village won’t be damaged.
If you couldn’t answer this poll, how the people who sacrifised their own friends could have? Yet they did.
I hope all the people who critisize Israel will reconsider their opinions after this post.
The US intentionally left Hiroshima unscathed by aerial bombing so they could see how well their atomic bombs worked. Despite this the Japanese military was systematically evacuating the people of Hiroshima and had reduced the population by about 125,000 at the time of the nuclear bombing from its pre-war totals.
The Japanese civilian leadership was covertly negotiating with the US to end the war. Which means the end of the war was in sight, there wouldn’t have to be a land invasion and the hundreds of thousands of deaths associated with it. This peace was deliberately avoided so that the US military could prove to the Soviets that they had the bomb and the willingness to use it.
The US dropped warning leaflets over most of Japan threatening continuing strikes like that at Hiroshima, but only after they had attacked Hiroshima. Warning leaflets were not dropped over Nagasaki unitl Aug. 10, the day after Nagasaki was bombed.
Maybe the US servicemen were in uniform, but the breach in the Geneva Conventions and the lack of necessity in dropping the bombs, in my mind, reduces the whole operation to a terrorist attack.
The Japanese breached the conventions, which they had not signed, but they also breached their own military code, and they kicked our asses during the first 6 months of the Pacific war. We only breached the conventions in order to save a million allied lives rather than invade.
Nope, we were attacked, and retaliated. How about all the civilians the Japanese massacred in China, Australia, etc. What about the Japanese medical experiments on the Chinese and our POW’s.
War is a nasty, brutal business. The Japanese were brutes during WWII. They even beheaded and crucified Austrailian nurses.
Sometimes, the only way to end the ugliness is to be ugly as well. Ever read what the Japanese did to our POW’s? Believe it or not, the Nazi’s were not nearly as brutal to the POW’s as the Japanese. Actually, they tended to treat with as honored adversaries.
Why all the sympathy for our WWII enemy? I have none. As mum claims, you pick a fight, get your nose bloodied, don’t whine.
Is Japan better today, than prior to WWII, you betcha. Why? We forced them to change and rewrote their constitution.
I know of no one who lived in Korea, China, etc., who has sympathy for the Japanese after the atomics, none.
When you have been stained by the blood of war, then you may make condemn, as a military tribunale does. Until then, you sit in an intellectual armchair and judge. No, I have never seen combat, but have known many who have, and heard the screams when they wake at night. Seen them sweating and wild eyed after leaving Nam. Listened to mum and dads tales of WWII, seeing friends blown to bits in front of them while still in their teens.
of course, america didn’t sign the relevant geneva convention until [size=200]1949[/size] but why let a historical fact disturb left wing rhetoric?
-Imp
[/quote]
Right, I forgot this, but neither did the Japanese. At the moment the militants have ot either. Also, Iran did sign the nonproliferation treaty which it now violates. So much for keeping one’s word. Oh, yes, that’s right, it is condoned to lie to one’s enemy and wife in Islam.
The Nazis applied variously the ratios of 20-1 to 1,000-1 for civilain deaths to soldier deaths. They were prosecuted for war crimes.
We have to get perspective on this.
No civilian deaths are OK.
As far as Japan goes, and the negotiations in Geneva, by June the Japanese were willing to accept all conditions for surrender except that the emporer resign. The US said no and dropped the bomb on Hiroshima. The Japanese said again that they would accept everything except the emporer resigning. The US dropped the bomb on Nagasaki. The Japanese reiterated their stance and the US accepted. The next day Japan surrendered.
The US and Japan negotiated in secret during the entire war. US pows were exchanged for interred Japanese americans who wanted repatriation to Japan while the war was going on.
no wonder i haven’t heard of it… i’m an ignorant american whose history lessons consist of pearl harbor, 9-11, hiroshima, nagasaki, d-day, … you know, all the stuff that happened to america
We sure did, and we exchanged several of Japan’s officials for POW’S. Some of the officials were housed in our desert regions.
Regardless, the military controlled the government, and much was covertly done without the Japanese military’s knowledge.
Many moons ago, during a Modern European History class my professor, David Tharp, made claims similar to yours. There was a lecture given by a visiting history professor, whose wife is Japanese, and claimed the bombing was necessary because of the facts I just provided. Remember, the Samuri, the warlord culture existed in Japan, and the civilian government were basically powerless, including the emperor. This Japanese mentality was thousands of years old, the Shogun, the Samurai were valued. Sure, they made nice with the emperor, they were sworn to die for him, but the emperor knew better than to try and play hardball with the warriors.
I understand where you are coming from, was a very liberal Democrat for many years, until I started understanding economics, and security threats, working for a living, and paying taxes. Then 9/11 was kicker. Mum is British, and made many attacks against Israel while I was a child, she was really ticked regarding the David Hotel bombing. I am also a product of the 60’s and graduated from high school in 71, flower power and all. Now, I realize what is being claimed regarding my brethren, my culture, myself in general, and will not accepts the lies flowing from many media sources in the West and in the Middle-East.
With regards,
aspacia
You are a good person, and most liberals are good people, often non-violent, tolerant and giving. Just remember many moderates and conservatives are as well.[/url]
The actual warning given falls a little short of the type of warning your first post impled they were given. The US admin. still chose not to warn Nagasaki
"The first Geneva Convention of 1864 dealt exclusively with care for wounded soldiers; the law was later adapted to cover warfare at sea and prisoners of war.
In 1949 the Conventions were revised and expanded:"
