- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: One US air strike kills 200 civilians in Mosel
Posted on 3/27/17 at 8:56 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
Posted on 3/27/17 at 8:56 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
I still don't understand your point?
My point is the legal and moral underpinning of the bombing we did in WWII is different from the bombing we do now.
It is all so blase now, but the bombing we do now is an international war crime -- under precepts adopted after- World War Two.
3
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:00 am to WhiskeyPapa
Which falls back to my original point: international law is arbitrary. Of course what we did during world war 2 isn't "illegal" based on rules WE made after WW2. What makes these bombings war crimes when far more severe and punitive bombings were not?
These bombings at least have intended targets. Innacurate recon and intelligence doesn't even approach the requisites for a war crime
These bombings at least have intended targets. Innacurate recon and intelligence doesn't even approach the requisites for a war crime
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:02 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:01 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
I can't speak for the technology of WW2.
But I was a Firecontrolman on an AN/SPY-1D AEGIS DDG. For those unaware, I am the fricker who fired our missiles and tracked them to target.
Anytime I hear that our missile went "off course" or "missed" their target, it amuses me.
Hell, the circular error probability on our ICBMs (travelling thousands of miles) was around 3 feet in the late 80s.
If our missiles and bombs hit, for example, a Children's Hospital, they were delivered there deliberately. We do not miss. My ordinance is ALWAYS right, but your intel can be wrong.
I have seen 1 miss in my entire time in the World's Finest Navy, and that was testing the ESSM system. We were firing at an inbound missile. In 5 shoots, we missed once. And that was the first time the system was field tested.
But I was a Firecontrolman on an AN/SPY-1D AEGIS DDG. For those unaware, I am the fricker who fired our missiles and tracked them to target.
Anytime I hear that our missile went "off course" or "missed" their target, it amuses me.
Hell, the circular error probability on our ICBMs (travelling thousands of miles) was around 3 feet in the late 80s.
If our missiles and bombs hit, for example, a Children's Hospital, they were delivered there deliberately. We do not miss. My ordinance is ALWAYS right, but your intel can be wrong.
I have seen 1 miss in my entire time in the World's Finest Navy, and that was testing the ESSM system. We were firing at an inbound missile. In 5 shoots, we missed once. And that was the first time the system was field tested.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:04 am to Roaad
In World War Two we had slightly worse technology lol. The second atomic bomb missed its target by a mile. We lined up hundred of bombers and drove them over a target area and released indiscriminately. We sent hundreds at a time because it was the only way to ensure we could destroy a target. It was incredibly accurate for the times, but not even in the realm of accurate by 1960's standards even.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:05 am to WhiskeyPapa
Allied bombs killed 25,000-50,000 civilians in Dresden (depending on who you ask -- 25,000 is the "official" number). It had zero military or strategic value. It was pretty much a civilian center.
Back then no one cared. Killing a bunch of civilians was seen as a normal part of war, just as we saw in Japan with the two A-bombs.
Back then no one cared. Killing a bunch of civilians was seen as a normal part of war, just as we saw in Japan with the two A-bombs.
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:06 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:07 am to YNWA
Yeah a-hole.... maybe if the rat terrorist wouldn't hide in hospitals and schools the civilians wouldn't get killed but it pushes the narrative. It's their fault for allowing it to happen just like in most ghettos in America they allow it. When you allow people to shite on everything around you don't complain when it smells
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:08 am to WhiskeyPapa
LINK
Curtis LeMay interviewed at the 1:00 mark on this video.
Curtis LeMay interviewed at the 1:00 mark on this video.
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:10 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:10 am to WhiskeyPapa
Are you still stuck on whether LeMay actually stated the quote I (and countless military historians/etc) attribute to him? I'm not watching your video, but it he didn't say those words then that is my mistake. Also, if your point is that he held little to no remorse for his actions, I am also not surprised. Truman felt the same way about the bomb. Just because they did it doesn't mean they didn't know it was wrong. My goodness, move on to the substance of the argument.
And where is your source on LeMay not saying that he would have been a war criminal had we lost to Japan? I decided to indulge your ignorant deflections and peruse the internet. Widely, and I mean WIDELY, the quote is attributed to LeMay when he was asked on the morality of the firebombing against the Japanese
And where is your source on LeMay not saying that he would have been a war criminal had we lost to Japan? I decided to indulge your ignorant deflections and peruse the internet. Widely, and I mean WIDELY, the quote is attributed to LeMay when he was asked on the morality of the firebombing against the Japanese
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:13 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:23 am to Northwestern tiger
quote:
Some reports saying the toll is close to 500
War crime?
It's not even clear that it was an airstrike that destroyed those buildings in the first place.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:25 am to AUstar
quote:
Allied bombs killed 25,000-50,000 civilians in Dresden (depending on who you ask -- 25,000 is the "official" number). It had zero military or strategic value. It was pretty much a civilian center.
Exactly. Towards the end of WWII, the RAF went around destroying German city centers regardless of their ability to contribute to the war effort. The German defenses were shattered.
On an early raid, the USAAF couldn't find the target and with no other instructions, they brought their bombs back to England, resulting in many blown tires, very scary with 10 X 500 lb or 6 X 1000lb bombs on board. That was the typical B-17 load out.
The word went out - leave those bombs on the continent.
The weather over Europe was always a factor with up to 4 out of 5 days unsuitable for visual bombing. A secondary or tertiary target was always the rail road terminal in the target city. The crews knew that was area bombing. Another bad problem for the air crews - like in much of the US weather fronts in England tended to come down from the north and north west. This meant it could be clear on a morning take off but overcast when the bombers returned.
On one occasion General Doolittle recalled a huge strike just as it was formed up to head into Germany. The recall was due to a fast approaching weather front. His boss, General Spaatz, called him on the carpet and questioned his nerve. “I wonder if you have the guts to lead a really big air force,” Spaatz said.
Not long after that, Spaatz and Doolittle were passengers in a B-17. The pilot couldn’t find a base to land on due to the undercast. He finally set it down in a field and got it stopped just before smashing into a stone wall. Spaatz never questioned Doolittle on weather recalls again.
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:26 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:27 am to HailToTheChiz
Who says they are civilians? ISIS? Because I don't believe them. Also, if ISIS wants to hide among civilians, their dead is on their hands. They can stop being medieval barbarians any time they like and stop the madness. Until then, unleash hell.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:32 am to Northwestern tiger
Is there a distinction between sympathizer and civilian. In these cultures villages are sympathetic to Isis and give them safe haven. In that case they support the war indirectly and are not entirely innocent, excluding children from that statement. Also they were not killed indiscriminately. It was more than likely a calculated risk/loss.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:33 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
I bet isis follows international law and the Geneva convention so we should to.......................NOT!
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:43 am to WHS
ISIS being a non-governmental actor may complicate the matter. Is it even possibly to commit war crimes against non-state actors? As in, are these conflicts even governed by the Geneva Convention?
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:45 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:45 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
war crime
The dumbest phrase to ever grace the pages of history and politics. All war is a crime. Which is why war should ALWAYS be the last resort of any diplomatic crisis. But once war has been enjoined, all is fair.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:48 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
...but it he didn't say those words then that is my mistake.
Don't make up quotes.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:48 am to Northwestern tiger
quote:
Some reports saying the toll is close to 500 War crime?
Could be.
Why don't you and your ilk head to Hawaii and seek a TRO from the 9th Circuit on further Trump bombing ? They seem to believe that US Constitutional Rights belong to every World Citizen.
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:49 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:50 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Better get with Field Marshal Kietel. He was hanged for war crimes in 1946.
And you need to cite LeMay to that effect. I won't hold my breath.
It is always important not to judge historical people by modern day standards.
The Germans waged aggressive war and occupied large swaths of Europe.
Yet not Stalin nor any Soviet commanders were tried for aggressive war or war crimes. This effectively makes his point and not yours. If you win, war crimes are fine. If you lose, the victors will arbitrarily try the losers for war crimes.
quote:
The British reacted to indiscriminate bombing of their cities with indiscriminate bombing of German cities
This is revisionist history. The Germans did not begin bombing London "indiscriminately" until AFTER the British bombed Berlin indiscriminately. The Germans were bombing strategic targets in Britain to that point. The British leadership wanted to use this form of warfare and their bomber fleet was perfectly suited for it. The suggestion that the British were morally opposed to area bombing and terror bombing and only reluctantly engaged in it after being left no choice by German actions is simply not true.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:51 am to RollTide1987
quote:
All war is a crime.
Well, no it is not. Going back to at least the Civil War.
Governments MUST have a legal redress in times of emergency or exigency of events.
General Orders No. 100 : The Lieber Code
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE FIELD
Prepared by Francis Lieber, promulgated as General Orders No. 100 by President Lincoln, 24 April 1863.
Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., Originally Issued as General Orders No. 100, Adjutant General's Office, 1863, Washington 1898: Government Printing Office."
LINK
Posted on 3/27/17 at 9:51 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Don't make up quotes.
Quit being dishonest. I didn't make it up. I told you its widely attributed to LeMay, something you don't seem interested in refuting. Any inspection of LeMay's life or the firebombing campaign mentions it. Even if its not something he directly and exactly stated, its still not something I 'made up'.
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 9:53 am
Page 5 of 10
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News