ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags war crime charges , winston churchill , World War II history

Reply
Old 14th April 2016, 01:16 AM   #321
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,438
It might have been an argument ysed by the Nazi regime but it was their actual policy towards every other country and it was put in to practice. For Britain and other countries it was reality.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 01:36 AM   #322
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
It might have been an argument ysed by the Nazi regime but it was their actual policy towards every other country and it was put in to practice. For Britain and other countries it was reality.
So it was, my good man. Indeed, so it was.

But my point is that the guy in the trenches at the time didn't know that. The Waffen SS guy who took it out on the French villagers ALSO thought he's fighting a war for the very survival of not just his country, but verily of the whole western civilization, and that if Germany failed, it would mean slavery for everyone for ever.

That is my problem with postulating that such situations excuse comitting atrocities. Because that's how and why the Nazi atrocities happened too. Because those guys too were told they were in such a super-just war, and that the end is so super-important that any means are super-justified.

Sure, they were told a lie, but the vast majority didn't know it was a lie.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 01:47 AM   #323
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
What is the moral difference between bombing a German (ex)civilian who had been drafted into the army, and a German civilian who had been assigned to work in a munitions factory?
Not much, if you're the kind who'd just want to kill them no matter what.

The thing is, though that the trend for the last 150 years or so has been to make sure that the soldiers can surrender. Which is kinda important. We don't just want the guy dead because he happened to be born in an enemy state, even if he happened to get drafted. We just don't want him shooting at our guys. We have conventions on top of conventions, with a bunch more conventions and protocols reaffirming them, just dedicated to the idea that we should give that guy a chance to come out with his hands up, and then nothing will happen to him.

Regardles of whether that guy is a civilian or yes, a soldier, we're not going to want him dead just because he was born in the country over there. We just want him not shooting at us. If it takes killing him to stop him shooting at us, fine, that can be avoided. But it's means, not goal.

The moment it becomes the goal instead of means, well, that's pretty much the moment when it becomes a war crime nowadays.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 04:19 AM   #324
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,487
Wink

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Regardles of whether that guy is a civilian or yes, a soldier, we're not going to want him dead just because he was born in the country over there. We just want him not shooting at us. If it takes killing him to stop him shooting at us, fine, that can be avoided. But it's means, not goal.
That should be corrected to:

we just want him not shooting at us; not making bombs; not building tanks, not contributing to the war effort.

Like with soldiers surrendering, bomber Harris would have been fine with the German home front surrendering (in fact, he expected it).
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 04:47 AM   #325
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Heh. Right. The civilians in Hamburg only needed to swim about 750 Km (about 400 nautical miles) to London and surrender

Joking aside, though, no, the current treaties do NOT go by the way you extended that statement. I mean, of course, you still have the right to your opinion, but the current conventions explicitly don't recognize someone as a combatant just because they might work in a ball bearing factory, which also produces bearings for tanks.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th April 2016 at 04:49 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 05:37 AM   #326
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,438
Current conventions weren't the conventions 70 years ago
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 05:47 AM   #327
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Current conventions weren't the conventions 70 years ago
Indeed. I think we cleared that up several pages ago.

But nevertheless I can think that while Churchill and Harris weren't war criminals, they were, shall we say, dicks. And, granted, the Nazis and Soviets had a bunch of even bigger dicks. The whole war was waged among such a bunch of complete dicks, that you could scalp them and call it a circumcision

In fact, one could even say it was a total sausage-fest
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 06:18 AM   #328
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,487
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Indeed. I think we cleared that up several pages ago.

But nevertheless I can think that while Churchill and Harris weren't war criminals, they were, shall we say, dicks. And, granted, the Nazis and Soviets had a bunch of even bigger dicks. The whole war was waged among such a bunch of complete dicks, that you could scalp them and call it a circumcision

In fact, one could even say it was a total sausage-fest
More efforts at nihilistic moral equivalence. First we couldn't expect the average person to be able to distinguish between the morality of Nazi and western allied war aims. Now we find that all the leaders are 'dicks'.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 06:32 AM   #329
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,438
Just about had my fill of this thread, the smell is getting unbearable.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 06:46 AM   #330
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,487
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Just about had my fill of this thread, the smell is getting unbearable.
It's sad that 70 years after the war we have ethically advanced so much and become so morally enlightened that we sometimes can't even tell the difference between FDR/Churchill and Hitler /hirohito.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 06:58 AM   #331
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
More efforts at nihilistic moral equivalence. First we couldn't expect the average person to be able to distinguish between the morality of Nazi and western allied war aims. Now we find that all the leaders are 'dicks'.
Again, if you think that it's nihilistic to say that people should stick to combatants, you have a pretty uphill battle. You know, considering that most of the world agreed after WW2 that that kinda crap should count as an atrocity.

I'll grant that it wasn't illegal at the time, but then most crimes weren't until someone went and did them in a spectacular way. I mean, there also was no hurry to regulate drugs until the 1937 sulfanilamide disaster, but that doesn't change the fact that most people still agreed that they'd rather not have that kind of crap happening ever again.

I think calling them dicks is actually pretty restrained, all things considered.

It's going to be hard to convince me that my morality is broken or nihilistic or whatever... BECAUSE it aligns to that of pretty much the whole civilized world at the moment. Seems to me like that just makes me normal.

If someone has a problem with my not being the kind of bloodthirsty extremist that sees massacring civilians as justified, well, I can live with that pretty easily actually.

And in any case, it's going to take some better arguments than the kind of nonsense brow-beating you've been doing so far. I mean, other people like Corsair, I might disagree with them, but they actually can make a coherent argument. You, on the other hand, no offense, but just doing that kinda flailing and browbeating ain't even coming close to making me question my ethics.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th April 2016 at 07:01 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 10:17 AM   #332
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Again, if you think that it's nihilistic to say that people should stick to combatants, you have a pretty uphill battle. You know, considering that most of the world agreed after WW2 that that kinda crap should count as an atrocity.

Yet again:

Who was it who worked in the armaments factories building the ships, tanks, artillery, rifles, bullets, bombs, torpedoes, submarines, and aircraft? The civilian. Who was it who worked in the steel mills producing the steel to make all those weapons? The civilian. Who was it who grew the food that fed the military? The civilian. Who was it who mined the coal which powered the railways and factories? The civilian. Who was it who ran the trains which moved the raw resources to the factories, and the end products from the factories to the military? The civilian. Who was it who worked in the chemical factories, electrical plants, oil refineries, electronics manufacturers, and the multitude of factories large and small which built the myriad of vital subcomponents without which military arms could not function? The civilian. From whose ranks were replacement soldiers, sailors, submariners, and airmen drawn? The civilian.

The civilian was absolutely indispensable to the war effort. No civilians, no economy; no economy, no military; no military, no war.

Given this reality, perhaps you, Hans, can address the above. So far Craig has steadfastly refused to do to.


Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Again, if you think that it's nihilistic to say that people should stick to combatants, you have a pretty uphill battle.

The combatant is a civilian in military clothing.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 10:22 AM   #333
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 15,143
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
So it was, my good man. Indeed, so it was.

But my point is that the guy in the trenches at the time didn't know that. The Waffen SS guy who took it out on the French villagers ALSO thought he's fighting a war for the very survival of not just his country, but verily of the whole western civilization, and that if Germany failed, it would mean slavery for everyone for ever.

That is my problem with postulating that such situations excuse comitting atrocities. Because that's how and why the Nazi atrocities happened too. Because those guys too were told they were in such a super-just war, and that the end is so super-important that any means are super-justified.

Sure, they were told a lie, but the vast majority didn't know it was a lie.

Off topic slightly, but it does have a serious point in this context:
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 01:28 PM   #334
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 20,853
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Just about had my fill of this thread, the smell is getting unbearable.
That's a pity, because I have appreciated your contributions; but I know you've been suffering in this way.
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
... It makes me puke ...
So it's reasonable that you should cease to contribute to a discourse which is unpleasant to you.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 01:33 PM   #335
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 20,853
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
It's sad that 70 years after the war we have ethically advanced so much and become so morally enlightened that we sometimes can't even tell the difference between FDR/Churchill and Hitler /hirohito.
Which "morally enlightened" people in the thread do you have in mind?
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 01:42 PM   #336
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,017
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
It's sad that 70 years after the war we have ethically advanced so much and become so morally enlightened that we sometimes can't even tell the difference between FDR/Churchill and Hitler /hirohito.
Sad that you can't however I don't think I've ever met anyone else who couldn't.

What I do find "sad" in the sense of regrettable is that the views on Churchill and other war leaders today are formed from the propaganda of WWII; propaganda that at the time was seen for what it was by the majority of people.

Churchill was at times the leader the country needed but he was also a deeply flawed man and leader and I see no reason why his decisions and opinions should not be open to criticism and reevaluation.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 02:05 PM   #337
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 15,143
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Sad that you can't however I don't think I've ever met anyone else who couldn't.

What I do find "sad" in the sense of regrettable is that the views on Churchill and other war leaders today are formed from the propaganda of WWII; propaganda that at the time was seen for what it was by the majority of people.

Churchill was at times the leader the country needed but he was also a deeply flawed man and leader and I see no reason why his decisions and opinions should not be open to criticism and reevaluation.
I agree with this, and there were plenty of bad decisions or ones of dubious ethics that he proposed.

However, I don't think that supporting area bombing fits that, given the information available at the time.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 02:08 PM   #338
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,487
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Sad that you can't however I don't think I've ever met anyone else who couldn't.
Not sure if you can't read sarcasm, or if you just failed at making a riposte...

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
What I do find "sad" in the sense of regrettable is that the views on Churchill and other war leaders today are formed from the propaganda of WWII; propaganda that at the time was seen for what it was by the majority of people.
Hmmm, you may be projecting here. Certainly Brits and Americans at the time were aware that their side practised propaganda. But they were also aware that it wasn't all propaganda. There were just war aims, and it was recognised as a total war which required some ruthless decisions.

Don't think that I see Churchill through rose coloured glasses... but I do object to simplistic: "they're both dicks" characterizations of Churchill and Hitler.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 02:40 PM   #339
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 20,853
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Don't think that I see Churchill through rose coloured glasses... but I do object to simplistic: "they're both dicks" characterizations of Churchill and Hitler.
That's not in the least fair. Here is what was in fact stated, which contains expressions I don't like, but which you are grossly misrepresenting. Not simply "both dicks", but
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
while Churchill and Harris weren't war criminals, they were, shall we say, dicks. And, granted, the Nazis and Soviets had a bunch of even bigger dicks.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 03:27 PM   #340
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,487
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
That's not in the least fair. Here is what was in fact stated, which contains expressions I don't like, but which you are grossly misrepresenting. Not simply "both dicks", but
You aren't being in the least bit fair. And you left out this bit of his text, which is grossly misleading of you!

"The whole war was waged among such a bunch of complete dicks"

That's a complete dickish equivalence right there!
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 08:44 PM   #341
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Quoting from the 'Conclusions' section of Chapter III—The Supply and Use of Labor of the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey report on the European war:

Quote:
The physical destruction from strategic bombing was a major factor in keeping labor out of war production or the Wehrmacht. The destruction made it necessary to reconstruct or disperse plants, provide temporary housing, re-lay track, and in general to restore productive plant and workers' shelter to satisfactory condition ... Such construction operations grew in volume quite steadily throughout the period of strategic bombing, which was marked by special emergency construction programs, such as that of Geilenberg to make good the damage done to the oil industry. In the late summer of 1944, an estimated total of 500,000 to 800,000 persons were regularly employed by the construction industry in new construction and repair work caused by Allied bombing. An additional 250,000 to 400,000 persons were engaged in providing material and services necessary for this work. The total so engaged was between 750,000 and 1,200,000.

Another type of production made necessary by strategic bombing was that required to replace household goods lost in the raids ...

An additional number [of workers] were engaged in producing and using equipment designed to prevent bomb damage. About 250,000 to 300,000 workers were employed in the production of antiaircraft artillery and ammunition, and about 800,000 people were required to man the antiaircraft guns. Of the latter, 71 percent were service personnel and 29 percent were civilian personnel in November 1944 ...

A far larger number [of workers] were employed in producing and flying the fighters used to attack the Allied bombers. Total production on account of the air force absorbed over 50 percent of the resources devoted to war production, and by 1944 most of the aircraft produced were fighters ...

This section of the report also includes a table estimating the number of workers affected in some manner by strategic bombing; its figures are reproduced below.

Bomb damage:
Casualties: 0.25 million
Unproductive labor: 1.50-2.00 million
Construction workers: 0.75-1.20 million
Civilian goods production: 1.00-1.20 million

Air defense:
Ground: 0.80 million
Air: Indeterminate

Total: 4.30-5.45 million
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."

Last edited by Corsair 115; 14th April 2016 at 08:45 PM.
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2016, 11:04 PM   #342
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
You aren't being in the least bit fair. And you left out this bit of his text, which is grossly misleading of you!

"The whole war was waged among such a bunch of complete dicks"

That's a complete dickish equivalence right there!
Well, you left out the funny part about scalping them and calling it a bris, so there

But more seriously, I don't see the equivalce, since I already granted that the Nazis and Soviets were bigger dicks. Nobody said that all dicks were equal

I mean, dunno about others, but I get several email messages a day informing me that there not dicks are equal, and there are ways for one to be even bigger
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th April 2016 at 11:14 PM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 01:53 AM   #343
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,269
Still don't get how Churchills bombings can be bad when the two atomic bombs and strategic fire bombings of wooden buildings apparently arent
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 02:02 AM   #344
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Still don't get how Churchills bombings can be bad when the two atomic bombs and strategic fire bombings of wooden buildings apparently arent
If it helps, I consider the firebombing of Japan to be a dick move too.

The nukes are more complex, shall we say. Hiroshima was a valid strategic target, and in fact probably more of the destruction was due to blowing up the munitions factories than due to the nuke itself. I'm willing to accept colateral damage, even though it might have been a tad disproportionate. Nagasaki is a whole different story. It had almost no military or industrial importance, so I'm filing that one too under, you know, dick moves.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 02:09 AM   #345
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,269
Off topic but I saw quite an amazing episode of antiques roadshow where this bloke had a melted plate.

It was picked up from one of the drops.

The expert said it hadn't just been re-fired about 1000 degrees cels. It had literally been so hot it melted.

Pretty awesome in a sick way.

Irony being it was worth nothing really
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 02:12 AM   #346
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Hmmm, you may be projecting here. Certainly Brits and Americans at the time were aware that their side practised propaganda. But they were also aware that it wasn't all propaganda. There were just war aims, and it was recognised as a total war which required some ruthless decisions.
Treating is as a total war is ITSELF a war crime these days. It's not an excuse, it's an atrocity. Using it as an excuse it's like saying, 'your honour, I only killed that kid because I wanted to wipe out the whole family'. It doesn't really work as a defense.

But the deeper problem is that you seem to have this silly idea that most people somehow just know whether their side is good or evil, just or unjust... and yet somehow keep fighting for evil and injustice anyway. Which is absurd. And not only that they know all that, but basically that they even know the same stuff you know now, never mind that even the high command didn't have such complete info at the time.

And, sorry, but Piaget says you should have grown up and out of that egocentrist world model at around the age of 4 (FOUR.)

But more importantly, that kind of thinking where the others surely know that they're in the wrong or evil camp, is as close to a universal root of all evil as you'll find in human history. The road to the ghettos, pogroms and gas chambers also started when a bunch of early Xians rationalized that surely the Jews know they're theologically wrong, but decided to spite god anyway.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 03:41 AM   #347
Nessie
Philosopher
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,443
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
No. Here is the aim, clearly stated by Sir Arthur Harris, who was in charge of the bombing campaign. I have cited it before, but you haven't seen it. Here it is again.
the aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive...should be unambiguously stated [as] the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilised life throughout Germany.

... the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories.
My bold.
I do not understand why you said "No" when I am agreeing with you and said "Destroying factories and killing those who worked there was the aim."
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 03:45 AM   #348
Nessie
Philosopher
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,443
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Presenting it to the population as defensive was nothing new, though. The attack on Poland was also presented as Poland having attacked Germany, and then, as far as the Germans were told, France and the UK had joined in the aggression.
Indeed, according to revisionists everything the Nazis did was defensive. The invasion of the Netherlands was to defend against UK attack. The attack on the Soviet union was supposedly defensive because the Soviets had plans to attack the Nazis etc etc.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 04:16 AM   #349
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,982
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Indeed, according to revisionists everything the Nazis did was defensive. The invasion of the Netherlands was to defend against UK attack. The attack on the Soviet union was supposedly defensive because the Soviets had plans to attack the Nazis etc etc.
Well, my point wasn't about what revisionists think, since, frankly, anyone STILL believing that is either dishonest or stupid. My point was what the soldiers and population were told at the time.

Which, indeed is just what you wrote above. The attack on the USSR was indeed presented as a preemptive strike. Nobody told the population stuff like, "we just want to starve a couple million Ukrainians, so we can take their farmland."

It's even older than that, though. Rome for example built a huge empire while claiming all the time to only defend itself and its allies.

So, yeah, basically that's my problem with the idea that atrocities are allowed if your cause is righteous. Everyone who was ever sent to war was told that their cause is righteous.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 04:39 AM   #350
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,487
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Treating is as a total war is ITSELF a war crime these days.
That's because we have the luxury to do so. The west, facing asymmetric threats or minor powers, currently has the power and technology to fight a (relatively) clean war. Back in the 1940's, facing enemy powers on a similar level of power, fighting anything less than a total war would have been seen as a good way to lose the war.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 05:11 AM   #351
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,438
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
That's because we have the luxury to do so. The west, facing asymmetric threats or minor powers, currently has the power and technology to fight a (relatively) clean war. Back in the 1940's, facing enemy powers on a similar level of power, fighting anything less than a total war would have been seen as a good way to lose the war.
Exactly, the entire economy, resources, industry and population of the UK became one giant armaments factory and military force. Even then it was barely enough even with huge aid from the Empire, Commonwealth and USA.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 11:48 AM   #352
bignickel
Mad Mod Poet God
 
bignickel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,097
Hans, just trying to nail down what you specifically consider as atrocities:
1. Bombing of munitions factories
2. Bombing of munitions factories which contain workers.
3. Bombing of munitions factories which contain citizens who work, the houses that house them, the farms that feed them, etc.
4. Bombing of any citizens, no matter what they do.
__________________
"You can find that book everywhere and the risk is that many people who read it believe that those fairy tales are real. I think I have the responsibility to clear things up to unmask the cheap lies contained in books like that."
- Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone
bignickel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 11:53 AM   #353
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Nagasaki is a whole different story. It had almost no military or industrial importance, so I'm filing that one too under, you know, dick moves.

Nagasaki was the secondary target. The primary target for the second atomic bomb was Kokura, but cloud and smoke prevented the bomb from being dropped there (the crews were under strict orders to bomb visually on the aiming point).

Also, Nagasaki did have military and industrial importance. From Wikipedia:

Quote:
The city of Nagasaki had been one of the largest seaports in southern Japan, and was of great wartime importance because of its wide-ranging industrial activity, including the production of ordnance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials. The four largest companies in the city were Mitsubishi Shipyards, Electrical Shipyards, Arms Plant, and Steel and Arms Works, which employed about 90% of the city's labor force, and accounted for 90% of the city's industry.[171] Although an important industrial city, Nagasaki had been spared from firebombing because its geography made it difficult to locate at night with AN/APQ-13 radar.[112]

With all due respect to Hans and Craig, I am forced to conclude they know relatively little about the topic of strategic bombing during WWII. The error Hans made above being one of the reasons for my conclusion.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."

Last edited by Corsair 115; 15th April 2016 at 11:59 AM.
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 12:06 PM   #354
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 20,853
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
With all due respect to Hans and Craig, I am forced to conclude they know relatively little about the topic of strategic bombing during WWII. The error Hans made above being one of the reasons for my conclusion.
I can't answer for Hans, but I'm not intimidated in any way by that. Keep making the arguments and adducing the facts you think will sustain your case, and I will do likewise without impugning your capacity to do so.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 12:21 PM   #355
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
I can't answer for Hans, but I'm not intimidated in any way by that. Keep making the arguments and adducing the facts you think will sustain your case, and I will do likewise without impugning your capacity to do so.

I have provided evidence in the form of data and citations which support the claim that strategic bombing had a significant direct and indirect effect on the German economy. See post #341, for example. Thus far your counterarguments have provided little beyond emotionally-based protestations.

Given what you have said on the subject, it seems to me you have done relatively little reading on it. There's nothing wrong with that per se. But it does call into question the validity of your assessments if you have only a light knowledge of the subject. It would be like asking me about the latest in cosmology—I don't know nearly enough to render a meaningful analysis.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 12:29 PM   #356
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 20,853
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
I have provided evidence in the form of data and citations which support the claim that strategic bombing had a significant direct and indirect effect on the German economy. See post #341, for example. Thus far your counterarguments have provided little beyond emotionally-based protestations.

Given what you have said on the subject, it seems to me you have done relatively little reading on it. There's nothing wrong with that per se. But it does call into question the validity of your assessments if you have only a light knowledge of the subject. It would be like asking me about the latest in cosmology—I don't know nearly enough to render a meaningful analysis.
I don't accept that at all, so just don't worry about it. Carry on making your points, if you wish to, and so will I.

ETA If you're not sure where best to start, our discussion in #202, for example, has not been concluded, if I remember aright.

Last edited by Craig B; 15th April 2016 at 12:34 PM.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 02:24 PM   #357
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
I don't accept that at all, so just don't worry about it. Carry on making your points, if you wish to, and so will I.

I'm not sure there is much point in continuing a dialogue with someone who appears to have relatively little knowledge of the subject at hand yet nevertheless seems quite willing to offer firm opinions as if they are indisputable, while citing no evidence to support them and failing to acknowledge the evidence to the contrary.

Notwithstanding the above, there are also general points you have refused to discuss. Such as this one:

Who was it who worked in the armaments factories building the ships, tanks, artillery, rifles, bullets, bombs, torpedoes, submarines, and aircraft? The civilian. Who was it who worked in the steel mills producing the steel to make all those weapons? The civilian. Who was it who grew the food that fed the military? The civilian. Who was it who mined the coal which powered the railways and factories? The civilian. Who was it who ran the trains which moved the raw resources to the factories, and the end products from the factories to the military? The civilian. Who was it who worked in the chemical factories, electrical plants, oil refineries, electronics manufacturers, and the multitude of factories large and small which built the myriad of vital subcomponents without which military arms could not function? The civilian. From whose ranks were replacement soldiers, sailors, submariners, and airmen drawn? The civilian.

The civilian was absolutely indispensable to the war effort. No civilians, no economy; no economy, no military; no military, no war.

So, again, I question the usefulness of continuing.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2016, 04:26 PM   #358
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
If it helps, I consider the firebombing of Japan to be a dick move too.

Returning to this subject for a moment, it turns out those area raids had a measurable impact on the Japanese economy, much as the area raids over Germany had.

Quoting from the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey report on the Pacific war; specifically, Volume 55 - The Effects of Air Attack on Japanese Urban Economy Summary Report:

Quote:
The Morale Division's survey further indicated that of all the gainfully employed people who evacuated their homes, 37 percent had been engaged in war industry. Only 26 percent of the workers among the urban non-evacuees were in war production. Of the war workers who evacuated the cities, only 4 percent left because their factories were moved; the rest either abandoned their jobs or left because of the destruction of their plants. The latter group seldom sought or heeded official pleas for redeployment. The evacuations resulted in a substantial loss of workers and a sharp increase in absenteeism among those who continued to work....

In the six largest cities, the area attacks destroyed or seriously damaged from 25 to 40 percent of the storage and manufacturing floor space. In the 60 smaller cities, an average of 20 percent of such floor space was destroyed or damaged...

In Tokyo, by August 1945, the total number of plants in operation had been reduced to 13,193 or 32 percent of the October 1944 figure. In all, over 25,000 plants were destroyed or badly damaged. Most of these were plants employing under 100 workers. In 1940, such plants accounted for 52 percent of the total industrial output of the city and, in 1942, for 53 percent. In the same years, the labor force amounted to 65 percent and 58 percent , respectively, of the city's total and in October 1944, to 60 percent. Although production figures for October 1944 are not available, it is a reasonable assumption that this production would have represented between 50 percent and 55 percent of the total city output. In this same category, 28,256 of a total of 40,641 plants had ceased operations by July 1945, and the number of workers in this group had dropped from 662,561 to 178,986, a loss of 73 percent. Bomb damage resulted in a production loss of approximately 75 percent in this category; and as the category itself accounted for about half the production of the entire city, the decline actually represented an industrial loss of approximately 40 percent of the whole city. This loss, which resulted primarily from the destruction of a widespread network of component suppliers, bore heavily upon the city's overall production.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 01:05 AM   #359
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 20,853
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
I'm not sure there is much point in continuing a dialogue with someone who appears to have relatively little knowledge of the subject at hand yet nevertheless seems quite willing to offer firm opinions as if they are indisputable, while citing no evidence to support them and failing to acknowledge the evidence to the contrary.

Notwithstanding the above, there are also general points you have refused to discuss. Such as this one:

Who was it who worked in the armaments factories building the ships, tanks, artillery, rifles, bullets, bombs, torpedoes, submarines, and aircraft? The civilian. Who was it who worked in the steel mills producing the steel to make all those weapons? The civilian. Who was it who grew the food that fed the military? The civilian. Who was it who mined the coal which powered the railways and factories? The civilian. Who was it who ran the trains which moved the raw resources to the factories, and the end products from the factories to the military? The civilian. Who was it who worked in the chemical factories, electrical plants, oil refineries, electronics manufacturers, and the multitude of factories large and small which built the myriad of vital subcomponents without which military arms could not function? The civilian. From whose ranks were replacement soldiers, sailors, submariners, and airmen drawn? The civilian.

The civilian was absolutely indispensable to the war effort. No civilians, no economy; no economy, no military; no military, no war.

So, again, I question the usefulness of continuing.
Nobody can argue against the point that if there were no civilians there would be no war. It is a manifest truth. I have nothing to urge against it except what you correctly describe as "emotionally-based protestations", which are of no interest to you.

And I also say genocide is best left to the SS.

If you have nothing further to add, then of course you should terminate your contributions. There are points we haven't yet addressed, which I think are within our intellectual capacity to discuss; but no matter.

Last edited by Craig B; 16th April 2016 at 02:00 AM. Reason: Insert omitted passage.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 10:25 AM   #360
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Nobody can argue against the point that if there were no civilians there would be no war. It is a manifest truth. I have nothing to urge against it except what you correctly describe as "emotionally-based protestations", which are of no interest to you.

And I also say genocide is best left to the SS.

And you STILL cannot argue rationally or with evidence. This is a skeptic's forum; evidence and reason are the key focus. When you bring either of these to your arguments I'll listen. To date, however, you have not.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:26 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.