Null



Bigbens42

Verified Member
  • Content count

    10,931
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Bigbens42 last won the day on February 5

Bigbens42 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,232 Sterling

About Bigbens42

  • Rank
    Bobbin Along
  • Birthday 09/24/1985

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    jbens241
  • Yahoo
    bigbens42

Profile Information

  • Location
    It's 9:30. There's fish everywhere ... fish everywhere?
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,436 profile views
  1. I should note that Homer is better read on this topic than me. Give me 35 years to catch up to him.
  2. Yeah it's pretty refreshing after Jeff.
  3. Oh, and we weren't the only ones to round folks up. http://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/blog/collar-lot-britains-policy-internment-second-world-war/
  4. You are just a peach. Are you aware Churchill used the war as cover to institute an Imperial policy in India to clamp down on resistance to the Raj? For getting so much admiration these days, instituting a policy that killed around 2,000,000 sure didn't dent him.
  5. Starting points! There are a lot. For a general overview, The Second World War by John Keegan and is a good starting point and The Third Reich at War by Richard J. Evans For the Western theater, The Second World War in the West by Charles Messenger For the Pacific theater, Sea of Thunder - Four Commanders and the Last Great Naval Campaign 1941-1945 by Evan Thomas (this was a rec from Homer a few years back, and it's a great read.), The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors by James D. Hornfischer, War without Mercy by John Dower and The Pacific War by Saburo Ienaga for a Japanese perspective.
  6. Um, Bomber Harris was basically the British version of LeMay. RAF crews knew him as "Butcher" Harris. Britain (and we participated!) killed 10s of thousands of civilians in the course of firebombing Dresden and Hamburg. The Brits even refer to Hamburg as the Hiroshima of Germany . Face it. They committed war crimes. There generally are no innocents in a total war.
  7. All of the major powers committed war crimes. Only one of us had the moral high ground unless they are equivalent. Out with it or walk it back.
  8. One of the crucial things that we need to remember is to place events and opinions in the context of their time. While World War II may have only been very recent, the context of total war, a total war so incredibly destructive, really removes the ability to approach the events of the war with any current social context. Were the Allied bombings of Germany and Japan atrocities? Yes, undoubtedly so. Would they fit the definition of war crimes today, or even at the time? Yes, undoubtedly so. Did they inflict a massive amount of pain and suffering, primarily on civilians (including complete innocents, like imported foreign laborers, young children)? Yes, undoubtedly so. But if you accept that the Holocaust, the prospect of a Third Reich covering Europe or Japan exterminating their neighbors was a greater evil (and there can be no doubt that it was), then you enter a sort of moral twilight zone. Every bomb you don't drop makes them stronger. Every city you don't flatten improves their military strength. Every laborer or farmer you don't kill results in tangible amounts of deaths for Allied soldiers and civilians These bombings are completely indefensible outside of the context of World War II, as are most acts of war. Within the context of total war, especially one against three regimes that are responsible for the brutal murders of millions of innocents with little to no provocation, acts like the bombing of Dresden, Hamburg, Rome, Tokyo, Hiroshima or Nagasaki start to make a perverse kind of sense, and are in fact, entirely logical. That's a testament to how ****** up the war was. In total war, there are really no easy moral choices.
  9. You're welcome for the context. I asked you, who had the moral high ground among the major powers?
  10. I did. It makes no sense.
  11. Let's consider this in the context of another large battle from the war: When the German Group North began the siege at Leningrad, they thought that it would be a cakewalk. Hitler already had the invitations to the victory celebrations printed. There was a plan "Both German and Finnish forces had the goal of encircling Leningrad and maintaining the blockade perimeter, thus cutting off all communication with the city and preventing the defenders from receiving any food or supplies. The Germans planned on food being their chief weapon against the citizens; German scientists had calculated that the city would reach starvation after only a small number of weeks." The siege lasted 872 days. The Russians suffered. They died, they ate everything down to the rats and probably including their own dead. They hung on and eventually won. Nothing that I have ever read would suggest that the Japanese were less tough than the Russians. They would have hung on. They would have died by the millions but they would have hung on.
  12. That makes no sense. If they are not equivalent, either we have the high ground, or they do.
  13. Among the major powers involved, who? Bomber Harris poured the wrath of the British out upon the population of Dresden in righteous indignation. The USSR's behavior in eastern Europe would be enough to make Hitler blush. Japan, Italy, Germany? All launched undeclared wars against their unoffending neighbors and indulged in ethnic cleansing. It was a brutal, ugly total war on all sides.
  14. LOL. They were more than willing to die for their God, and three months isn't so long. Did the concept of Gyokusai not sink in? They drilled it into their populace. They prepared for a massive defense of their homeland, and we knew what was up because of the MAGIC intercepts.