Should the nuclear bombing of japan in WW2 be considered a war crime?

@MarmeeMarch

Inexcusable.
And what point did you feel you were making?

@Pikachu The point is it is day 2 and the question to the group is - How do you think the families adjusted - right before Christmas.

@MarmeeMarch

I don't see how that relates to the subject of this thread.
It appears that in in lieu of an answer you've chosen a distraction.
Sorry, i'm rather too clever to allow such clumsy misdirection.😉

@Pikachu Whatever - I am contrasting the unprovoked attack that the Japanese did to our planned attacked - in which the citizens were warned to evac the city. So -- no war crime committed by the USA

@MarmeeMarch

Oh! So your thesis is that fair warning means that it is NOT a crime to murder tens of THOUSANDS of civilians.

Ok, make your case.
Go on, we're all waiting....

@Pikachu No citizens in the city = no civilian deaths in the city. Case closed -

@MarmeeMarch

Sorry, i don't understand. Can you explain that statement?

@Pikachu I dont think I can dumb it down any further - what part of a citizen empty city dont you you get ?

@MarmeeMarch

I don't need you to simplify. Rather the opposite, I need you to elaborate.
I don't get what you mean by "citizen empty city".
Please explain.

@Pikachu Gee - I guess it would mean that there are no citizens in the city that would be killed. So your war crime BS is just that BS.

@MarmeeMarch

I was a wondering if that's where you were going but i didn't want to insult you by assuming.

So...are you saying that in fact there were no japanese people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki who were killed by the bombs and no japanese people who later died as a result of the radiation?

@Pikachu UAAAAA - nooooooo - I am saying that it was a matter of choice whether to stay after receiving a warning by the USA or leave - and of course people did not leave and many died afterward. I knew a guy that was only a kid, that had red blotches on his face from the rad.

@MarmeeMarch

ok...so then it's time for you to make your argument for why telling people you're going to murder them makes it ok to then go ahead and murder them.
Make the case that telling the japanese that they would be bomb makes it less of a war crime to burn women and children.

Let's heat it! Or are you just going to repeat yourself yet again?

@Pikachu I dont know what you want to hear - if we went in by ground or using conventional bombs and targeted women and children then yes it is a war crime. But when you drop the BIG A- you can not selectively pick and choose your targets. And the leaflets were a good enough warning - some might have left and lives might have been saved too - ever think of that ? But some ignored it and paid the price. What are we supposed to do - go in and remove the women and children one by one and airlift them someplace.

@MarmeeMarch

[quote] I dont know what you want to hear[quote][/quote][/quote]

I want to hear you make a case for why it's ok to murder women and children if you first tell them you're going to murder them.

Like what argument do you think you're making here?
"Well obviously nuking a city is going to end in children burning to death in their beds, so it's not a war crime.".
lol what are you even saying here?
Just stop making excuses and explain clearly why you believe that giving warning for murder makes murder ok. Explain clearly why turning thousands of people into irradiated glass is not a war crime because it's impractical to expect a nuke to do otherwise.

I'm really curious to see you do this. Give it your best shot.

@Pikachu Casualties of war - not ok but a necessary evil. -- Closing my briefcase. ----click -----

@MarmeeMarch

So no argument.
Just a declaration that it was necessary.
If that's how you feel then that's how you feel but you'll admit that you've failed [i]spectacularly[/i] to defend your position.

Didn't expect much more from you, if i'm being honest.😏
Ok, run along then...

@Pikachu I think you are confused here you are basically thinking on 2 planes --1) murder of innocents and 2) fair warning and the fact that they did not leave. And if you crack open your little ole revisionist history book you will note that that Japan surrendered with their tails between their legs because they did not want any more of what we had. -- Wise choice - and it was a shame that Japan started the war and forced us into a position to use such a drastic weapon. Japan burned their own children and women - some of whom were pregnant - they charred their own cities -- Why did they not surrender after bomb #1 was dropped ?? No Japan wanted to test us and to see how far we would go.

@MarmeeMarch

Sorry, can you name which japanese general forced the american pilots to press the launch button?
No? Oh, so then actually no one was [i]forced[/i] to do anything.
Actually it was the americans that decided it was prudent to burn pregnant women and children in their homes.

And you have no defense except "well we told them we were going to murder them".

lol thanks for playing kiddo. I think it's plain to see that you're out of your depth.

You are excused😁👍

@Pikachu No - if you rewind the tape a bit you will notice that my Pearl Harbor reply is very applicable here because it tells the world that although crimes were committed - Japan started the fight - do you fight back if someone attacks YOU ? - I thought so.

@MarmeeMarch

[quote]do you fight back if someone attacks YOU ? - I thought so.[/quote]

If buddy starts a fight, do you go burn his house down with his mother and sisters in it?

Nah, thought not.

Get out, you're done😉

@Pikachu good point - if he starts a fight beats you - then goes after your family then goes after your friends - then you warn MOM and SIS to get out because the house will be burnt.

@MarmeeMarch

kid...you're done.
Bow out gracefully

@Pikachu I cant compete with you - you are too much for me (eyes rolling)