Truman vs Bush

[MaggieD]

Truman dropped atomic bombs on two Japanese cities intentionally killing over 100,000 civilians.

Bush authorized the waterboarding of three AQ terrorists.

Let's pretend Truman's alive. How do you vote in the above poll?

What??? I didn't get a poll option. Helllppppp!!!!!!!!

Can a mod help me?

How do you vote:

Truman and Bush should both be imprisoned for war crimes.
Bush should be imprisoned for war crimes.
Truman should be imprisoned for war crimes.
Neither should be imprisoned for war crimes.

 

[Wiseone]

Whats the question? Truman vs. Bush sounds more like a bad boxing match.

 

[Jetboogieman]

A fair question.

Except for the circumstances of world war two, where casualties in some battles were the amount of the entire war on terror, or the attacks of 9/11.

America had to defend itself during the second world war.

The real question should be, did the Bush administration lie about Iraq?

If the answer is yes, they are guilty of war crimes.

War is bloody business, I don't blame a veteran for a second, just doing their jobs, but if a lie was told to go into Iraq, THAT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

Torturing... meh. That's a long shot, ain't gonna get prosecuted anymore then Japanese internment camps under FDR.

 

[Guy Incognito]

The real question should be, did the Bush administration lie about Iraq?

If the answer is yes, they are guilty of war crimes.

War is bloody business, I don't blame a veteran for a second, just doing their jobs, but if a lie was told to go into Iraq, THAT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

Torturing... meh. That's a long shot, ain't gonna get prosecuted anymore then Japanese internment camps under FDR.

I don't get this. First of all, how can anybody be so blase about torture? Not to mention the abuse of civil rights that accompanied it?

Second of all, lying isn't a war crime last I checked. But torture sure is.

 

[Jetboogieman]

I don't get this. First of all, how can anybody be so blase about torture? Not to mention the abuse of civil rights that accompanied it?

Second of all, lying isn't a war crime last I checked. But torture sure is.

Lying that causes the deaths of 100's of thousands of Iraqi Civilians, almost 5000 American soldiers, and alot of my own countrymen of Britain.

That's a crime.

Dude, I don't condone torture, if it's happened, Bush will be held accountable if the god that conservatives proclaim to exist, exists. As much as the Terrorists will be punished as well.

My point was, you can't prosecute him. So forget about it.

Every President has torture and blood on his hands. EVERY SINGLE ONE.

As every president and leader in the world has.

 

[SheWolf]

I have heard people debate about the atomic bomb and weather it constitutes as a war crime. I am not too informed on the issue or cared enough to inform myself.. However it seems that the people who think the atomic bombing of Japan constitutes as war crime, argue that the war could have been won without bombing them. They use a bunch of facts to support their claim of course, which are not stored in the memory bank

On the other hand, I think the fire bombing of Dresden could possibly be easier to qualify as a war crime..

If Germany and Japan won the war, America would have been on trial for that one.. :shocked2:

 

[Guy Incognito]

Lying that causes the deaths of 100's of thousands of Iraqi Civilians, almost 5000 American soldiers, and alot of my own countrymen of Britain.

That's a crime.

Maybe, but it's not a war crime.

Dude, I don't condone torture, if it's happened, Bush will be held accountable if the god that conservatives proclaim to exist, exists. As much as the Terrorists will be punished as well.

My point was, you can't prosecute him. So forget about it.

Every President has torture and blood on his hands. EVERY SINGLE ONE.

As every president and leader in the world has.

I wasn't trying to imply you condone torture. But Bush was held accountable for his lies about the war in Iraq. It was the election of 2004, and the American people acquitted him. There was plenty of deception leading up to that war, sure, but if deception was a crime the whole government would be in jail. Like it or not, the Iraq war was lawful.

Torture is different. We prosecute war criminals from the former Yugoslavia so often that we have a special international court dedicated to it. I refuse to accept that justice is defined by who is the most powerful. Bush is in fact a war criminal, by his own admission committed the crime of torture.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Truman KO 8.

 

[SheWolf]

On 7 December 1963, in Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the subject of a Japanese judicial review.[3] On the 22nd anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of nuclear weapons in general, but found that "the attacks upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of war".[4] In the opinion of the court, the act of dropping an atomic bomb on cities was at the time governed by international law found in Hague Convention of 1907 IV - The Laws and Customs of War on Land,[5] and IX - Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War,[6] and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923,[7] and was therefore illegal.[8][9]

Ryuichi Shimoda v. The State - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I read the statements in the trial and it sounds like it was found to be a war crime under numerous international laws. However, because of a peace treaty between America and Japan the plaintiffs could not sue for damages or try anybody involved with the bombing for war crimes. Article 19 (a) of the Treaty of Peace with Japan. So that amount of bombing and damage is considered a war crime, and will be in future cases.

I didn't read much into other areas of the bombing, but I do question the President's judgment to bomb Nagasaki so soon without warning civilians. If he really knew the damage and suffering in Hiroshima, then his decision seems careless and cruel from my POV today, knowing what I know. I admit I didn't read into everything or the rational however, so that is at face value.

 

[Jucon]

I have heard people debate about the atomic bomb and weather it constitutes as a war crime. I am not too informed on the issue or cared enough to inform myself.. However it seems that the people who think the atomic bombing of Japan constitutes as war crime, argue that the war could have been won without bombing them. They use a bunch of facts to support their claim of course, which are not stored in the memory bank

On the other hand, I think the fire bombing of Dresden could possibly be easier to qualify as a war crime..

If Germany and Japan won the war, America would have been on trial for that one.. :shocked2:

This is pretty much how I feel, and just because we won the war should not mean the actions (firebombings and atomic bombings) were not war crimes. I'm happy the war ended, but it was a cowardly move to intentionally target civilians.