Soviet Attack Hastened End of World War II

[H]

Wasn't there some documentary awhile back about Allied Pacific atrocities?
There's two sides to every page...

The "condoned" equivelent is not comparable. Revenge is not a scarcity but there are 'criminal' elements in all societies that will use the "they did it first" excuse against the innocent (civilians, etc.).

[Minotaur]

The "condoned" equivelent is not comparable. Revenge is not a scarcity but there are 'criminal' elements in all societies that will use the "they did it first" excuse against the innocent (civilians, etc.).

Well said and I agree with you on that point. During WWII even the allied normal carpet bombing was indiscriminate and they purposely targeted civilian targets for the terror effect. Look at the fire bombing of Dresden and Tokyo. The unfortunate fact of war is it's not only hell for the combatants, but also for the non-combatants. The mind set of war is, "You attack me, I attack you". But even in war there are certain things you shouldn't do like attack hospitals, kill POW's and injured soldiers. Hence the Geneva Convention rules of warfare that dictate these rules. Germany, Japan and Russia openly ignored the Geneva Convention. The allies tried to adhere to them, but there are always going to be those that get frustrated or angry and use what ever force is necessary to get information that is vital to saving their countrymen.

[Hagar]

rules of warfare

I always found it puzzling that you can have 'rules of war'. This is total war on a grand scale & most aggressors will not abide by any rules. Apart from things like treatment of prisoners this puts those that do adhere to them at an immediate disadvantage.

[Scorpiоn]

The "condoned" equivelent is not comparable. Revenge is not a scarcity but there are 'criminal' elements in all societies that will use the "they did it first" excuse against the innocent (civilians, etc.).

I say it more in the sense that we (The Allies (That being America and West Europe)) shouldn't mount ourselves too high on our horse, as we're not so pure as we like to make ourselves out to be.

Definitely not justifying Japanese crimes.

[Minotaur]

I always found it puzzling that you can have 'rules of war'. This is total war on a grand scale & most aggressors will not abide by any rules. Apart from things like treatment of prisoners this puts those that do adhere to them at an immediate disadvantage.

You are definitely correct on that point. Germans and especially the Japanese saw the Geneva Conventions as useless and a sign of weakness. They figured, if your going to fight a war, fight a war. If you are to win a war, you must become war.

The Japanese didn't believe in surrender and even after the 2 A-bombs were dropped. There were radical eliminates in the Japanese military that refused to even consider surrender. These people tried to prevent the Emperor from recording his capitulation on the 2 discs that were to be broadcast. They tried to overthrow the Emperor and his government in order to continue the war and to avoid the shame of surrender. Luckily for the Japanese and the Allies, they failed. If it hadn't failed, I can't imagine the chaos and the amount of lives that it would have cost on both sides to invade Japan.

[ATI_7500]

Germans and especially the Japanese saw the Geneva Conventions as useless and a sign of weakness. They figured, if your going to fight a war, fight a war. If you are to win a war, you must become war.

If the Germans really ignored any "standards" of warfare, there would have been no surviving allied PoWs. Plus, people like Douglas Bader would have been killed instantly , rather than being invited for dinner with Galland.

[ozzy72]

The Gestapo and the SS ignored the standards expected, the other German services tended to respect their prisoners (of course every camp had the odd loon for a goon). A good example of this was the camp commandant at Stalag Luft III when he had to tell the British prisoners that 50 of their colleagues had been murdered by the Gestapo following the Great Escape. Apparently he was nearly as rough as the British over this news. An honourable man....

[ATI_7500]

The SS and Gestapo were the zits of the german miltary. Formidable fighters, but as whacked in the head as their commanders.

[ozzy72]

I'd never thought of them as acne before

[H]

Heretic: The SS and Gestapo were the zits of the german miltary. Formidable fighters, but as whacked in the head as their commanders.
ozzy72: I'd never thought of them as acne before

Ozzy, I rather question whether you've never thought of them as festering pimples, howbeit, perhaps, not in such a polite term . As to the SS and Gestgapo being "formidable 'whacked in the head' fighters": rather reminiscent of their ancestral cousins' "berserkers"? Rage and insanity both add a certain numbness to the effects of battle.

[dcunning30]

According to Mitsuo Fuchida, the Soviet attack was a doublecross.

[dcunning30]

ozzy72


I agree.  Especially how the Luftwaffe were honor-bound and treated their fellow airmen prisoners with respect.

[dcunning30]

Wasn't there some documentary awhile back about Allied Pacific atrocities?

There's two sides to every page...

I never heard of such a documentary.  However, the marines on Guadalcanal learned the hard way that the Japanese soldier could not be counted upon to surrender when defeated, or treat their prisoners decently when captured, even if they allowed their prisoners to live.  So, when fighting  the Japanese soldiers, the marines gave no quarter, nor asked for any.  It was how both sides treated each other.  The marines also quickly learned that many Japanese soldiers, when severely wounded would wait for a marine approach himself, then detonate a gernade, taking himself out as well as his would-be rescuer.  So the marines just shot the wounded enemy rather than risk their own demise.  However, when it was safe, the marines did take prisoners, but Japanese prisoners were very rare.

Now, if anyone construes this as atrocities, then they are revising history.