Quote:
Originally Posted by loTEK911
Is this right? morally, yes. Of course. But 60+ years later? This is politics? And it begs the question, where in history does morality and politics fit? Politics is an easy one. History is written by th victor. everybody knows that. So how do we sit back an accept th bull shit morality that is fed to us. This is going to be a stretch , so bare with me.
|
Morality being only an excuse to justify things based on emotions such as religious beliefs.
Rightly noted are similarities between the bombing of London, Dresden, Tokyo, Guernica, and N Vietnam. In each case, bombing had no military significance; only attacked civilian population. Well, in WWII, that concept was not fully understood. So explain the bombing of Hanoi?
You have assumed the victor rewrites history. Did you read a Japanese history book? What does it say about Pearl Harbor? Whereas Germans were confronted by the Holocaust, Japanese still remain rather defiant of their history. Why is the USS Arizona so often visited by Japanese. Some regard that as a great victory.
That lawsuit is simply a demand that Japanese acknowledge facts that remain mostly denied by the Japanese public - such as the rape of Nanking.
For that matter, some Americans still remain defiantly ignorant about America's unjustified attacks on Vietnam or why America created the situation that would break down into the 'killing fields'. Do you still deny those realities of Nam? If America was defeated in Nam, then why do so many Americans remain in denial as to why that defeat was obviously pre-ordained?
One can argue merits of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However those bombings were performed for a strategic purpose. Maybe the target selection was - as you put it - immoral. But the bombing itself had a strategic purpose; meets a definition of 'purpose of war'.
But again, morality has nothing to do with it. One can say "Mission Accomplished" is immoral. But that completely ignores facts as to why "Mission Accomplished" exists and why America cannot win that war. Morality has nothing to do with it.
Start by asking, "What is the purpose of war?" To obtain an answer, that is why we teach history: hoping to drive 'political agendas' out of how historical facts are presented. In America's history, those who advocate war where war was not justified typically cannot even answer this question - "What is the purpose of war?"
Somehow their 'morality' justifies that war - facts be damned. This paragraph specifically cites "Misson Accomplished" as the perfect example.