Real0ne -> RE: A Moment of Silence in Memory of The Holocaust (2/13/2017 10:22:17 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Real0ne Dresden is a matter of record, we have plenty of video footage starements and news clips for the war crimes committed by britains churchill and eisenhower. While dresden is a matter of record the record is quite clear that it was "bomber harris" and not churchill or eisenhower that was responsible. Then there was the amerikan general who promised an ss commander that if he surrendereed and caused no further harm to the inmates of the concentration camp he would not let the russians take them as prisoners. After the germans had complied the amerikans withdrew and the russians took the germans back to russia for a little retribution. When the germans complained that the amerikans were being unethical the amerikan commander replied "toughski shitski" War is funny like that. How can anyone dispute that churchill and eisenhower committed the highest of war crimes? Hitler sued before the war to limit aerial bombing, and britain ignored it. International law relating to aerial bombardment before and during World War II rests on the treaties of 1864, 1899, and 1907, which constituted the definition of most of the laws of war at that time — which, despite repeated diplomatic attempts, was not updated in the immediate run up to World War II. The most relevant of these treaties is the Hague Convention of 1907 because it was the last treaty ratified before 1939 which specify the laws of war regarding the use of bombardment. In the Hague Convention of 1907, there are two which have a direct bearing on this issue of bombardment. These are "Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); 18 October 1907"[2] and "Laws of War: Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War (Hague IX); 18 October 1907".[3] It is significant that there is a different treaty which should be invoked for bombardment of land by land (Hague IV) and of land by sea (Hague IX).[4] Hague IV, which reaffirmed and updated Hague II (1899),[5] contains the following clauses: Article 25: The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited. Article 26: The officer in command of an attacking force must, before commencing a bombardment, except in cases of assault, do all in his power to warn the authorities. Article 27: In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes. It is the duty of the besieged to indicate the presence of such buildings or places by distinctive and visible signs, which shall be notified to the enemy beforehand.[2] Although the 1907 Hague Conventions IV – The Laws and Customs of War on Land and IX – Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War prohibited the bombardment of undefended places, there was no international prohibition against indiscriminate bombardment of non-combatants in defended places, a shortcoming in the rules that was greatly exacerbated by aerial bombardment. With the rise of aerial warfare, non-combatants became extremely vulnerable and were inevitably collateral targets in such warfare potentially on a much larger scale than previously.[6][7] So you agree with the hypocrisy that only germans deserved to be hung at nuremburg?
|
|
|
|