Integral said:It is said that WWII was won with Russian blood and American trucks.
But you said that the Germans would have tried allies for war crimes for such actions. Just doing a little more (and while that's arguable, its not really significant - a crime is a crime is a crime, and how many times you do it only affects the punishment) wouldn't make the situation different. You're saying the Germans would have held a double-standard while the allies wouldn't have (didn't). That shows that the Allies had moral superiority - and I agree.fourier jr said:...& the germans weren't convicted of war crimes for bombing urban civilian targets because they could have shown that the allies did more of it, simple as that.
But again - only if the winner of the war allowed it. Again, this contradicts the typical "the winner decides what is right" argument. You're implying that the allies would have been equitable, or by not prosecuting Germans for attacking civilians, actually were equitable. Again, when the winner is truly immoral, "legal precident" simply doesn't apply. They do whatever they want.if the nazis were put on trial for that though, it would have set a legal precedent, and the germans would have been able to put on trial some of the allies (like churchill)
Certainly, it could be - it isn't a perfect process, but it is a step up from the multitude of countries who would never even consider prosecuting their own soldiers. It simply depends on how much integrity the government/legal system has. However, I would say that as long as the US makes a reasonable effort (yeah, I know, how do you define "reasonable?"), the US doesn't need to enter the world court. The World Court has some problems when applied to the US because of who the US is: being the big boys on the block, everyone is gunning for us. The EU, for example, was created largely to be an economic force to oppose the US. The UN works by majority rule (mostly), and let's face it: the majority of the countries in the world are not responsible enough to have the same vote as, say, France or Germany. That the world court would be dominated by 3rd world dictatorships is our fear, and it is a legitimate one: we would be their biggest target.klusener said:Having experienced a corrupt government, I would look at that and say wouldn't that court be lenient on its own citizen than if that citizen/soldier was tried on an international court, isn't this what the US is refusing to do?
And to make it worse (could it be?) even the majority of the Russian "soldiers" were soldiers in name only - they were quite literally civilians rounded up, handed guns (or told to follow a guy with a gun) and forced to fight, with guns pointed at them from in front and behind.Integral said:It is said that WWII was won with Russian blood and American trucks.
russ_watters said:And to make it worse (could it be?) even the majority of the Russian "soldiers" were soldiers in name only - they were quite literally civilians rounded up, handed guns (or told to follow a guy with a gun) and forced to fight, with guns pointed at them from in front and behind.
dextercioby said:True,yet Russians won the war,by confirming the rule:"In war,quantity prevails upon quality".
Daniel.
franznietzsche said:IIRC, more Russians died in the war than people from all other countries combined, military and civilians.
Bystander said:--- and, there're indications/suggestions that Joe ran up a larger score than the Wehrmacht and SS --- little motivational policies like "Get killed and we send your family to the Gulags." Joe ran up a 2-3:1 edge that way through 1940-41.