Behaviour of Allies during WW2 that went unpunished

RemadERemadE Global Moderator
edited December 2011 in Spurious Generalities
I've found out I have 10 days to get an essay done I totally forgot about. Great situation, eh? Not least when all the books have been taken out of the fucking Library for over the xmas holidays.
Awesome.

Anyway, this is my question, and it's something I spoke to with TDR on Teamspeak a few times. If anyone has any input on it, that'd be great. Academic sources would be even better. I have about 10 Academic Journal Articles and 3 books - one from the Library and two from BitTorrent (that stuff has saved me when I have to do work, I cannot stress it enough).

So without further-a-do, here is the question:

Explore the contention that the war crimes trials at Nuremberg and Tokyo raised awkward questions about the conduct of the Allies during the War

So far I have found plenty of critics who commented on the firebombing of Dresden and the dropping of the 2 Atomic Bombs on Japan - but my main question is why were the War Victors never punished for acts which clearly broke International laws? My first answer would be because they came up with the damned things, and knew legal loopholes (ie. no laws against Atomic weapons as they were not considered at that time of the war etc).
Also dresden was not a Military City. if anything, all it hosted, Military-wise, was a communication line from the Eastern front.

So, what are your thoughts, &T?

Comments

  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited December 2011
    Why were the War Victors never punished for acts which clearly broke International laws?

    From the U.S. Library of Congress.
    Twenty-four major political and military leaders of Nazi Germany, indicted for aggressive war, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, were brought to trial before the International Military Tribunal. More than 100 additional defendants, representing many sectors of German society, were tried before the United States Nuremberg Military Tribunals in a series of 12 trials known as “Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings.” The four major publications linked below contain: the official proceedings of the trial of the major war criminals (The Blue Series), documentary evidence and guide materials from that trial (The Red Series), the official condensed record of the subsequent trials (The Green Series), and a final report on all the war crimes trials held in Nuremberg, Germany, from 1945 to 1949.

    The International Military Tribunal consisted of officers from the armed forces of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union. Therefore their purpose was to find those 24 leading Nazi's guilty after a fair trial. They were not convened or appointed for the purpose of investigating war crimes, charging those with evidence against them, or hearing that evidence at trial. The same can be applied to the more than 100 additional defendants, representing many sectors of German society, were tried before the United States Nuremberg Military Tribunals in a series of 12 trials known as “Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings.

    It is important to note that all of this was "mandated" before the existence of the U.N. The United Nations officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and by a majority of other signatories. These decisions were ultimately arrived by the agreement and authority of Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin and not by international diplomacy. Now as to why the U.N. never perused the U.S., GB, and the C.C.C.P.. (not to mention China or Japan) who are the big boys in the U.N.? The United Nations Security Council is composed of five permanent members — China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States — and ten non-permament members. Do you really think that England, Russia, China, and the U.S. are going to sit as permanent members on the most influential council in the U.N. and allow themselves to be put on trial for war crimes as the victors?
  • RemadERemadE Global Moderator
    edited December 2011
    <3 you. Looks like I know what I'm doing tonight :thumbsup:

    With this and the mention in my Dissertation, I think TDR has beaten all of my Tutors. Shame - he should get their pay packet.
  • PsychlonicPsychlonic Regular
    edited December 2011
    On top of this, the victors of WW2 - especially the US - got plenty of payout from the war in the form of technology taken from Germany and Japan. An interesting point to touch upon as a prime example would be Japan's Unit 731 who committed rather grave crimes against humanity that the US pardoned in exchange for handing over all of their findings. The US has its own little history of unethical human experimentation so this shouldn't be a surprise. People tend to look at the US/Japan relationship being as simple as Pearl Harbor leading up to the atomic bombings, but there was a lot more going on that still impacts the world today. Japan's treatment of their conquered enemies, especially China, still brings forth bad feelings in Asia. While it's easy to look at the surface and say "The US is bad for dropping those A-bombs" - which is absolutely true - this is also ignoring the fact that Japan frankly got off the hook and had we NOT dropped the bombs, things could be much, much different today. The war could have dragged on longer and Japan made out to be just as evil as Germany with their war crimes being exposed immediately instead of covered up. From there it's speculation of course, but it's interesting to think about and deserves a mention I'd say. Needless to say that the US also has dirty hands in the matter for letting it slide.

    I would go so far as to say the US was practically its own "third" side of the war, outside of "axis and allies". Not necessarily a good one.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited December 2011
    ^The Soviet Union, GB, and France were all dirty in their own ways as well. I don't think anyone here will argue that Stalin was just as if not more murderous than Hitler and the exploitation by GB, and France of colonies around the globe with no real regard for the rights or welfare of the indigenous populations and then there is Dresden (GB).
  • PsychlonicPsychlonic Regular
    edited December 2011
    Oh no doubt, not on a self-hating anti-US agenda by any means, just find the Unit 731 thing to be particularly interesting.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited December 2011
    The Chinese have done some horrific shit since Mao took over in '48 as well but you don't see any of their leaders at the ICC in The Hague.
  • PsychlonicPsychlonic Regular
    edited December 2011
    Of course not, China is good for business.
  • RemadERemadE Global Moderator
    edited December 2011
    Cheers for the input, Psychlonic :) I remember watching "Men behind the Sun" which was based on Unit 731, and just how mental some of the thins that went on there were. I can see what you mean about the "third" side to the War, as well - which is a good way of putting something I've thought about for a long time into words :thumbsup:
  • RemadERemadE Global Moderator
    edited December 2011
    Yeah, there are a few dodgy Authors out there. Two of which I despise are Goldhagen and AJP Taylor. One is a Zionist-Nazi and the other is a Left Wing nutjob.

    I was told about Google Scholar but not had much luck with it. Spent ages in the Library today before I went stir-crazy and found some good books on "Victor's Justice". That is my main thesis in this essay.
Sign In or Register to comment.