I sdaid there was no such thing, and the crimes were committed before the war. A quick review of the thread will show you that. Learn to read & discern.
Glad to see the Rape of Nanjing is on the top ten list. I have a friend who was a child in Nanjing when this massacre happened. I was a big surpirsed in their bibliography they did not include the book, "Hungry Ghosts" by Jasper Becker.
I noticed they did not list "The Three Bad Years," in China when up to 50 million people starved, 1960-62, from a very stupid government program, the Great Leap Forward, plus government officials lieing about crop yields to keep Mao happy.
If you can find it, read Winston Churchill's History of the Second World War: The Gathering Storm, vol. 1 (of a five vol. set), for all the inside story of what was happening on the world stage prior to the outbreak of WWII.:thumbsup:
A Wiki article is a good place to start one's research so that you can get an idea of the material and what further research is needed. However, a Wiki article should never be one's sole reference source especially with respect to modern political issues. Likewise, the specific article you linked has the following note attached:
This should have been a major clue that perhaps the information in that article needed much more additional research on your part before using it as your sole source here.
War crimes, as I understand them, are determined based upon whether or not those engaged in fighting a war violate the principles of Jus in Bello.
You asked a question but I doubt if you wanted a rational discussion.
I believe you just wanted a devious way to smear President Bush.
What is a War Crime.
In reality it depends on who wins the war.
Does anyone doubt that if Germany and Japan had won WWII there would have been mass slaughter of dissenters throughout any occupied country. Remember the Holocaust and the Rape of Nanking?
Remember the Bataan Death March?
The mortality rate in Japanese prison camps was 50%, that in German prosin camps was ~10 %.
Does anyone doubt that if the Soviet Union had won the cold war there would have been mass starvation of dissenters.
Remember the millions of "White Russians" slaughtered and starved after the Russian Revolution?
Remember the Siberian Gulags to which all dissenters were banned forever?
But there is something much worse going on in this country right now.
It is a War Crime against the Unborn.
Since 1973 50 million unborn babies have been murdered: some by dismemberment; some by scalding with a salt solution; some by yanking them from their mothers womb feet first, piercing their head with scissors, and suctioning out their brains. That is about 4000 per day, more than American Soldiers killed in Iraq. Now MR. Crabtownboy you want to talk about War Crimes.
There is a War Crime to talk about.
If I am not mistaken you are a supporter of a man and political party that wants to continue this War Crime, forever.
Now explain that to the people on this Forum you have disingenuously attempted to drag into a smear of President Bush.
The original question was never answered in good faith.
To say that it's ridiculous to ask whether Hitler committed war crimes doesn't agree with reality.
If Hitler wasn't a war criminal who was?
In my view, breaking a treaty is not a war crime.
War crimes are committed against individuals not countries although I guess you could call genocide a war crime.
I agree that that's true in that one situation.
In general, I think it's better to talk first.
During the Cuban missile crisis and I'm sure during several other times we didn't know about not talking first would have meant the extermination of the human race.
Rather than continue arguing over who didn't answer who's question first let's return to the subject of the OP:
A Wiki article is a good place to start one's research so that you can get an idea of the material and what further research is needed. However, a Wiki article should never be one's sole reference source especially with respect to modern political issues. Likewise, the specific article you linked has the following note attached:
This should have been a major clue that perhaps the information in that article needed much more additional research on your part before using it as your sole source here.
War crimes, as I understand them, are determined based upon whether or not those engaged in fighting a war violate the principles of Jus in Bello (i.e. right or just action in war).
The question was not asked in good faith. A definition was given, and we were asked who fit it. If David fits it, then most certainly Hitler would fit. It's a ridiculous premise.
I noticed that a certain poster visited the BB today and made 17 posts, but none in this thread.
I guess he did not really want to talk about Jus in Bello.
Hmmm...
Well, it's time for me to cut and run for dinner and to ring in the New Year with friends and family.
Happy New Year Y'all!:wavey: