WTF BRITS???

WTF BRITS???

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes#Massacres_and_war_crimes_of_World_War_II_by_location
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

He didnt fly so good

What's wrong Klaus?

you building a statue for a war criminal

*hero

Hehehehe

nothing

bein smug bein thug

what exactly did he do to deserve beeing called a hero?

Etarnal

He helped bombed a lot of Nazis.

Oh that. A controversial figure no doubt.

Helped destroy the nazi menace

he bombed civilian population that had very little military value

>the aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive...should be unambiguously stated [as] the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilised life throughout Germany.
>the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories.

The only crime he's guilty of is not finishing the job

...

Talk shit get hit.

ROFL

Hey, you should apologize to America. Kurt Vonnegut had to pick up some of those bodies.

>lol guys war crime is ok as long as we do it

Good job Brits !

But war crimes are about horrible things done to humans in war, the Germans arent human.

If they win the war they're war heroes, if they lose the war they're war criminals. It is the basics of international law lad.

Still destroying the nazi menace

It was the only viable option with the technology and resources available.

Even then it was somewhat restrained, they could easily have dropped chemical agents too.

not really, that was thanks to russians
terror bombing had very little effect on nazi ability to wage war

and i dont demand a trial or even an apology. But not errecting statues for obvious war criminals would be nice

...

>terror bombing
germans love to blame everyone else except themselves.

>start bombing british cities
>get mad when brits bomb you back

>terror bombing had very little effect on nazi ability to wage war

It tied up resources that could have been used against the USSR, that was the point.

Depends on how you view it I guess. If the Soviets really were nearly beaten then the bombing was valuable, if the Germans could never have won anyway then maybe it was mostly pointless.

Either way, spare a thought for the brave lads of Bomber Command, 44 percent death rate for bomber crews.

did i ever say Nazis never commited any war crimes?
Cause they did and they were rightfully persecuted for it.
But British war criminals get statues instead

filthy germs

>It tied up resources that could have been used against the USSR, that was the point.
with this sort of argument you can justify pretty much every war crimes
>executing whole villages in eastern europe
>sorry, just necessary evil to fight partisans

Do you really think it is fair to expect our military to did there while the Nazis bombed our cities and not respond?

to just sit there*

no but i would expect you not go out of your way to specifically target civilian population

So let's look at the motivation
>EE partisan
Defending their home against nazi invaders who plan to genocide them all
>nazi German
Started a world war, flattened major cities and killed millions

One jumps out at me as being slightly more deserving of a good bombing

if you blame the civilians who were bombed by harris for german agression, you should also blame EE partisans for stalin

It's an argument for area bombing in terms of the effect it had on the outcome of the war, not the morality of it.

Once you dedicate your efforts to constructing a specific type of weapon you pretty much have the choice of using it or doing nothing. With the technology and military thinking of the time it seemed to be the best option. It's easy to look now and say that Germany was never going to just surrender once they'd been bombed a bit, but during WWI the civilians suffered far less before they were ready to throw in the towel.

And I'm not sure your comparison is really useful since the Germans went into the war with the intent of killing everyone in Eastern Europe and Western Russia, so those people were going to die anyway if the Germans won.

And I am not demanding reparationfs from Britain. Not even an apology.
I just dont want see statues errected for obvious war criminals

because allies won and winners write history

stay mad kraut

Obvious war criminal seems a bit of a misnomer when nothing he did was illegal or defined as a war crime until after the war.

There's not much point in going back into the past and applying modern standards of waging war on historical figures.

If you're a prominent commander on the winning side in a war you get a statue, that's just standard.

Harris himself said that the Germans entered the war under the childish delusion that they could bomb the enemy without being bombed back.

I agree! When are you going to start tearing down the statues of Arminius, Wilhelm, Frederick II and Bismarck? Oh, and that Soviet Memorial in Berlin too (cucks).

>Obvious war criminal seems a bit of a misnomer when nothing he did was illegal or defined as a war crime until after the war.
And yet the nazis were put on trial for stuff that wasn't illegal only after the war

Like what?

those people don't have statues for the war crimes they commited (which war crimes, btw?), but for their service to German people.
Literally the only thing worthy of notice that Harris did was commiting war crimes against German civilian population

oh noes, those poor Nazis ;_;

get fucked Kraut scum

Should have thought about that before you bombed civilians in London first, play stupid games and win stupid prizes.

The German civilian population who produced food and armaments for the German army.

When the whole country is involved in the war effort how can you distinguish which people should be excluded as targets?

Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of a crime against peace
Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace
War crimes
Crimes against humanity

None of those other than war crimes were considered as a crime before WW2

so nothing wrong with killing entire villages in eastern europe, then?

flatten british cities and get mad when the favour gets returned

can't understand that poking somebody's eye will get you punched

terror Flieger = hero

Yes because you had already captured that village. If the Brits had the means of simply capturing all the people working in the factories they would have.

Look this is just a stupid argument.

Any and all efforts were justified in defeating Germany in the second world war.

As the aggressor in a pointless and unwinnable war which achieved nothing other than ruining Europe the Germans got off lightly, and they certainly fared a lot better than the countries to the east of them that they attacked.

If you want to argue that the Germans were justified in what they did then that's a different story, but you've already said you don't.

Villages in countries the Germans invaded.

If you want to say that there's nothing wrong with it then justify the aggression and occupation.

but the partisans were fighting back. the most efficient way to defeat partisans is kill the entier village.
Nothing wrong with it, according to your logic

so as long as you have a good causus belli, war crimes are not a problem?

No because you have already captured those villagers, send them to a a pow camp and for the love of god don't just murder everyone in the camp.

>If you want to say that there's nothing wrong with it then justify the aggression and occupation.

the prisoners in camp need to be fed and clothed. A lot of resources necessary that could help the war effort instead.
According to this post nothing wrong with killing them

Maybe don't decimate all of Europe if you don't want to get fucked

do it again Bomber Harris

Literally who

a british war criminal. bad man

>Be German
>Invade half of Europe
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes#Massacres_and_war_crimes_of_World_War_II_by_location
> "hurr durr they are bombing us!!! war criminal!!!!"

>Germans arent human
The Frog gets it

>They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind

Why was he so cool lads?

>if one side commits war crimes, the other side is automatically 100% innocent of war crimes
nice logic, Pierre

do it again Bomber Harris

This is essentially true. There's no objective good in war

Wouldn't have had to have done it if you didn't have a country-wide sperg out

It's not war crime, it's justice

Moral good*

All sides are guilty of doing terrible things, (Yes, including bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki) to win the war, not all of it justifiable. The world we live in isn't a fair one, though we often wish it were.

and now imagine USA would create a statue for the pilotes who nuked Japan

Why not ?

We put the Enola Gay on exhibit in the Smithsonian, so that wouldn't be beyond us.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified though

Don't let the weebs hear that though.

"They sowed the wind, and now, they are going to reap the whirlwind." - National hero Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris

>attack a random guy on the street
>he fights back
>"wooow, he is at fault too, he hit me back therefore he is just as guilty as me"
I thought the Germans were supposed to be smart, or at least not completely retarded.

Why did season 2 have to be shit?

more like
>attack a random guy on the street
>he kills your family

Kraunglo

I don't see the problem here. Honouring heroes is a normal thing to do.

> boohoo bongs have a statue of bomber Harris
Kek they have statues dedicated to Robert Clive. Now *that* is controversial.

oh my. Are you a Korean?

How did WW2 brits have time to think of so many cool lines?

do it again bomber harris

no surprise if Americans do it from now on but requesting to remove such a thing is meaningless. I suppose we have no right to sue suspicious men.