The Holocaust was deliberate, systematic genocide, and the firebombing of Dresden was not How is this even in question
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @AndrewJensen2 and
It doesn't matter if killing civilians is "systematic" or "genocidal" you're still killing civilians! That's my whole argument. Would you have approved of systematically murdering German workers if it would have brought the war to an end?
8 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jlippincott_ @AndrewJensen2 and
I mean, a targeted bombing of a munitions plant kills civilian workers as much as a firebombing of the city does, so what exactly are *you* arguing here
1 reply 2 retweets 32 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @jlippincott_ and
Hell, in the case of Nazi Germany and other regimes happy to rely on forced labor, blowing up a munitions plant would likely mostly kill Jewish workers imported from the camps This is a moral dilemma brought up in Schindler's List etc It's the ugly moral calculus of warfare
1 reply 3 retweets 47 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @jlippincott_ and
Your moral standards would make it basically impossible to wage strategic warfare against a country like Nazi Germany at all It'd limit the warfare of your country to limited wars of "self-defense" on their own territory, which is what the Geneva Conventions were invented for
1 reply 2 retweets 40 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @jlippincott_ and
Which, you know, is all well and good, if you're safe and well-fed and happy in your own country and other people's problems are not your business, like Lucky Lindy openly argued for Not so great if you're a German Jew being systematically genocided
2 replies 3 retweets 45 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @AndrewJensen2 and
Yes, I am arguing for limited war. Every righteous crusade of my lifetime has been bullshit.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @jlippincott_ @arthur_affect and
And you know damn well that America didn't fight WW2 to save the Jews. It wasn't even about stopping tyranny either. That's why we cozied up to Stalin.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jlippincott_ @AndrewJensen2 and
Well, yes, the main concern for our leaders was not having Hitler rule half the world as a fascist dictator, which really is bad enough
4 replies 2 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @jlippincott_ and
Stalin was a "lesser evil" because he was willing to "let us have" much of the territory Hitler would've conquered and, honestly, how is that not a major net benefit for the "free world" Trying to both-sides this shit in 2020 is pretty fucking sus honestly
3 replies 5 retweets 28 likes
Just like even the racist white Northerners in the US Civil War didn't think much of Southern aristocrats asserting they were absolute rulers of their little fiefdoms who could do whatever the fuck they wanted on them That's not something you can just live and let live
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @jlippincott_ and
And even that is honestly conceding too much I can agree that most of the Union leadership was pretty racist without actually conceding the pro-South talking point that abolitionism *didn't matter*, and pretending that the colored regiments just didn't exist
1 reply 2 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @jlippincott_ and
Just like, say, Oppenheimer considered himself completely apolitical before the war, and said he never even voted in an election before 1936, but got radicalized pretty fucking fast by Hitler and devoted his life's work to making sure the Nazis didn't win the race for the Bomb
0 replies 5 retweets 31 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.