🚀 go-pugleaf

In ba.general Hugo S. Cunningham <checkwebsite@cyberussr.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 01:40:40 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman
> <dorfman@green.rahul.net> wrote:

...

>>> FDR's sins in WW II were greater than G.W. Bush's in Iraq, but they
>>> were redeemed by FDR's competent achievement of worthwhile objectives,
>>> notably the destruction of Nazi Germany.
>>
>>     First, I'm curious as to what you regard as FDR's sins in WW II.
>>I would include the evacuation of Japanese Americans, but they were
>>not tortured to the best of my knowledge.    What else did you have
>>in mind?

> Fire-bombing  Japanese cities with callous disregard for hundreds of
> thousands of civilian deaths (I am not referring to the 2 A-bombings.
> If someone else wishes to make an issue out of them, however, all the
> work on developing them took place under FDR.)
> (The carpet-bombing of German cities [including Dresden]  was more the
> responsibility of the RAF's Arthur "Bomber" Harris, though the USAAF
> played a part.)

     You are right that the USAAF tried to limit itself to military
targets in Germany (albeit with limited success) while the RAF 
deliberately set out to "de-house" workers, keep them from sleeping
at night, etc.  In total war, it is difficult to separate the workers
from the fighters.
     In Japan the Marianas were captured and the B-29s deployed at
incredible cost in blood and treasure.  (Did you know that the B-29
development program cost more than the Manhattan project?)  And when
the early raids didn't seem to be accomplishing much, the commander
(Heywood Hensel) was fired and LeMay was put in place.  He quickly
found that Japanese cities were tinder boxes of paper and wood, and
went from high-altitude daytime raids to low-altitude night fire
bombing.  
     I'm of two minds about this kind of thing.  How about 
unrestricted submarine warfare?  We gave the Germans hell about it
but right after Pearl Harbor we started doing it ourselves.  Is that
a war crime?  It was very successful--Japan ran out of oil and just
about everything else due to lack of shipping.
     And there's a question of how low a tactical level the 
commander in chief can be blamed for.  Front-line atrocities?  I'm
not at all sure about that.  Even strategy questions.  If you want
to call Harris and LeMay war criminals we can have a discussion.
How about the RAF Air Chief Marshal (can't come up with his name
right now) or Arnold or Leahy?  What decisions should FDR and
Churchill have been involved in, or reversed on humanitarian
grounds?  There are only 24 hours in a day and there were a lot of
things that absolutely required their attention.

> Reciprocal atrocities on the front lines with Japanese troops.  (The
> USA treated its PoWs better than Japan did, but until surrendering
> soldiers were accepted as PoWs, anything could happen in a savage race
> war.)  Both sides pressured soldiers  immediately after capture for
> intelligence info, though US forces would generally let up before
> going too far.

> Giving massive aid to Stalin without requiring restraint of his
> human-rights violations.

     As Churchill said, "If Hitler marched into Hell, I would hasten
to make an alliance with the Devil."  He and FDR knew which was the
greatest evil.  Stalin would have rejected any conditions on aid--
then what?  Allow Hitler to conquer Russia?  Or Stalin would have
agreed and ignored the agreements, as he did with Yalta etc.; should
we then have stopped the aid?  War is hell, even for civilian 
leaders.

> Executing 8 suspected Nazi saboteurs after a farcical, mostly secret
> "trial."  Bush talks about it, but he hasn't done it.

> Failure to appoint lawyers for all detainees

     There is a bit of historicism here.  Neither the Geneva 
Conventions nor anything else called for that kind of treatment of
spies, which is what they were: enemies behind the lines and out 
of uniform.  If the Germans had been in uniform they would have
been treated as POWs.  Out of uniform they were spies and lucky
not to be just shot out of hand.