• PugJesus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, there were a lot of civilian deaths in ww2. But they largely at least tried to minimize the non-military casualties

    I feel obligated to point out that the Brits in Europe and the Americans over Japan engaged in deliberate terror bombing.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, there are no good guys in war… Just different levels of crimes and justification from the obscene, to the grey.

      The Allies were responding to aggressors that had invaded and “terror bombed” dozens of countries for years, killing millions of civilians, while maintaining extremely high domestic support throughout… Doesn’t make terror bombing their civilians right, but it was more justifiable in context than anything the invaders did.

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, yeah, I’m not at all questioning that the Allies were the right side. Only that we definitely attempted to deliberately inflict civilian casualties in Europe and in Japan, despite the US realizing that terror bombing was ineffective and quarreling with the British over its use in Europe, while still switching to it in Japan after strategic bombing campaigns were less effective than hoped.