The followup -- Japan i WWII would kill 10 to 100 chinesse for every soldier of there army killed...?

Question

is this an acceptable practice in war or is this extreme is what Israel ding in Lebanon extreme or is it justified??

Answer 1

to ask yourself if it is justified, look at the attititude toward japan of most asian countries (esp. China) -- they still are bitter toward them. Expect similar results for Israel

Answer 2

Actually, exacte data is rare. and you can guess that Japan army killed about 15,000-25,000 from their diaries during Nanking Massacre.
But China is changing and increasing the number several times.
They says 300,000 ppl. But in their history, they use 3,000, 30,000, and 300,000 etc, when they exaggerate the history. Chinese scholor admit this fact.
But it is easy to know this is not true. cos check the population of Chinese in Nangking at that moment.

By th way,I doubt the way you ask, and your humanity.
Why you can say like "is this an acceptable practice in war"?
Today the world is watching YOUR question. Asian people too, not only from US and Europe.
What if I asked like:
"USA, since WW2 to present, would have killed 10 to 100 peple for every soldier in Asia and Mid east ?
Is this an acceptable? Howmany in Vietnam War? more than 1M? how about in Korean war? more than 2M?"
You know what I mean.
You followup this either.
The way you ask insult Japan and Israel.

Vietnam War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War
Korean War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War

Answer 3

The Chinese were unprepared for war as they were having there own problems with communist insurgents. Plus China had a lot of population so many would get killed just for that fact.

Its justified what Israel is doing in Lebanon. They are fighting Hezbollah terrorists, who look like civilians. Many of those women and children getting killed are family members of terrorists so in reality they are "OK" targets.

Answer 4

Your question deals with the ethics of war and in truth is one of the most debated topics. There is no cut and dry answer, due to the nature of war there will always be civilian casualties, especially in our modernized warfare. At one point in history yes civilian casualties were greatly reduced due to the fact that armies met face to face. The history of the grand melee is a long one, but then again at that point by order of a king all males of age could be recruited to fight. The definition of a civilian was much different than it is now

http://www.hyw.com/books/history/Medi0000.htm

Another thing you might want to look at is the history of war as a whole.this site might help you take a look at it from a time-line perspective.

http://www.historyofwar.org/main.html

As warfare evolved weapons of mass destruction came into the picture. The development of fire and forget weapons and modern range weapons has taken the personal aspect out of the fight. In WWII it was proven that attacking a city could be ultimately effective in ending a war.

Now to give my personal opinion, in a Utopian society there would be no justification ever for civilian loss of life. Since we live in reality though the level of justification is determined by our world leaders and the leaders within the conflict. I hate to say this but to them the amount of casualty is reasonable or the conflict would have ceased.

Answer 5

In warfare...the more of the enemy you kill for less of your own lost the better. Simple as that...especially if the kind of war you fight is Attrition-based. Problem is this takes time especially when you try to be considerate for civilians because your enemy will never openly come to you all at once just to die.

As to the question of civilians, nowdays it is shunned and abhorred, but as far back as World War II there were no real methods for neutralizing the enemy's capacity for war other than destroying its most precious resource... namely its people (who do you think produces the Nazis/Japs weapons, fuel, material and raises its soldiers huh?). Its as simple as that...Different times, different meanings.

Answer 6

In the Pacific theater during WWII, we suffered 92,000 battle deaths. The Japanese suffered 1.6 million for a loss ratio of 1-22.

War is not a pretty thing. But you are either in it to win it, or you will lose.

If the members of Hezbollah feel the Israeli Defense Forces are being mean to them, they can surrender.

Answer 7

yeah and in the vietnam war the us killed 300 for every 1 soldier

Answer 8

china was attached unprovoked, (as was Israel) that is unjustifiable.