<our Army, volunteer or draft, was the only one last century that was greeted with open arms everywhere. No major "rape and pillage." >
Lindy, that's a slight exaggeration, in the 'open arms everywhere' aspect. Also, the Kiwis, Canadians, Aussies and Poms weren't noted for rape and pillage either. Nor plunder.
I suspect the Kiwi soldiers have a higher open-arms success rate than Yanks. There have been "Yankee Go Home" signs around the world and much flag-burning, but never a "Kiwi Go Home" sign [maybe I exaggerate, but can't remember one]. Of course, given the relative population sizes, there'd be a hundred of the "Yankee Go Home" variety for each "Get Lost Kiwi" type.
Surprising though it may seem, the USA doesn't have a monopoly on military ethics. There are actually a few cases of USA soldiers doing a spot of raping, not to mention some village pacification. One could also enter the realm of Weapons of Mass Destruction on civilians in Hiroshima. I'm not sure that the children half-fried alive in Hiroshima would make a great ethical distinction between Saddam's use of gas on Kurdish civilians and their experience. The main difference is Victor's Justice.
If Japan had won, I think there might have been some war crimes charges laid. No wonder the USA doesn't want to sign up to the International Court of Justice. Better just to send Saddam, 7 Diamonds, Milosevic there for perpetual torture at the hands of lawyers, being innocent until proven guilty, which will take a couple of centuries, or until the innocent party dies, whichever comes first.
Mqurice |
