Why is killing civilians and war crimes bad?

Why is killing civilians and war crimes bad?

What's so bad about killing civilians were in a time of war not some limp wristed tea drinking kumbaya nonsense. I'm not saying that torture or rape is the solution but what's wrong with killing civilians in war? If you stop resisting the soldiers will leave you alone. What's the point of the Geneva conventions? It's stupid that we can't kill civilians or take whatever we want from them during a time of war.

t. kraut

it by platonic definition bad because it causes harm to things.

Because there's hell to pay if you do it and then lose the war.

>germans genocide jews
>Veeky Forums ugghh stupid krauts so evil what the fuck is their problem?

>Rome genocides everyone they’ve ever conquered
>Veeky Forums wow fucking based FOR THE GLORY OF ROME all this is missing is a pregnant anne frank

Why is Veeky Forums full of hypocrites?

What civilization were the germans bringing.

Why do the romans get away with it?

they were bringing civilization

>it’s okay to kill everyone as long as you make sure to pave the roads with their blood

its called making the world a better place.

But that's not even true, they assimilated many, many tribes and used destruction of civilization on a local scale as a show of force. And if the Germans won, the labor camps would be a footnote. Hell, bet you nazzy apologisers didn't even know that the Jehovas' Witnesses were also killed en mass.

You need to stop judging Rome by our modern moral standards

>jehovas witnesses were killed
Wtf i love hitler now

>the labor camps
apologist detected. Nazi germany was weak like paper.

Because people have this stupid, unrealistic idea that one day all the nations of the world might one day put aside their differences unite in common brotherhood, and that genocide and it's repercussions endanger this future. The truly wise, however, know that those fuckers across the border are evil scumbags who live only to defile and ruin, and the only way our tribe can ever be safe is by not suffering any other tribe to live.

Because the other guy will do it to you if you ever lose a war, which you eventually will.

Most people don't like getting their shit ruined, which is why reciprocal standards evolve in society.

What are you talking about? They started mainly as slave labor camps and then converted to death camps later on. Every proponent of the historical narrative of the Holocaust agrees with this you triggered dumbass.

>the started mainly
>mainly
more apologism

Yeah, I actually laughed when I heard that because I know they cast a wide net, but seeing that it wiped out the doorknockers as a footnote gave me a chuckle. Also gypsys, but the Romani people are understandably herded as shithead nomads like the Jewish people.

What was the most obscure faction that was netted in the Nazi Holocaust roundup rodeo?

They were slave labor camps. Then they became human liquidation camps. This isn't apologism, this is the accepted fact by historical consensus. I just saw a program on National Geographic Channel last week stating the exact same thing, are they Nazi apologists now? Fucking chudbox.

.t kraut

>>Rome genocides everyone they've ever conquered
[citation needed]

>Fucking chudbox.
>saw a program on National Geographic
you're a joke. it is a fact that they were death camps. Even you admit it. But you took a step back an apologized for them by hiding that they were converted. And your other post said that that some weren't or were somewhat for death. Even in your accounting, you are an apologist.

cool! so now this is the same board as /pol/ but this time I'm not being called a shill!

>/pol/ did something
go back there

>Calling nazis murderers = being a nazi apologist
good bait

Fuck off, G*rm

They started as slave labor and concentration camps before they decided what to to with them, which ultimately was when they decided to make them liquidation stations of the nations for generations when told they were going on vacations. You dumb false dichotomy chudster.

>but dresden was justified
amirite?

It's really this simple, I don't understand what the brainlets don't understand.

not only was it justified. Any germ north of Austria should starve to death

because they fear god. or because they need consumers after installing capitalism. and also, because it's just a shitty move.

It's not that they don't understand, it's that they are mentally deranged sociopaths.

wtf I love hitler even more now

>G*rms systematically exterminate millions of innocent civilians for no other reason than their perceived 'superiority' over other people.
>Allies kill 25,000 civilians in a strategic bombing run.
Wow those Allies, huh? They really are evil amirite? Fucking retard

Not him, but I think both cases are equally bad.
>let's say for the sake of argument that Germans were systemantically gasing people 24/7 through the whole war and making BBQ on their burning bodies while also frying their children heart's on top of them
>Allies purposely went with an operation that wrecked absolute inferno on non-militarized populace with aim to do as much mental and civilian damage
Both of them are equally bad and if someone says that the Allies were justified with the attack because they wanted to make people lose moral and stand up against Hitler to stop the war and save lives, then you are equally horrid as the stuff that Germans allegedly did in camps. Unless the whole of mankind is at stake, there exist no justifiable reason for any civilian war crimes.
Oh and btw, afaik, the attack only made Germans fight harder after Dresden because they saw the allies as monsters afterwards.

>equally bad
Do you want me to talk numbers? Because I'll talk numbers

>implying at those volumes numbers matter
>completely disregarding the fact that both events were equally horrible
"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."
>we are good because we did less bad things

>If you stop resisting the soldiers will leave you alone

Yes, because that's the common trend in all wars, right?

>implying Austrians aren't the true menace

I didnt want to, but you have forced me*

It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the English began to hate.

They were not easily moved,
They were icy — willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the English began to hate.

Their voices were even and low.
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show
When the English began to hate.

It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the English began to hate.

It was not suddently bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the English began to hate.

*This is the original 1917 version

So the same reason Ted Bundy is a monster and Jack the Ripper is a kids Halloween costume.

Do you have a brain? The difference between tens of thousands and millions is significant. It's the difference between stubbing your toe and getting shot in the foot. Also, learn to read because I never claimed the Allies were good, only that the Germans were worse for executing millions for ideological reasons. But oh well, you seem to be ignoring the numbers, reasons and methods of execution completely to support your bullshit argument

I am truly glad that people from Veeky Forums don't dictate international (or national) law.

I believe everyone should be given its due, but I'm not naive enough to think that will ever happen. I don't see the Allies paying their due for their own atrocities they did. However, I'm not the one defending the winners and saying it was alright even when they have more than one skeletons in their closet.

>civilian deaths thread
>axis lives matter swarm in

Like clockwork.

>dehumanizing other humans
Wow, talk about being human and civilized.

>he says in defence of people who declared millions of people to be less than human and set about systematically murdering and enslaving them

Who are you going to rape when they're dead retard?

>they did it, so we can do anything they did and more
If you consider them human scum, then you surely are better than them and not a scum like them with that behavior.
And if you say that Allies did nothing like that, then for example:
>What were Eisenhowr camps?

I understand attacking civilians if they turn into active combatants, but taking innocent lives is completely barbaric and despicable.

Krauts: 12 millions civilians killed because muh skin color
Allies: 10 thousand civilians killed because Krauts won't stop Boeing monsters

Wow, Allies are as bad as the germs
Check mate

>and more

Lol

>Eisenhower camps

Double lol

They didn’t do it based on skin color though, they did it on nose length

>Eisenhower camps
Didn't happen but I wish it did

Churchill literally said it had no purpose other than to terrorise the German population. Rationalise that please.

[Citation needed]

if you carelessly start killing everyone you wont be able to stop since you will never feel safe around these people unless you think they are subhuman and their lives don't matter of course

Ah, Churchill quote debunked even in fucking Stormfront.

imagine if every board was a country. who do you think would be the least shit to live in?

Of the boards I've been active on, I think Veeky Forums and /wsg/ wouldn't be all that bad.

Veeky Forums would be fine, Veeky Forums would be Florence

Ironically I'm a liberal socialist that hates everything right of centrism but I'd enlist in the Veeky Forumstorian army to defend our board from the hordes of /pol/yp migrants.

OP here. I still don't get why killing civilians and war crimes are a bad thing? I mean the Holocaust is different that's murdering Jews and Jews by and large did nothing wrong to deserve the Holocaust. But what's wrong with soldiers throwing off a little steam once and awhile and kill some civies for fun. It's part of war. It's what makes war, war.

It is a mechanism of de-escalation. If you kill their civilians, they will kill your civilians in return. Even if you win it will be a Pyrrhic victory.

> what's wrong with soldiers throwing off a little steam
I dunno, just let soldiers do what they want to. What is the worst that can happen?

/po/ because the autists there at least keep to themselves and don't come at you with their weaponised autism

Soldiers are meant to be disciplined, that's what makes them good soldiers. A soldier who needs to 'let off steam' by killing civilians is an undisciplined, emotional wreck.

The way you worded that made laugh.

Because everyone else will do it thats why, if you function on empathy you will agree with war crimes due to feeling sorry for non combatants being tortured or killed quickly by bored adrenaline fueled soldiers.

>t. carthcuckian

>Veeky Forums would be Florence

Prove to me that is wrong? Our ancestors did it, the Romans did it, the Muslims do it, why can't soldiers behave like Attila the Hun? Civies should just get out of the way or don't try to fight back. You're giving me answers but they aren't good enough. Why is it bad to kill civilians and why are war crimes bad? I still don't get it.

Traditionally you fought war over control of civilians, not because you wanted to spite the other guy.

The thing is modern day wars may involve total war, or may not be about conquest.

I sincerely hope you change your mind or die

Get out underage fuck

it depends on the time period and who's fighting

reparations
reciprocation (you don't know if you'll win)
logistics - why waste ammo
not all soldiers are psychopathic retards
annexation
post-war economy
blah blah blah this is a stupid question

Why should I change my mind? I'm legit serious. Why is it bad? It's war, our ancestors did it, the Romans did it, the Muslims do it. Just because the Holocaust was a horrific event, doesn't mean that we should just stop being animalistic like our ancestors did in order to survive and start to regress in human evolution and start to become less tribalistic and more limp wristed kumbaya tea drinkers.
I'm not underage, I am legit serious. Why are war crimes bad? Why am I getting flak and dumped on?

You need to get tested for autism

Kys

Have fun getting nuked or conscripted into a decade long hundred million casualty war. War has changed, it's no longer something you can do like back in the day. We're too good at it.

You are not only underage, but edgy and dumb as a sack of bricks. Get the fuck oit

This

Equivocation this strong takes skill

Because killing innocent people for no reason is wrong. I don't see what's so hard to grasp about that.

Romans were pragmatic killers. They did it to quell local resistance, and stopped when they'd achieved a compliant populace. The obvious exception was Carthage, but that was at least to make sure a resurgence didn't happen.

What they didn't regularly do was attempt to wipe out ethnic groups, meaning they were not committing genocide.

The ideal Roman Province was populated overwhelmingly by the people who had lived there before the Romans came.

And I do think the Romans were monsters. These are just facts.

>nazi germany was a paper tiger
t. Józef Beck