The Bombing of Civilians in Wartime - Essay Example

?The Bombing of Civilians in Wartime The first document is the “Law and Customs of War on Land (Hague II), July 29, 1899 This document s thatarmies cannot attack towns, villages, habitations and buildings. Moreover, the Commander, before commencing a bombardment, must do all he can to warn authorities. If there is a siege or a bombardment, there should be all steps taken to protect hospitals, charities, places where the wounded are gathered, as well as cultural artifacts. The second document is the “Law and Customs on War on Land (Hague IV) October 18, 1907.”1 This states that undefended towns, villages, dwellings and buildings cannot be attacked. This document is basically the same as the previous one. The third document is the “Draft Rules of Aerial Warfare, The Hague, February 1923.”2 This states that there cannot be aerial bombardment for the purposes of terrorizing citizens, or bombardment for the purposes of destroying buildings which are not military in character. Basically, this article states that there can only be aerial bombardment of military targets, or within the immediate neighborhood of land forces. The fourth document is the “Protection of Civilian Populations Against Bombing from the Air in Case of War, League of Nations, September 30, 1938.”3 This document states that the intentional bombing is illegal, and that only military objectives can be bombed. The contrast to these documents to the course reading is that the course reading suggested that entire cities were bombed, not just military targets.4 For instance, according to the course reading, in April of 1940, Germany launched a blitzkrieg of Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and France.5 Moreover, Hitler used airpower against civilians in London in the Battle of Britain, which caused sympathy among the Americans. There was further allusion to civilian casualties. The chapter states that, in Europe, the Allies destroyed large cities such as Hamburg and Dresden, killing many civilians, which perhaps was not offset by the damage that was done to military targets.6 In fact, the critics of the Dresden leveling charged that Dresden had little strategic value.7 In Japan, the relentless bombing of civilians was duplicated, as General Arnold devised a plan where large Japanese cities would be firebombed. The bombing of Japanese cities was supposed to be precision, but, really, the bombings were indiscriminate, leveling square miles, with the number of Japanese civilians killed in these raids outnumbering the Japanese soldiers killed. Air attacks in Tokyo in March 9 and 10, 1945, leveled a quarter of that city and incinerated 100,000 people. The strategy was called “bomb and burn them until they quit.”8 And, of course, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki involved the loss of much civilian life, and the bombing of these cities went well beyond military targets. In fact, the advice initially was to stick to throwing the nuclear bomb on military targets as a show of force- Truman declined to do this, because he wanted the bomb to inflict as much psychological damage as possible.9 The bombing instantly incinerated all humans and manmade structures, with the longer-lasting effects of radiation disease being the great fear after these bombs were dropped.10 If the information that was contained in the Hague Documents was known to all Americans – that, according to the Internationally agreed-upon rules of war, civilians were not to be targeted, neither would cultural and historical landmarks or hospitals and the like – it probably would not have changed any citizens opinion. The reason for this is because the American people probably just wanted to win the war. They saw that the enemies were fighting dirty – the Japanese attacked our ships, after all, and the world was probably beginning to understand that Hitler was ruthless and intent upon world domination, even if the world didn’t exactly know the extent of Hitler’s atrocities at this time. If the enemies could be ruthless, then the Allies would have to be more ruthless to defeat them. Therefore, the average citizen would probably casually dismiss the Hague rules of war, reasoning that if the enemies do not follow these rules, then the Allies shouldn’t either. That said, this doesn’t mean that there would not be a significant contingent who would try to force America to follow the rules of war. There will always be people who believe that rules are rules, and America should follow them, no matter what. America and the Allies probably would have lost the war if this happened, however. But if Americans knew about the documents, there probably would have been some type of debate, at the very least. Also, it is possible that, if enough Americans knew about the Hague rules, perhaps America wouldn’t have gotten involved in the war. After all, the policy prior to Pearl Harbor was isolation, and the people didn’t want to go to war. This might have been an excuse that Congress could use to not intervene – the people would hold the American’s feet to the fire as far as not bombing civilian targets, so it would be impossible to win the war with one hand, essentially, tied behind its back, so, if the war could not be won, it probably shouldn’t have been entered into at all. The main way that these documents changed my understanding of the topic is, simply, I didn’t realize that there were rules of war that state that civilians cannot be targeted. I always assumed that this was not the case. After all, the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima are known to virtually everybody; and the leveling of Dresden, including the great loss of civilian life there, and the fact that the beautiful cultural landmarks of Dresden were also destroyed, is another famous incident. Moreover, the bombings of London were also famous. Therefore, because history shows that civilians were targeted, I always assumed that there not rules regarding targeting civilians. That there were international treaty rules against targeting civilians surprised me. That said, as noted above, it is doubtful that the Allies could have won the war if they couldn’t level civilian targets. Japan and Germany evidently had no regard for these rules. Therefore, if the enemy is violating the rules, then the Allies must as well – fight fire with fire, so to speak. Definitions list (Google Definitions. Available at : www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=define) 1. Civilian – a person not in the armed services of the police force. 2. Treaty – a formally concluded and ratified agreement between countries. Bibliography Draft Rules of Aerial Warfare, The Hague, February 1923. www.dannen.com/decision/int-law.html Google Definitions. www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=define Law and Customs of War on Land (Hague II), July 29, 1899. www.dannen.com/decision/int-law.html Law and Customs on War on Land (Hague IV) October 18, 1907. www.dannen.com/decision/int-law.html Murrin, John M., Paul E. Johnson, James M. McPherson, Alice Fahs, Gary Gerstle, Emily S. Rosenberg, and Norman Rosenberg. Liberty, Equality and Power: Concise, 5th Edition. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, 2011. Protection of Civilian Populations against Bombing from the Air in Case of War, League of Nations, September 30, 1938. Notes Read More