Posts made by Ozone27

@TM:

If anything, I like to try something new. :)

BRAVO!!!

So many people forget the game’s purpose is to have fun.

Ozone27

I agree with the India strategy–if the Allies try to defend India T1, you should surround it by siezing (Greater) China. Then they are isolated early and if they put an IC down you are in an advantageous position (although that IC can still be a pain in the butt sometimes if you ask me!).

“Hawaii Lite”…now there’s a name! :D

Ozone27

@TG:

Seriously!? Mine too! My German history teacher would always talk about how the Turkish immigrants were destroying Germany and that in 50 years, Germany will cease to exist to be a state we come to known. At first I thought he had too much coffee (where upon he would sing strange sea chanties in Deutch) or some sort of strange racist, so I’m surprised you had the same problem too! He talked about how bad things have become, and Germany can’t do anything about it because it would make Germany look like they were Nazis. That’s why he says, Germans welcome Jews with open arms into their state. With the Jews taking action, Germany can’t be branded and looked upon with holocaust type sentiments. Very interesting… I like to talk more about this.

Maybe its just the way you put it but this whole account sounds distinctly creepy to me. “Sea shanties in Deutsch…”? WTF? “Germany can’t do anything about it 'cuz they’d look like Nazis…”? Like what exactly does he have in mind here? “If the Jews (BTW, Germany still has Europe’s lowest per-capita Jewish population; you figure it out) take action, Germany can’t be branded as Nazis…” OK that is just too wierd! What’s with this guy–how old is he? I’ve GOT to know!

Ozone27

First of all I don’t want to start presuming too much, because I’m not a German and I’d really like to avoid becoming a “know-it-all-American” type…

But 2 brothers from Deutsch Evern are 2 of my best friends in the whole world, we talk a lot about Germany and America and I have travelled in Germany–these are about my only claims to knowledge about Germany other than a longtime interest in the country (mainly beginning w/ meeting these guys)…

I see Germany’s basic social problem these days–as it is with most other West European countries–is the massive influx of foreigners (one might even include east Germans) that has been going on for a while and is reaching a critical level. You’ve got to understand that most European national states were founded with a (more or less conscious) idea of a national identity based on culture, language & ethnicity. Now HUGE #s (well, not compared to American immigration, but that’s a whole other issue)of foreigners are coming in and Europeans must deal with it mentally–and it is tough. In other words; “Can an ethnic Turk ever really become a ‘German’?” “Can a West African ever really become a ‘Frenchman’?” In the USA, we have our own (mainly racial) issues of this kind, but basically no one (but extremists) doubts whether, say, an Irishman or Latino can ever eventually become fully “American”. It has to do with national identity–in Europe, so often, the “state” and the “culture/language/ethnicity” are one in peoples’ minds.
I may be way off base here, so input by actual Europeans would, I’m sure, be more enlightening. I’m just relating my limited observations.

As far as Bavaria, in some ways I’d see the difference between Bavaria and, say, Niedersachsen is more like the perceived difference between say, Texas & New England. North Germans (especially the old Hanseatic states) see themselves as more reserved socially, but more liberal (“enlightened”? :wink: ) politically, whereas they tend to view Catholic, conservative, Bavaria as retrograde culturally & politically–sometimes a source of embarrassment. Far be it from me to decide one way or another!

Re: German instructors–my teacher was, I think, a fairly reasonable lady who suffered somewhat from the ugly prejudices of her local native culture (which–believe me–is not wholly discouraged even in supposedly “liberal” Northern Cal). Judging from what you’ve said, though, I’d have to agree w/ F_alk that your History instructor is an out-and-out Nazi!!! No one in Germany (without a shaved head & white bootlaces) would DARE publicly advocate something like “union w/ the territories ‘lost’ in WWI/WWII”! That borders on Nazi-type hate speech (and is definitely right-wing propaganda), which is illegal in Germany. Makes me wonder why he came to the US to begin with–you should ask him!

Anyway, these are just my observations.

Ozone27

P.S. TG-- :lol: I’ll let it go this time, but don’t EVER compare Sonoma & Orange counties like that! Did we produce Ronald Reagan? Pete Wilson? The Duke? The Mighty Ducks?;it’s been said that everything bad that ever came from California came from Orange County. :lol: If you are from there, I will exclude you, but I assume by the fact that you put “L.A.” in your profile you are not… :o

:lol: about the green money :lol: !

About $1/$2 coins–BADBADBAD IDEA! BOOO! Before the Euro, everything in Germany up to (and including) 5 DM were coins. When me and my buddies went in '95, the mark was about at its strongest–being pretty close in value to $1 (US). Now, unless you were very resourceful (and we were not) and good with your math (which we also were not) by the end of the day you’d be walking around w/ like 10 lbs. of coins, and looking like you were wearing jodhpurs (hmmmmm :wink: )!

TG: Santa Rosa’s IN Sonoma County, silly!–I just think the countryside around here is better…but I appreciate you & TM’s kind words for our lovely city…

About the Germans–first of all, everyone’s different and as you know the “efficient, clever German” is just as much a stereotype as the “dumb American”. I’m sure you agree…

But interestingly, my German friends also spent a year each as exchange students and also did horribly! One is now majoring in History at Jena University, the other…well, he’s studying Geography, but he mainly surfs a lot. Regardless, how do you explain the poor performance in US school?
Well, partly its that our schools aren’t quite THAT bad–you can indeed skate by (as I did), but to excel does require some work. Another reason certainly is the handicap of being a foreigner and having to learn all the new ways & rules & customs while trying to learn as well.
But I think the main reason is that, regardless of what it’s supposed to be, being an exchange student is tantamount to just being on vacation in a foreign country for a year–in some cases the academic year doesn’t even COUNT toward your average! In this situation, and considering all the other factors, I’d say you’d have to be pretty boring to be spending all your time studying when you’re a High School student away from home for maybe the first time in your life in a foreign country with no one to keep an eye on you! :o Just my opinion!

Also BTW, my German Instructor at college was a polite lady from Bavaria who in between language lessons liked to tell the students how the Turkish immigrants flooding into Germany were ruining the economy by having 20 kids and sucking off the state. So see, some Germans are just idiots…same as everybody, I guess…

I’m sure you know all this stuff, but thought I’d posit some ideas…

Ozone27

Hey SUD; when did you get so nice? :D Did you get religion or something?

J/K!

Ozone27

@TM:

Sir Ozone, do not forget Santa Rosa! It is a lovely place! I love the landscape decoration. :D

What is a ‘Quantas’ and why would they be on strike?

Thanks. Though have you been to S.R. recently? Seen the giant concrete hand that now blights our downtown–as well as the recently-built 3D Charlie Brown statue (that theoretically honors Charles Schultz)-- :cry: creepy! Oh well maybe you can see the beauty that I miss…

Sonoma County does rule though… :D

BTW Qantas (no ‘u’) is Australia’s national airline.

Also BTW–no more Deutschmarks–Euros! :lol:

Ozone27

@TG:

BTW: I like Germans/Germany too, but I was left a tad disappointed when I encountered some (even the new arrivals). Lets just say, don’t believe the hype.

…please elaborate…! :)

Ozone27

There are 3 instances when you consider rolling for tech (as any power, Allied or Axis);

1.) When you’ve got some extra cash (that is, after figuring what you’ll want to purchase if you DON’T get tech) that you don’t really NEED to put you over or keep you in the game. Usually this comes up right after a power has been taken and the side that conquered has a lot of spendable cash & wants to put the game away w/ some heavy-hitting tech (Heavy Bombers is really what you are looking for here). Spending too much here is very tempting–always have it worked out in your mind what you will buy if you don’t get tech; if its a choice between tech rolls and a needed unit, tech always loses…

2.) You are losing the game militarily and technology is the only solution. many of the techs are “defensive/offensive” in nature–pertaining to defensive capabilities (i.e. Jet Power); offensive reach for bottled up units (i.e. Long Range Aircraft); Economic relief (i.e. Industrial tech); Improvement of strategically defensive-type units (i.e. Super Subs); Punitive strikes (i.e. Rockets); or just plain a$$ kicking (i.e. Heavy Bombers). Basically, the techs heavily aid beleagured powers over those in the lead.
Here again the choice of how much to spend & when is tricky. Essentially it comes down to how long you have left. If you are sure you are losing, and the prospect of further economic gain is low-to-nil, try tech–but if you can take a few more territories and gain a few more bucks, wait; tech is to be bought with “spare” bucks only. At this point you want to buy tech when the game will be all downhill from here…however, since you theoretically are gonna lose anyway otherwise, you can allow yourself more latitude in how much you spend. Just remember that tech is useless unless you already have the units it pertains to, or can buy more.

3.) You are just feeling it. :D A friend of mine has phenomenal luck with tech–when he rolls, he just seems to get what he needs. But is this just because he is willing to take the risk and try tech more often? Who knows? Suffice it to say, this friend is a big gambling fan, and he simply has a “sense” when the dice are “hot”. He is an example of why even well-thought-out plans in A & A go awry.
If you are a gambler, you can always take this route. I am not a gambler so I have no suggestions. You will know when its time… :wink:

Hope these suggestions help…

Ozone27

Drat! I posted, then the site crashed & everybody beat me to it. Oh well, Wild is correct–best way to handle these situations is to designate a landing point on your Combat Move for each of your FTRs. Keep these landing points in mind as you choose casualties (i.e. always choose the planes w/ the LEAST remaining movement points as casualties first!).

And yes–in 3rd Edition rules, surviving defending planes have 1 M.P. to land on an adjacent friendly island OR land territory (or CV as the case may be). This prevents such illogical instances as a FTR on a(destroyed) CV in the West USA SZ not being allowed to land on adjacent Western USA.

Ozone27

@TG:

Then there is Nagasaki to bring up itself. Nagasaki was a very valuable military and industrial target (as I mentioned many times before). It was often called the “San Francisco” of Japan due to its very valuable Naval Ports. In fact, Nagasaki held many of Japan’s vital [Mitsubishi] shipyards, along with an arrary of war production facilities.

…fine. Then EmuGod and I don’t agree on anything. Are you happy? :wink:

TM Moses–don’t believe it about German cities! American cities are cleaner (San Francisco anyways). Now, I love Germany with a passion, but facts is facts–you are a lot less likely to be hit by a hot blast of urine-soaked air in the USA than in Germany, depending on where you go (obviously New York vs. Bremerhaven is no contest, but still…)

Just my opinion–no offense intended…

ozone27

Emu–first of all, let me say I have been in agreement w/ you from the beginning about the Nagasaki thing. It had not yet been heavily bombed by 1945 because it was a very minor military target…

2nd–since you are so adamant, and there is no apparent way for me to prove to you the point, we can agree to disagree about the “pragmatism” vs. “pride” point in politics. Suffice it to say in passing that if what you say were true, we would all have been blown to atoms by nuclear weapons long ago. 'Nuff said…

As far as the Germans vs the Japanese–you are still dead wrong. All of the atrocities you have just stated the Germans being guilty of in WWII were also perpetrated by the Japanese–including the brutal murders of babies in China and the vicious “experiments” by Japanese ‘doctors’ on American (and other) P.O.W.s. That Japan is (and has historically been) one of the most racially homogenous nations on earth–and that therefore the atrocities occured (many times, though certainly not always)–on foreign soil HAS NO BEARING WHATSOEVER!!! The Japanese citizens were just as (if not more) inculcated in their belief in their own racial superiority as the Germans. They wouldn’t have cared one whit if it were in their own backyard.

On a lighter note–hey Falk! I’m heading to Germany on the 14th to visit my buds (in Luneburg)! Where are you headed?

Ozone27

That was a very, patient & polite post, SUD :D –and enlightening as well!

I still don’t know if 2-hit BBs is a good rule for Germany–I guess the pluses for Japan outweigh the minuses for Germany.

Ozone27

:D What about a magic sword that’s +1 to all INF? Or a “wizard” unit? :D

Ozone27

I’m sorry, Emu, I just don’t agree with anything you said (except that the Germans didn’t care that the Jews were being massacred).

There is absolutely no difference between what was going on in China for the Japanese, and what was happening in Germany (and their conquered countries). I’d like to remind you that many of the Nazi death camps were located in foreign countries (especially Poland), and millions of non-German Jews were murdered. Why are you holding the German people more responsible than the Japanese? They were just as aware of what was going on. Soldiers went on leave. They told their friends & relatives what was happening in China. No one gave enough of a damn to raise a stink–at least not enough people that the government couldn’t arrest them all. The only difference is that the Japanese weren’t gassing them in camps.

As far as WWI/the Cold War you are also wrong. Modern governments do not operate on “pride” as you say, but on cold pragmatism–“pride” is a minor factor. Czar Nicholas and Kaisers Wilhelm & Franz Joseph may have been operating on pride, but they were wrong and idiotic to have been doing so. They (personally) and their countries (who they were supposed to be watching out for) were better off WITHOUT THE WAR and I’m talking from a patriotic perspective as well as a pragmatic one. Before WWI, Wilhelm received a report stating that with every year of peace Germany grew stronger–this is a cold fact, and subsequent world history has borne out that Germany was destined to economically dominate Europe without having to fight 2 destructive wars. Austria-Hungary was certainly on the way to a reorganization into some kind of federal system rather than the ossified “Dual-Monarchy”, but surely her people were better off standing together rather than devolving into a series of tiny, weak countries–which the pressures of war drove her to.
And as far as Russia, as I stated before, Czar Nicholas II was a profoundly ignorant man who indeed thought he was in better control of the situation than he was, but still–having learned from the 1905 revolution, he should’ve known Russia could not stand the hardship of a major European war, and as bad as the implications would be for backing down, it was the right thing to do for 1914.

In other words, these three men FELT that they had to enter WWI because of “pride”. And they were absolutely wrong. So what does that do to your theory that governments are run by “pride”?

Then you bring up Cuba; this is far less of a conspiracy as you seem to believe. Yes, the 2 superpowers went to the brink of nuclear war–but that was part of the game; similar to the gameplay prior to WWI. Yes, Russia got the infamous “Turkish Missiles” removed and USA got the even more infamous Cuban Missiles removed. But has it occured to you at all that the missiles in question were all medium-range theatre-level nukes? Fact is that the US & USSR could easily and reliably blow one another up completely using LONG-RANGE BALLISTIC MISSILES and BOMBERS without the need of these limited-range units!!! Duh!

So what REALLY happened during the Cuban Missile crisis? The Cubans offered to have Russia put the weapons in place to protect Cuba from another expected US attempt to invade. Russia decided it was a good idea. The Americans found out about it early and ordered the Soviets to pull them out. The two superpowers stared each other down for a few days before agreeing that if the US DIDN’T INVADE CUBA the Soviets would withdraw the missiles and let Uncle Sam be the big heroes. The medium-range missiles (on both sides) were just a complete sideshow. And WHOA! Guess what?–we never DID invade Cuba! How about that?

Why did all this happen–cold, pragmatic politics. “Pride” is just a smokescreen…

Ozone27

@EmuGod:

You make Kaiser Wilheim the Second sound like Hitler. He wasn’t evil, but rather a greedy emperor who had no choice but to go to war. He tried to sotp the war, but it was not possible because of pride. If he had not gone to war in the Great War, he would haqve been overthrwon. The same with Austria-Hungary’s emperor, and with Tsar Nicholas 2nd. They would not have been able to face their people if they had backed down.

Aobut it being the Germans’ fault that they were bombed and many cities heavily damaged (almost all of Dresden was wiped out), it was. I don’t mean to stereotype, but 99% of the German people helped hitler mass murder Jews. When they had the choice of leaving the concentration camps, they decided to stay. They deserved each and every bomb that hit them. Had they been a-bombed, I would not be arguing about the cities that were hit.

…EmuGod–what is the difference between complicity in the mass murder of Jews and the same of Chinese/Burmese/Vietnamese etc.? The average Japanese in WWII was inculcated with the belief that they were part of the legendary Yamato race–that is, superior to all others. Racial philosophy had everything to do with their willingness to go to war in 1941–the same as with the Germans in 1939. How can you say the civilians of Dresden somehow “deserved” to be firebombed more than the civilians of Nagasaki “deserved” to be nuked? If you can explain this to me I am all ears…just don’t give me the tired old line of “well the Germans knew what was happening, they just didn’t care”–no s**t! Of course they didn’t care–just like the Japanese wouldn’t have cared had they known what was happening…as many of them did…

And as far as your (for lack of a better word) “point” with the Great Emperors of the turn of the century–NONE of them had “no choice” but to resort to war…NONE! The only one you can make an argument for there being “no choice but for war” would be “Austria-Hungary’s Emperor” (that is, Kaiser Franz Joseph Habsburg if anyone’s taking notes)–and even here the poular misconception of Austria-Hungary’s impending collapse is misleading. Austria was concerned with her international image, not popular discontent, and she had a blank check from Germany to back her up…this is not being “forced” to declare war…

As far as Kaiser Wilhelm Hohenzollern of Germany; he was a sabre-rattler and a wierdo who liked to talk tough, but in crisis after crisis over Africa, repeatedly backed down at the brink of war. In fact, he tried this again after the beginning of WWI–to bring the trains back from their deployment against France along the Western Front in the opening hours of WWI, but acquiesed when his top general flipped out and explained to him there was no going back. Not only that, but his people were educated, well-informed and extremely patriotic and motivated; Kaiser Wilhelm was in no danger in 1914 of losing power. He wasn’t “forced” to begin WWI because of popular opinion–he was just a bully who found himself unable to wimp out when his usual cue came…

And your weakest case is with Czar Nicholas II of Russia. Come on–in spite of its economic & military weakness, Russia was home of the world’s most powerful monarch (perhaps w/ the exception of Japan). Russia’s one chance of AVOIDING revolution in the “teens” was by NOT entering the Great War, but typically for the Russian Empire, the Czar himself was totally ignorant of the domestic situation and saw things only in terms of his “duty” to his Entente allies. There is quite simply no explanation for Russia honoring these “commitments” (such as they were) in 1914, except that she feared loss of her “Great Power” status should she back down (again; international opinion over ‘public opinion’–whatever ‘public opinion’ was in pre-revolution Russia); and the fact that Czar Nicholas II was a profoundly ignorant and dull-witted man…also a fact.

So come on, lets not make excuses–these guys were morons who were too stupid (or maybe too old in the case of Franz Joseph) to understand that they were better off allied WITH one another than against (Bismarck understood that). Was Wilhelm “like Hitler”? Not if you mean in the sense that he rounded up people and had them systematically massacred. But if you mean in the sense that he caused directly or indirectly the deaths of millions in order to serve his own frivolous and egomaniacal ends–I think one can draw a comparison…

Ozone27

Hate to burst your bubble, mikaylah, but you can’t “blitz” thru neutral territories. Russia will see you coming a mile off.

With India evacuated, your campaign in Asia should be a walk-thru. Check out the “Take Hawaii” thread for a funny gambit for dealing with this exact situation–might give you some ideas for much better strategies of your own.

Hope this helps.

Ozone27

SUD is right on about “unconditional surrender”. If the japanese could’ve reasonably expected their Emperor to retain his position, they MIGHT have surrendered. But would the American public have accepted this? NO WAY! It was a double-edged sword for Truman–no 2 ways about it. He just HAD to do what he did…

For once I agree w/ EmuGod–why did it have to be Nagasaki? On the one hand–civilians were gonna die w/ these attacks. On the other–it is particularly ironic that the home of the largest Christian population in Japan was targeted for the USAs most deadly weapon. Japanese Christians practiced their religion in secret for almost 400 years before being bombed to the f**(&(*&g stone age by the USA.

Now, I am an atheist, but I still find it extremely ironic considering the religious arguments many are using here that Nagasaki was the 2nd target. Why? Cold strategy…

And as far as the Emperor’s religious position–yes, as mentioned, he to the Japanese was like a Jesus figure to Christians–a bridge between God(s) & Man. And yes, if you were a pious 1945 Japanese, you WOULD feel like fighting to the death to prevent his defeat & humiliation. But Japanese were (& are) just as pragmatic as the rest of us. They felt profoundly BETRAYED when the Emperor made his “not a God” speech–many, many Japanese wanted to eliminate the office of Emperor when this happened. In fact, it was mainly due to US manipulation that the Emperor (incidentally; politically the weakest monarch in the world) even retains the title today…

Is that ironic or what?

Ozone27

@Soon_U_Die:

My main messages are:

Hold EE with EVERYTHING, if you are going to hold it at all, otherwise pull out.

Hold WE on G1, with the minimum units required if you decide to hold EE, otherwise hold it with Arm, and free 1 or both Inf to move to Ger.

If you buy a blocker, make certain the EMed sub dies when playing Naval Occupation.

Preserve your armour, don’t waste 1 on Caucusus if there are 2 Inf there. If only 1 Inf, then risk the 2 vs 1 if you like.

God gave you Russia Restricted so that your tranny could die a glorious death in NAVAL combat. Don’t waste it on transporting an armour to Algeria…which can get pegged easily anyway. You risk losing an air elsewhere for a dubious gain.

SUD

OK I sorta get it, but bear w/ me :wink: …

I see the risk of the SS purchase w/ Naval Occupation. I will be vigilant…

Hold Western Europe w/ ARM? What if I wanna hit Karelia sometime soon? Doesn’t that “trap” my ARM there?

Why not take Caucases w/ a throwaway force if it gets you a few extra IPCs T1 (when theoretically you can’t be bombed too bad) and makes USSR take it back? I mean there’s only 2 (or 1, or 3) guys there…sure looks tempting. I believe you, I just don’t get it :( …

I don’t understand how trading Western Europe (essentially giving the Allies an extra 6 IPCs each turn) is gonna be worth it. Karelia is worth more strategically, but economically–man it seems like an awful risk!Explain…

What is my overall strategy in Africa? Dominate for several turns? Or just pick away at territory until the Allies kill me? In other words–how many troops am I to commit there in the long run?

Realistically what are my chances against Russia in the long run if they do NOT attack Eastern Europe T2 (that is I put virtually everything there and they wimp-out)?

If East Europe is the “key”, then why not use the Baltic TR to move 2 additional guys over from Finland/Norway, and use an extra 2 elsewhere (like Caucases or Western Europe for defense)?

Please explain–I wanna know!

As far as your question about the rules: I dunno why exactly it is! :) Basically we started w/ the 2nd Edition, we added Submerging Subs a few games later 'cuz it sounded cool (and we kept it 'cuz it worked well) and we’d been playing like that for a very long time. Then a few games ago we (after much political wrangling) got everyone to agree on RR and of course it improved our games immensely. Then one of us created his own goofy “house rule” that if anyone gets a new tech, and their Capital is subsequently taken, the conqueror “steals” the tech (incidentally, as can be expected, that rule has never been applied to anything). Now everybody wants their own “house rule” and one of the guys wants “2-hit BBs”. That’s the story of how this wierd combination of rules we play under has evolved. I wanted an idea of the impact of the rule before I raised an objection or not…Personally, I’m thinking about “Scorched Earth”…hmmmm :wink: …

Anyway, please explain your ideas further…I’m listening…

Ozone27

2335 people died at Pearl Harbor 12/07/1941. Maybe you hafta be an American to know that…(“240”…please!) :x

But forget Pearl Harbor. Let’s pretend it never happened…

Japan allied herself with Germany–a power that killed 6,000,000 people who were noncombatants, for no reason at all except her leaders hated them (and her people didn’t care enough one way or another to stop it–I love Germany today as a people, and 2 of my best friends are Germans, but this is undeniable); Japan herself was deeply involved at the time in her own genocide of millions of Chinese people. When Japan conquered (or coerced a people to join her in the case of Burma), she brutally enslaved millions of people into hard labor w/ no pay (Koreans, Filipinos, Burmese, Vietnamese…would you like me to continue?). When Japanese troops captured enemies, they were subjected to brutal tortures and even bizarre medical experiements.

Against this, one ranges the crimes of the United States:

1.) We (mainly Californians/Hawaiians) forced perfectly loyal and good Japanese-Americans into harsh internment camps.

2.) We were insensitive to the cultures and homes of the peoples of the Pacific Islands we siezed.

3.) We bombed helpless cities with the purpose of terrorizing the civilians into surrender (incidentally, EmuGod–we DID level German cities in WWII–without the Atomic Bomb)

There are many other more personal examples of American “warcimes” but these suffice for my point. As a counterpoint, might I present these examples:

1.) We helped to defeat Germany and Japan–the instigators of the horrors of WWII…

2.) We (practically singlehandedly) rebuilt the lands devastated by the brutalities of the war…

3.) We–subject to the political/social/moral/intellectual constraints of the times, and to any times–attempted to prosecute and punish the worst offenders of human rights…

Yes, Americans did commit certain “crimes against humanity” in WWII. But who is willing to step up and prosecute the people who did the good that the USA did? Does that good have any meaning to you at all?

No one in the USA was prosecuted for the crimes we committed. But many Germans and Japanese (and Italians) got away without prosecution as well (chief in my mind being the Japanese “scientists” who “experimented” on US POWs–no one said a word about them postwar). The millions of Asian peoples who were the victims of Japanese aggression in WWII got no say in the trials…

But when it comes down to it: Yes, the war was ugly. Yes, no one got away without guilt for some kind of atrocity. But lets face it–who in the world WANTED to prosecute Americans in 1945? I think most world citizens were focused on how to rebuild…how to heal…

Ozone27