Victor's
Justice Vs.
Morality
The Hitchens
Conundrum
By Patrick
J. Buchanan
25/06/08 "
Post
Chronicle"
-- - -Did
Hitler's
crimes
justify the
Allies'
terror-bombing
of Germany?
Indeed they
did, answers
Christopher Hitchens in
his Newsweek
response to
my new book,
"Churchill,
Hitler and
the
Unnecessary
War":
"The stark
evidence of
the Final
Solution has
ever since
been enough
to dispel
most doubts
about, say,
the wisdom
or morality
of
carpet-bombing
German
cities."
Atheist,
Trotskyite
and newborn
neocon,
Hitchens
embraces the
morality of
'lex
talionis' -
an eye for
an eye. If
Germans
murdered
women and
children,
the British
were morally
justified in
killing
German women
and
children.
According to
British
historians,
however,
Churchill
ordered the
initial
bombing of
German
cities on
his first
day in
office, the
very first
day of the
Battle of
France, on
May 10,
1940.
After the
fall of
France,
Churchill
wrote Lord
Beaverbrook,
minister of
air
production:
"When I look
round to see
how we can
win the war,
I see that
there is
only one
sure path
... an
absolutely
devastating,
exterminating
attack by
very heavy
bombers from
this country
upon the
Nazi
homeland."
"Exterminating
attack,"
said
Churchill.
By late
1940, writes
historian
Paul
Johnson,
"British
bombers were
being used
on a great
and
increasing
scale to
kill and
frighten the
German
civilian
population
in their
homes."
"The
adoption of
terror
bombing was
a measure of
Britain's
desperation,"
writes
Johnson. "So
far as air
strategy was
concerned,"
adds British
historian
A.J.P.
Taylor, "the
British
outdid
German
frightfulness
first in
theory,
later in
practice,
and a nation
which
claimed to
be fighting
for a moral
cause
gloried in
the extent
of its
immoral
acts."
The
chronology
is crucial
to Hitchens'
case.
Late 1940
was a full
year before
the mass
deportations
from the
Polish
ghettos to
Treblinka
and Sobibor
began.
Churchill
had ordered
the
indiscriminate
bombing of
German
cities and
civilians
before the
Nazis had
begun to
execute the
Final
Solution.
By Hitchens'
morality and
logic,
Germans at
Nuremberg
might have
asserted a
right to
kill women
and children
because that
is what the
British were
doing to
their women
and
children.
After the
fire-bombing
of Dresden
in 1945,
Churchill
memoed his
air chiefs:
"It seems to
me that the
moment has
come when
the question
of bombing
of German
cities
simply for
the sake of
increasing
the terror,
though under
other
pretexts,
should be
reviewed."
Churchill
concedes
here what
the British
had been
about in
Dresden.
Under
Christian
and 'just
war' theory,
the
deliberate
killing of
civilians in
wartime is
forbidden.
Nazis were
hanged for
such war
crimes.
Did the
Allies
commit acts
of war for
which we
hanged
Germans?
When we
recall that
Josef
Stalin's
judges sat
beside
American and
British
judges at
Nuremberg,
and one of
the
prosecutors
there was
Andrei
Vishinsky,
chief
prosecutor
in Stalin's
show trails,
the answer
has to be
yes.
While Adolf
Hitler and
the Nazis
were surely
guilty of
waging
aggressive
war in
September
1939, Stalin
and his
comrades had
joined the
Nazis in the
rape of
Poland, and
had raped
Finland,
Estonia,
Lithuania
and Latvia,
as well.
Scores of
thousands of
civilians in
the three
Baltic
countries
were
murdered.
Yet, at
Nuremberg,
Soviets sat
in judgment
of their
Nazi
accomplices,
and had the
temerity to
accuse the
Nazis of the
Katyn Forest
massacre of
the Polish
officer
corps that
the Soviets
themselves
had
committed.
Americans
fought
alongside
British
soldiers in
a just and
moral war
from 1941 to
1945. But we
had as
allies a
Bolshevik
monster
whose hands
dripped with
the blood of
millions of
innocents
murdered in
peacetime.
And to have
Stalin's
judges sit
beside
Americans at
Nuremberg
gave those
trials an
aspect of
hypocrisy
that can
never be
erased.
At
Nuremberg,
Adm. Erich
Raeder was
sentenced to
prison for
life for the
invasion of
neutral
Norway. Yet
Raeder's
ships
arrived 24
hours before
British
ships and
marines of
an operation
championed
by Winston
Churchill.
The British
had planned
to violate
Norwegian
neutrality
first and
seize
Norwegian
ports to
deny Germany
access to
the Swedish
iron ore
being
transshipped
through
them. For
succeeding
where
Churchill
failed,
Raeder was
condemned as
a war
criminal and
sent to
prison.
The London
Charter of
the
International
Military
Tribunal
decided that
at Nuremberg
only the
crimes of
Axis powers
would be
prosecuted
and that
among those
crimes would
be a newly
invented
"crimes
against
humanity."
This decree
was issued
Aug. 8,
1945, 48
hours after
we dropped
the first
atom bomb on
Hiroshima
and 24 hours
before we
dropped the
second on
Nagasaki.
We and the
British
judiciously
decided not
to prosecute
the Nazis
for the
bombing of
London and
Coventry.
It was an
understandable
decision,
and one that
surely Gen.
Curtis LeMay
concurred
in, as LeMay
had boasted
at war's
end, "We
scorched and
boiled and
baked to
death more
people in
Tokyo that
night of
March 9-10
than went up
in vapor in
Hiroshima
and Nagasaki
combined."
After the
war, a lone
Senate voice
arose to
decry what
was taking
place at
Nuremberg as
"victor's
justice."
Ten years
later, a
young
colleague
would
declare the
late Robert
A. Taft "A
Profile in
Courage" for
having
spoken up
against ex
post facto
justice. The
young
senator was
John F.
Kennedy.
Patrick J.
Buchanan is
the author
of
Churchill,
Hitler and
The
Unnecessary
War: How
Britain Lost
Its Empire
and the West
Lost the
World
COPYRIGHT
2008
CREATORS
SYNDICATE
INC.
