"Kay" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:DAJJa.66$Hs2.100650@news.uswest.net...
> In article <RzIJa.3305$Hj6.2905@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>, USA@aol.com
> says...
> >
> >
> >"Austin P. So (Hae Jin)" <haejin@netinfo.ubc.ca> wrote in message
> >news:bd7gtu$34l$3@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
> >> "USA" <USA@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> news:nkDIa.2357$k22.539@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> >>
> >> > Here's one I'll throw at you....is Adolph Hitler a War Criminal?
> >> > I'm sure we all agree that he is...but do we ever call him one?
> >> > Why not?
> >>
> >> Ah...I see...
> >>
> >> You understand and agree that Hitler was a war criminal despite that f
> >act
> >> that he was not tried under court and therefore under legal terms "gui
> >lty"
> >> of war crimes.
> >>
> >> By that argument, you also seem to agree that Hirohito may have been a
> > war
> >> criminal, only that because he didn't face a tribunal, didn't face any
> >> charges, and therefore not guilty of war crimes in any legal sense.
> >>
> >> In other words, you actually agree with Kay.
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >> Austin
> >>
> >
> >You seem to have missed the point Austin. Or deliberately walked around
> >it.
> >The fact is we DON'T call or label Adolph Hitler a War Criminal.
> >Why don't you take a wild guess why we don't.
> >Same applies for Benito Mussolini.
>
> What difference does it make whether he
> was tred or not?
>
> Hitler was responsible to start the war.
> Hitler was responsible for the genocide.
> How can you say he is not a war criminal
> while you call his generals and ministers
> who were found guilty at Nurenberg war crimianls?
>
> It's like cronic arguments of the right wing
> Americans who say Clinton is a liar because he
> lied under oath but Bush is not because he
> lied but not under oath.  Lie is a lie is a lie
> in my book.  If the evidence proves that they
> lied, they are both liars.
>