Modulous writes:
Further, regardless of the accuracy of the painting, I am cautious of it's dehumanising impact. Even if every man woman and child was prepared to kill and die, it doesn't render them less than human, but the picture might help people think of them as less than human - a common and easy state of mind to slip into. Surely the impression does not, for instance, extend to babies?
But isn't this what war is always like. If we are going to see people as the enemy with the intent of killing them we first have to dehumanize them in our minds, or at least find some other way of detaching ourselves from the killing. Don't we always seem to label the enemy with racist names?
In the end, even if we are victorious I believe that we wind up doing to one degree or another, irreparable physiological damage to the young soldiers that get sent out to fight these wars. Ultimately,we all wind up being somewhat dehumanized.
I'm not trying to justify anything, but I think that the sense that the enemy is sub-human plays into decisions during war time. Now that it's well over half a century behind us, we look at the decision to drop those bombs through a very different lens.
Everybody is entitled to my opinion.