Law means anything if its applied equally to all sides. Biased applications of law, does not mean anything. Nuremberg Trials were political: We humiliated and

Law means anything if its applied equally to all sides. Biased applications of law, does not mean anything. Nuremberg Trials were political: We humiliated and destroyed the Nazi's for loosing and killing 6 million jews. Nothing wrong with it but nothing lawful about it either. If Nuremberg Trials were lawful, then we should have put US generals on trial for indiscriminately burning Tokyo, Osaka, Nagasaki killing millions (including small children). I don't see how this is any different from the holocaust except that its close to 700k dead vs 6 million in holocaust. If you think this numerical difference gives complete immunity to US soldiers for targeting civilians, I'm really interested in your moral philosophy. We should also have put most of Russian Army on trial for massacring most of the German Army and a large chunk of their population (Close to 10 million). Arguably the charges would be much lower since most law allow killing of soldiers, however without soldiers it was still close to a million civilians killed. Thinking that Nuremberg trials wasn't just a political show that was arguable necessary to maintain peace, but was instead pursuing some ephemeral Universal Justice is being deluded