It isn’t common knowledge, but back in World War II, there were nearly a million Axis prisoners of war on American soil.
They were housed in camps, and many of them describe the experience as positive, especially after the long, cramped trip across the ocean in the belly of a ship.
They were mostly German, but some were Italian, and even fewer Japanese, spread out over nearly every single state in the union.
When the public found out, and then the media, there was some outrage.
“These were the ones killing our sons overseas,” was the argument. “And now we’re putting them up, feeding them, while civillians are rationed?”
The argument from the government was that so long as we treat the enemy well, they’ll treat us the same when our soldiers are captured.
Then it came out that American soldiers were not treated the same overseas, particularly by the Japanese, but also in Germany in Italy. They were living under horrible conditions and often subjected to beatings and starvation.
But the U.S. government stayed firm. Their position became if we start treating them badly, then we’re no better than them.
I know that it’s different now. Warfare has evolved, and particularly in the Middle East soldiers and civilians are often indistinguishable.
That brings up the question of whether prisoners are murderers or soldiers doing their job. Maybe the rules need to change.
But one thing that won’t ever change is the moral implications for how we treat the enemy.
