Why is Israel not on the list? The entire nation was created at the end of WWII to make up for Hitler's atrocities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 16:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Why War reparations and not War reparation? The latter term is usually used to describe a particular reparation of a set of reparations. The former term is substantially more common (see google-fight). Kingturtle 07:08, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
the article is used to adress what exactly the term War reparations means, as well as some of the most studied (i think) war reparation terms.Ursper 20:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Territores awarded to Poland weren't part of war reperations. I removed the sentence.
The war reparations paid by Finald to the Soviet Union in 1045 - 1952 were momentous and Finalnd was the only country who fulfilled its war repation duties. Could a historian look at this and edit the page accordingly, if considered valuabel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 06:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I deleted the sentence dealing with US reparations for Vietnam and Korea, because there was no source. Please reinsert it if a source is found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Criticism - what about justifications?
I visited this page hoping to understand the logic behind reparations. Disappointingly for me, it has plenty of detail on what reparations are, but little on why they are imposed.
My thinking is as follows: Surely it is enough to have kicked the other country's butt? Why keep the conflict front-of-mind by insisting on an arbitrary payment?
The governments that impose these reparations must have justified their actions somehow. If anyone knows what these justifications might be, please add something to this article.
Cost money to "kicked the other country's butt" as a taxpayer I want no country's butt kicked if I have to pay for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:42, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- In principle, war reparations are founded upon the idea that the losing party started the war and ought to pay for it, both to make up for the victor's costs, and to deter future aggression. In reality, of course, they may be mere extortion by the stronger power, which, having conquered its adversary, finds itself in a position to demand whatever tribute the vanquished power can be compelled to pay. I don't have time to find a source for this, or I'd put it into the article. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The article asserts,
- Some war reparations induced changes in monetary policy. For example, the French payment following the Franco-Prussian war played a major role in Germany's decision to adopt the gold standard. . . . The 230 million silver taels in reparations imposed on defeated China after the Sino-Japanese War led Japan to a similar decision.
There should be some explanation as to how war reparations affected the decision to go onto the gold standard. Did the sudden influx of silver from reparations lower the market value of silver coin, requiring a switch to a more stable standard? Whatever the case, would somebody please find a source that explains this phenomenon, and put the explanation into the article? J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)