In his book, Victors Justice Richard Minears major concern was to challenge the prevailing image of the Tokyo War Crime Trials and to demolish its credibility.  In pursuit of this objective Minear poses the following questions:
1.    Did the Tokyo War Crime Trials match the high ideal of enlisting international law in the cause of world peace?
2.    Did Power submit to Reason? Or was the Tokyo trial only barely disguised revenge?
3.    Did the victors offer the vanquished a poisoned chalice?
4.    If the trial was indeed a travesty, was it so because a lofty aim was pursed by ignoble means?
Choose one of these questions and critically analyze Minears underlying arguments. What evidence does Minear offer to support his response to the question?  Do you agree or disagree with Minear?