Firebombing of japanese cities WW2

Site Issues 2008 Archive Room
#101

Hi bt3au.
Welcome on the board.
Sure you right here the Jap even did not want to surrender right after the A-bombing.Like they did nt surrender after the Firebombing of Tokio in march 1945 ( when the casulates were even more).
And i doubt that the any bombing/terrirising/annihilation of its peoples WOULD ever has the EFFECT for the wishes of the Jap to fight.
Honestly speaking we do not exactly know - had the a-bombing any effect to the decision of imperor at all At least we know for the sure that the Jap themself refused the a-bombing as the positive action that had helped to finish the war ( as it tell the official Washington &co).
So i personaly have the serious doubt that the a-bombing was even considering when the Imperor take the decicion to surrender.
There was very importaint other even that forced them to capitulate - the absolute desperate military situation in the front.
First of all we know from the intelligence ( soviet datas) that the Jap was waiting for the Soviet entering the war NO earlie summer of 1946. So they mistakelly thought they have a time( the whole year).
However after the beginning of crushing the Kwantung Army already in 8 aug 1945 this was absolutly clearly for any one who had the true infore ( firstly the Imperor) that THE WAR WAS LOST in military sence.
They could continie to speak the propogandic noncence for the people but it was clear- the game was over.
From this time the ONLY one really terrible thing could happen with then- The soviet-american invasion to the home Islands.
I hope you understand that for Japenese who believed that the Imperor is a GOD will be the full catastrophe the Soviet invasion to the Hokkaido who refuse the any religion at all.
So if the Imperor would not a fool ( and i hope you should agree he was not) he could understand that the continie of fight could bring juct much more TERIBLE suffer- the lost of the HOME LAND ( as may be yo know it was the HOLY Central concept for the Japs together with the concept of Imperor).
They could lost the Imperor, but to lost the Land- this should be quite unpossible for them. SO any fanatism should go away befor the mind.

Such is war when fighting fanatics, any logical and sane leader would have seen his country was stuffed and couldnt fight any longer.
Even the Nazi Doenitz knew Germany couldnt fight on and surrendered

Right but i doubt that the Nazy fanatism was weaker than the Jap.
Do not forget the fanatical and fiercing Battle for Berlin, Breslau and Prague.
And Doenitz had surrender AFTTER the full crushing of the GErmans troops near the Berlin.
He surrender coz he had no more any combat-ready troops that could realised his orders.Except the few surrounded divisions.

To understand why decisions during WW2 were made, you cannot look at them from today’s viewpoint and todays attitudes
Our thinking and attitudes are dramatically different from the generation of that era

Agree.
However do not think you this strange - why we judged the NAzy and Jap behaviour and its crimes WITHOUT context of history. But we always speak - to understand our behaviour we need to look from generation ot THAT era?
What is this dual standarts or “histroy writes by the winners” approach?

Cheers.

#102

The Soviets still maintained a massively large army in the forties…

And the article you linked also states the Soviets had bomber plans of their own to deliever nuclear weapons…

And “Operation Dropshot” was not different than any other hypothetical and contingency warplanning carried out by all nations, including preemptive nuclear plans of the USSR…

#103

The Japanese Imperial Army officers’ coup détat was very close to success and had the support of the majority of the Army as there were clearly some in the JIA that wanted to fight to the bitter end --to the last civilian.

And there is far more evidence to support this including the mass suicides of civilians, and parents throwing their children over cliffs, that took place after the complete conquest of Okinawa…

And Soviet tanks were little closer to mainland Japan on August 9th than they had been on August 7th, despite their overwhelming of a hollow army with little in the way of effective tanks or anti-tank weapons fighting on an open plane…

#104

Mate the battle to the last civiliance is not that chould care the Imperor of nation.
If you have no civiliance - you have no nation.
Even if the Army coup was succesfull - there is no any doubts the Imperor was not alone who want to stope tha massacre - and through the week the other anti-armies coup could happen.
So i/m really doubt the Japanes were ready to die ALL especially when the saw what was happaned with Germany (full destruction and initial division of territory and NATION for the several parts of influence).
No one even reasonable Jap imperor/prime minister or ets want the same for the its state.
The terrible end is the much better the the Terror without end.

And there is far more evidence to support this including the mass suicides of civilians, and parents throwing their children over cliffs, that took place after the complete conquest of Okinawa…

Exactly on this reason in case if Japs want to continie fight- and the American’s/Soviet captured the ALL home islands - the mass siucide of civiliances was INEVITABLE.
So again if the Any Japan gov should avoid it by the surrending- they did it any way.
The FANATISM is a good thing when this has a SENSE. But fanatism WITHOUT sense is the foolish SUICIDE…This was pERMISSIBLE JAp officers corps and soldiers- however NO ONE IMPEROR should not let it for the ITS NATION.
Coz Japane imperor was responsible for its nation ( coz he was a GOD).

#105

I read a learned book (can’t recall title or author) by some ?American academic some time ago that argued that the emperor agreed to Japanese expansionism and to the war, and ultimatley decided to surrender, purely to preserve the imperial system, as summarised below.

Imperial complicity in the path to and conduct of the war was a consequence of the emperor’s lack of power against the rising militarists, so when faced with a choice between what was best for him and his line versus any other consideration, he always conceded what they wanted to avoid a repetition of previous instances in Japanese history of warlords dispensing with an obstructive emperor. He allowed misery to be visited on millions of people in other countries to save himself and his line. That’s not to say that he wasn’t a keen supporter of expansion and the war, despite subsequent attempts to whitewash the little prick.

The only significance the civilians had in the emperor’s thinking on surrender was that if they Japanese nation was destroyed then the imperial system went with it. He did it to save himself and his line, not the Japanese people.

#106

Why mate?
While the Imperor refused the Potsdam Unconditional Surrender to capitulate that had a line- the Imperor must be removed from a power.Therefore he refused coz this mean the distruction of the Jap monarhy institute.BTW this fact was widelly know for the allies - so if they want to win the Japanes- thay could only ADD a little string and saved them the Imperor after the military crime tribunal.But they did not suggest it in the Potsdam.
But in 15 aug he already WAS ready for the uconditional surrounf- he sertainly knew that he could not be in power after the Surrender.
And only one think that he could reach - to save the its people from the more suffering.

#107

Um Chevan, the coup-officers tried to find and seize two vinyl (record album) recordings of the Emperor’s ambiguous surrender message. They were only thwarted by a radio studio engineer that hid with them in a closet…

They very much were going to control what he said and did. Because, the Emperor was completely unknown to the people…

#108

Agree.
However do not think you this strange - why we judged the NAzy and Jap behaviour and its crimes WITHOUT context of history. But we always speak - to understand our behaviour we need to look from generation ot THAT era?
What is this dual standarts or “histroy writes by the winners” approach?

Cheers.[/quote]

not dual standards mate, the reasons behind the actions of any of the belligerents in WW2 MUST be looked at from the point of view and the prevailing mindset and moral code of the initiator of those actions. Its no good looking at something that happened in WW2 and judging it as right or wrong, good or evil from OUR point of view/prevailing mindset and moral code, as they are very very different from that of 60 odd years ago.

#109

As far as blanket statement cliches such as “history is written by the winners” and the like when it comes to the unpleasantries of mass killings of civilians and humanitarian crises, I’ve never heard denials of the extent of strategic bombing and civilian deaths and the like from the descendants of “The Allies”…

The only real deniers are (but not limited to) Third Reich apologists and the current Japanese gov’t.:slight_smile:

Information and historical research on the regrettable circumstances that afflicted many innocent Germans: such as mass rapes, deaths in bombings, and the largest displacement of a peoples in modern history are readily available. But in context of starting the War, and Holocaust(s), they’re only going to garner so much sympathy…

I doubt that would be the case on subjects, say, regarding the Jewish creed or Chinese autonomy if the reverse were true and the Axis had won…

#110

A bit limited, old sport. :slight_smile:

Japanese governments have been flat out writing the loser’s version for most of the past sixty years, once they recovered from the terror of being viciously bombed by the evil Americans who had absolutely no reason to want to harm a peaceful people who had tried for years to liberate Asia peacefully from the Europoean colonial yoke. :rolleyes:

The problem with viewing events like firebombing Japanese cities in isolation from their historical context is that anything can be made to look bad.

Roosevelt and Truman didn’t each wake up one morning and think “Gee, what can I do today to make life a misery for a bunch of innocent Japs who’ve never done anything to me or my country.”

Japan reaped as it sowed, but for reasons to do with Japanese pride and cultural inability to admit fault, some of the more influential and very dangerous Nipponese idiots prefer the view that Truman woke up one morning and thought “Why don’t I nuke a lot of innocent Japs, just because they’re there and just because I can.”

The same irrational belief is taken up by the anti-nuclear crew etc, for the best of motives; with the least knowledge of how it happened; and with the conviction that people who suffer terribly are always the victims of an evil regime.

The odd thing is, you never hear these same well meaning people get their knickers in a knot over what Japan did in China and elsewhere which, strange to relate but true, some people think might have had just a touch of bearing on why Japan got bombed and why China is still pissed off with it.

#111

Of course. But I specifically really, really HATE that saying! (“history is written by the blah blah blah…”) It reeks of such pseudo-intellectual shit. Yes, in some circumstances there is some truth to it. But the defeated here are totalitarians that had already completely rewritten their own contemporary and past histories - often as the “losers” of WWI. And Japan continues to do so today!

#112

Really yo never hear the deniars of extent of strategic bombing Nick?:wink:
And what about Dresden where were killed about 100 000 however the “official version” is no more 25 000;)

The only real deniers are (but not limited to) Third Reich apologists and the current Japanese gov’t.:slight_smile:

Yea …except the Baltic states who organize the parades of Waffen SS ans installs the movenment for the former Nazy soldiers nobody want re-write the history;)

Cheers.

#113

Mate i’m a great admirer of your surcasm;)
Yo really know how make it :wink:
I m getting the great enjoy.
"just becouse they are here and just becouse i can …:slight_smile:
Cheers.

#114

Agreed.

The history statement is analagous to the dismissive term ‘victor’s justice’, which in many contexts implies that there is no justice in what the victors do because the victor allegedly doesn’t apply the same process to its own actions.

On the contrary, the more realistic position is that the justice the victors apply to the losers in a reasonably constituted legal process (e.g. Nuremberg, IMTFE) is no worse than a lot of other criminal legal processes, regardless of whether or not the victor applies the same justice to its own actions.

#115

Maybe because the “historian” that wrote of those numbers was himself:

1.) a hack with little specific training or university coursework pertaining to being a historian, which began to show in the unsupportable claims of his later works. The fact that his book was taken at face value initially in shows that there was, and is, greater attention paid to the “atrocities” of the Western Allies and questioning of the morallity of burning cities and their civilian inhabitants, beginning in the late 1970s and continuing today. This especially in Germany where talk of strategic bombing had been a taboo subject due to the collective feelings of war guilt there up until very recently, which have faded…

2.) one that later showed pro-fascist sympathies and an adoration of Hitler…

3.) not to mention his claims regarding only 100,000 plus Jews dying in the “Holocaust” which is utter shit…

Yea …except the Baltic states who organize the parades of Waffen SS ans installs the movenment for the former Nazy soldiers nobody want re-write the history;)

Cheers.

Yes well, this is problematic, isn’t it?

But the Baltic states are no threat to anybody

#116

Mate the “historian” that you mean wrote another figures of victims- 250 000 according the doctor Goebbels “figures”. Besides some of the some of adorations of Hitler told about possibly 500 000 of victims.
Sute they are all just the biased nuts.
Hovewed to believe that in city where were concentrated over 1 millions of refugees and citizents and that was 70% fully destroyed by the firetornado,there were killed less then 2,5 percent of peoples ( 25 000 according the “right historians”)- its ALSO noncence Nick.

3.) not to mention his claims regarding only 100,000 plus Jews dying in the “Holocaust” which is utter shit…

Oh the Holoaust shit again … do not begin it :wink:
This is not a thread fro it.

Yes well, this is problematic, isn’t it?

But the Baltic states are no threat to anybody

Oh come on Nick…Who does treats to anybody?
May be Japane?- the docile ally of USA that even participated in US coalition in Iraq?
So why do yo so worry about the Japanes revisionism- they threats to nobody Nick :wink:

#117

Just a reminder that this topic is Bombing Japan, while its OK to stray a wee bit its not for general talk of the Baltic or War in Iraq.

Cheers

#118

Agree Firefly.
However those matter would be very useful to understand the “context of history”.
Coz for me the new Baltic neo-fascism and relation to that movenment the officials in Washington is very DANGER.
And i think you will not deny the fact that the without the contex of the events the firebombing of the Japane IS the nothing more then pure genocide.
However some of our members looks as thgat through the revenge for Japanes behaviour in China,Korea and treating of the allies POWs during the war.( the point that i/m partly agree)
So if we speaks about Japan firebombing in that manner- why we should ignore the other events that could characterised and explained the situation with revisionism?

Cheers.

#119

But Irving was clearly biased towards Hitler…

Oh the Holoaust shit again … do not begin it :wink:
This is not a thread fro it.

Unfortunately you mention “context” of history in your response to Firefly that follows where you defend the mentioning of the neo-fascist revival in the Baltic States. Then you tell me this? Interesting…

However, I think the fact that even you would not doubt that at least upwards of above 100,000 Jews were killed, were they not? And certainly the Germans had actively killed Jews? That they didn’t just die of a typhus outbreak?

Irving has. Clearly, his a bias is evident and he’s no special historical education…

I think this tends to cover a lot of his book in a shadow of doubt…

Oh come on Nick…Who does treats to anybody?
May be Japane?- the docile ally of USA that even participated in US coalition in Iraq?
So why do yo so worry about the Japanes revisionism- they threats to nobody Nick :wink:

Are you saying the mighty Russians could not defeat Lichtenstein? Really?

And I’m not as threatened by Japanese revisionism as I am appalled at their two-faced hypocrisy. The way they claim martyrship yet find it impossible to take any responsibility for their aggressive actions in WWII…

#120

No shadow indeed. Nick if i has no the 'special historian" education - is this problem for me or for you to study the historical events and disscussed it?
I/m not a great admirer of Irving, however the absurd figure is 100 000 of killed jews is not that speak about the revisionists.
They tells about at least 1-2 million of jews who died during the war( including the died from illness and famine).

Are you saying the mighty Russians could not defeat Lichtenstein? Really?

Lichtenstein…:wink: Sure no Nick. Coz Lishtenstain is the really proud neitral state - do not need to threat them.:wink:
Lishtenstain do not organised the rusofobia, waffen SS parades and other hostitle actions toward the ethnical monorities.
But Baltic , be covering by the Nato i.e. new american “masters” , declared officially the suppressive domestic polisy toward the russian-speaking minority.
In the contrary, Japane do not threat to ani-body, they do not suppresse any minorities and ets;)

And I’m not as threatened by Japanese revisionism as I am appalled at their two-faced hypocrisy. The way they claim martyrship yet find it impossible to take any responsibility for their aggressive actions in WWII…

Oh mate , really they refuse any responsibility… Something prompts for me you are little biased.
They do nor deny its guilt, however - they do not agree to be responsible for ALL evil in the asia.( as the Germans was forced to accept because of our post-war ideological pressure).