Oh, do tell!
What about the fact that Japan was an invader waging a merciless war of aggression in China?
Yes, merciless like the opium war or the boxer’s war…
yeah, I know, this is only about world war two.
As much fun as it may be to engage in tangential distraction, its also off topic. Please confine your remarks to the subject of the thread.
Well, there’s a difference between “sending a crack squadron” and “recruiting volunteers.” Which is it?
Against “Japanese interests” in China? Really? What about standing up for the Chinese interests in China? And whatever Pat Buchanan selectively spews–he’s a rabid isolationist old school conservative, borderline reactionary, with an agenda. In any case, none of the American Volunteer Group were on active duty. They were all discharged and essentially acting as officially sanctioned mercenaries IIRC. So what? Japan had also long prepared for a war against the U.S. and had launched and unprovoked attack on a U.S. Navy gunboat in China prior to the AVG IIRC…
I apologize for that,
There is an interesting article about Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombing in this website:
Oh my! What an interesting article on the atomic bombings. :rolleyes:
Maybe they should post articles on how only a few hundred Japanese actually died in the bombings?
Incidentally, I’m giving you a warning for knowingly posting links to what is universally reviled as a Holocaust Denier site…
Not very interesting, just the usual denial pap delivered by the choir of pap. Really, is this the very best you can come up with? You are already aware that Holocaust denial material, or site links are unacceptable on this site. You are skating on thin ice here buddy, and there’s no denying that.
Frankly I didn´t know which was the position of this forum about IHR, It wasn´t my intention to provoke a reaction like this. Actually, I was curious about what would be that reaction and if there were some information to get from this forum about that site.
Now I know, my apologies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review
But I’m pretty sure you were aware of the controversial nature of the site to begin with…
Nice try Kurt, but no sale. posting a link to a controversial site in order to gain a response: “I was curious about what would be that reaction” is much the same as trolling. I formally warn you against any such activity in the future. No more excuses, no more apologies.
Japanese interests in China were countersigned by the US in the Lansing-Ishii Agreement of 1917:
In the published text of the Agreement, signed by United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing and Japanese special envoy Ishii Kikujirō, both parties pledged to uphold the Open Door policy in China, with respect to its territorial and administrative integrity. However, the United States government also acknowledged that Japan had “special interests” in China due to its geographic proximity, especially in those areas of China adjacent to Japanese territory, which was in effect, a contradiction to the Open Door Policy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lansing–Ishii_Agreement
What about the Lansing-Ishii Agreement of 1917 states the Japanese have the right to unilateral invasion, subjugation, and virtual genocide as part of their “special interests”?
And abrogated by America about five year later. http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9505E4D81F30EE3ABC4153DFB5668389639EDE
In the published text of the Agreement, signed by United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing and Japanese special envoy Ishii Kikujirō, both parties pledged to uphold the Open Door policy in China, with respect to its territorial and administrative integrity. However, the United States government also acknowledged that Japan had “special interests” in China due to its geographic proximity, especially in those areas of China adjacent to Japanese territory, which was in effect, a contradiction to the Open Door Policy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lansing–Ishii_Agreement
That’s what you get for using Wiki as a source when you don’t know enough about a subject to know whether or not it’s even moderately accurate.
However, the fact that you even know about something as obscure as the Lansing-Ishii notes demonstrates that you know considerably more than is consistent with your pretence of seeking knowledge from those of us better informed than you. Which is entirely consistent with you being a troll.
Here is a formal warning from a moderator who has previously suspended you for other misconduct, and in light of warnings to you from other moderators about your cute trolling: Stop it or you will be banned.
Don’t bother apologising or otherwise trying to slide out of what you’ve been doing. Just stop it.
And your point?, I can see a unilateral abrogation of a bilateral agreement, which one is more legitimate?
This is getting tiresome. But, why did you not answer my question regarding the nature of Japan’s supposedly recognized special interests? Why are we quibbling over legitimacy’s over abrogations? I mean, if one party can recognize something illegitimate, they have the right to unrecognized something as well. Do they not?
I mean, are you really saying that Japan had the right to launch a war of aggression against China because of wording of a certain bilateral transaction? Or are you saying the U.S. had no moral authority to judge such action, let alone take action supportive of the Chinese? Just trying to clarify…
More to the point, what is your point?
The 1917 agreement was overtaken by subsequent events, most notably Japan’s exit in 1934 from the Washington Naval Treaty and its successors, allowing it to build up its navy to challenge the US and Britain, and entering the Tripartite Pact in 1940 thereby aligning itself with Germany which in due course would declare war on the US, albeit only after Japan’s sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.
Pulling out obscure and outdated and irrelevant minor agreements between the US and Japan concerning China has no material bearing on the causes of the war or the legitimacy, or illegitimacy, of either nation’s wartime conduct.
I can’t think of anything more illegitimate that Japan’s sneak attack on Pearl Harbor and I can’t see how America’s abrogation of the 1917 agreement has anything to do with it in any way that justifies or even explains Japan’s conduct in commencing the war and its appalling conduct in prosecuting it, or that warranted America not using atomic weapons against Japan.
It depends upon what that nation did to your kith and kin. Some “terrible things” result in a deep hatred in some peoples minds and why shouldn’t it? If you don’t want people to have that attitude then I would recommend not doing the terrible things in the first place rather than censoring such individuals for expressing their views. (Off topic modern example, if some one drops a bomb on my son’s wedding party then I might well develop some deep rooted hatred and desire for revenge against the nation that did that to me, then again I might not, but I don’t know as it hasn’t happened to me.)
Although this was a horrific act for the lives that were taken… I feel that is was a means to an end, that at the time needed to be done.
I think it wouldd’t be such an horrifict act of war, if it was not the act of deterrent against ussr.I believe if the USSR not entered into the war with Japane - we probably never knew the Hiroshima. The surrounded Japane would fall into the Yankees hands most late in january 1946. Becouse they simply had nothing to eat. But USSR was involved and quickly advanced deep into the former Western comtrolled territory ( and had the plans to land into the Hokkaido) so Americans were in hurry to “finish the war as soon as possible”.Though war that was almost finished already.
So in fact the involvenment of USSR was the reason to drop the bomb.And this fact make me ill. Russia was involved into that horrific war crime.
The bomb was needed not to finish the war, but to finish it “at the moment”, as soon as possible.
That’s great news, maybe I can “abrogate” my marriage after all,
I will post a proper answer for you and Mr. Rising Sun later,