Kato.
If you cant back up any of your sweeping statements with any sources whatever then as guys have said, it seems like a simple Troll to me.
Please provide some information to back up your theories.
Thanks
You, guys, had plenty of knowledge and objectivity to refer to A-bombing as to something other than a war crime. After it you just don’t need any other information and theories.
…
What information do you need? That hundreds of thousands of the victims of American A-bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were women and children?
That the deliberate mass murder of civilians is a war crime?
The information that nearly all the countries of the region had been controlled and exploited by Brits and Americans for decades prior to the short Japanese occupation?
Or that Japan was a super-power that had kept pace with the West in technological and scientific development for decades prior to the end of WWII without Americans?
Thanks for the Wiki page citing NO sources and long discredited, exaggerated death tolls…
Yes the US committed atrocities against the Filipinos, or more specifically the Moro Tribesmen (as did other Filipinos against the various differing ethnic groups of their countrymen, as many fought with the US forces…)
But, I fail to see how an American counterinsurgency campaign in 1901 justifies wholesale murder of the Chinese by the Japanese in the 30s and 40s. Not to mention that the Filipinos didn’t exactly welcome their “liberation” by their “Asian brothers,” either…
BTW, if the US had no right to be “moralists.” Then what gives the Japanese the right to be moralists? If they could kill wholesale from 1931 to 1945 based on what the US did 30 years previously, what gives them the right to complain about being nuked? Or you for that matter…
Americans interned the Japanese citizens of the US.
And this compares with what the Japanese did how? Nobody here has ever said that is right, but I might add that the Japanese interned all Westerners, and even murdered numbers of them.
The Japanese-Americans, or Nisei, have also had reparations paid. Too little, too late. But what has Japan ever done as far as acknowledging their brutal, vicious campaigns featuring a complete lack of regard for human life…
There were few communists left in Japan, as RS* had pointed out. They were persecuted by the totalitarian Japanese police state…
In any case, the supplies would have had to been landed via shipping. Something not bloody likely too be allowed. In any case, it was never American policy to “oppress peoples.” We certainly can argue over how much it was in the American self-interest to rebuild countries in order to establish rich and successful trading partners - It certainly WAS! But at least you can credit the US for being far more visionary than the totalitarian occupiers were. At least say the humanitarian principles of the enlightenment drove US policy. Certainly unlike the political order that preceded it…
That was the main reason for more or less good conduct of Americans in Japan.
So. Why didn’t the US just begin mass executions? Sending What would have stopped them? Communist aid?
Why didn’t the US just do the same to Germany? Furthermore, both Japan and Germany acted in their self-interests when they occupied countries by enslaving and the use of forced labor, using terror, and intimidation to control whole populations. Can you please provide an example of how “communist aid” or even Allied operations such as the SOE or OSS “Jedburgh teams” really provided much impact on making things difficult for an occupying force. These would be examples far more appropriate and analogous to the US occupation of Japan, since you fail to understand even the basic histories of the Korean War or the Indochina/Vietnam War of 1946-1975…
Again, your posts are just silly argument fodder rife with internal contradictions…
“Hundreds of thousands?” You mean 150,000 actually…
That the deliberate mass murder of civilians is a war crime?
Oh, but they WEREN’T all civilians. Most had been conscripted into the Japanese Civilian Defense Militia:
Our troops face not only the roughly three million regular and garrison troops of Japan’s armed forces but a civilian militia that sometimes seems to include the entire Japanese nation. American intelligence reports confirm that in preparation for “Ketsu Go,” as the Japanese have termed their preparations for the American invasion, nearly 32 million Japanese were drafted into the civilian militia. That includes all males aged 15 to 60 and all women from 17 to 45. Their weapons include ancient bronze cannon, muzzle-loading muskets, and even spears and bows and arrows. More than ten thousand Kamikaze planes were readied, many of which have already been used. The harakiri cult has been extended even to little children, who have been trained to strap explosives around their waists, roll under tank treads, and blow themselves up.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-3904017.html
Yes! Those wonderful minions of the Japanese Emperor who loved their children so much, they were prepared to send them to their deaths in suicide attacks!
The information that nearly all the countries of the region had been controlled and exploited by Brits and Americans for decades prior to the short Japanese occupation?
Which countries? The Philippines? Singapore?
So it was now okay for the Japanese to run things even far more savagely?
I guess the US and Great Britain also had no right to object to the gassing of the Jews since both had had anti-semitic elements in their cultures too?
Or that Japan was a super-power that had kept pace with the West in technological and scientific development for decades prior to the end of WWII without Americans?
Japan would have been a backward, shangri la Samurai feudal state that had either already been conquered by European powers, or existed centuries behind the modern era, as it was the US that forced Japan to open its society, largely trained it’s modern army in the 1800s, and served as a model for industrialization and sea commerce and naval power. Americans had very much to do with it…
Is anyone else thinking ironman???
How do you figure that Kato?
Japan wasn’t a super-power, she relied on other countries for all manner of things. I would say a super-power is a country that can go it alone if neccesary. Japan couldn’t do this.
Japan had not kept pace in technological or scientific development. She had bought it from other countries. Particulary Great Britain. The Japanese Navy owed much the to the Royal Navy. Other countries provided know how also. Including the Americans.
If anything it could be said that Japan had achieved what they had inspite of being Japanese rather than because of it. Many of the traditions and customs of the Japanese clashed with the modern inventions and science.
A car presented to the Emperor by the British was never used… the Emperor could not be seen driving himself, and none of his lackeys could be seen in front of the emperor!!!
I suppose they could have reversed everywhere!!! 
Most of the wartime technology improvements came from Nazi Germany. U-boats provided the templates for most of the Japanese Subs, and the planes were practically all Luftwaffe rip offs. Some were identical!!!
More here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese-German_pre-WWII_industrial_co-operation
In my opinion, main criminals are politics but not soldiers
Iron-San?
It’s definitely a troll. No question…
Report him.
Japan would have been a backward, shangri la Samurai feudal state that had either already been conquered by European powers, or existed centuries behind the modern era, as it was the US that forced Japan to open its society, largely trained it’s modern army in the 1800s
Japan was conquered by European powers? And you called me a troll?
Commodore Perry negotiated a treaty allowing American trade with Japan, ending a 200-year period in which trading with Japan was only allowed to the Portuguese, Dutch, Chinese and a few other small groups. Within five years, Japan had signed similar treaties with other western countries. Americans just secured a part of Japanese pie for themselves.
Japan had not kept pace in technological or scientific development. She had bought it from other countries. Particulary Great Britain. The Japanese Navy owed much the to the Royal Navy. Other countries provided know how also. Including the Americans.
Yes, Japan bought know hows and technologies from the West and learnt a lot from the West. The ability to study, use, implement and maintaine these know hows and technologies successfully at the first stage of Japanese modernisations is very laudable. Japan managed to bridge the gap between feudal state and a key world power mainly within three decades after 23 October 1868. It means a lot.
I said WOULD HAVE been. It’s a hypothetical inevitability. Indeed, how did closed societies with anachronistic military technology usually fare in the “age of imperialism?”
Commodore Perry negotiated a treaty allowing American trade with Japan, ending a 200-year period in which trading with Japan was only allowed to the Portuguese, Dutch, Chinese and a few other small groups. Within five years, Japan had signed similar treaties with other western countries. Americans just secured a part of Japanese pie for themselves.
CMDR Perry also forced the Japanese to sign the document, under threat of military/naval action…
Yes, Japan bought know hows and technologies from the West and learnt a lot from the West. The ability to study, use, implement and maintaine these know hows and technologies successfully at the first stage of Japanese modernisations is very laudable. Japan managed to bridge the gap between feudal state and a key world power mainly within three decades after 23 October 1868. It means a lot.
Of course they did, and did so well. But openly with the assistance of the Western Powers. Even during the occupation, it was felt by senior US military and civilian gov’t officers that the Japanese had merely transferred the ideals of their nationalism from a discipline of that that was blatant militarism to one that was far more subtle. One that focused on industrial production and not conquest - with little apparent reflection on morality or historical context…
Who wants a martyr?
as may be,
Oh what a brilliant discuss i’ve missed in here guyes.
Kato you definitelly have shocked me;)
I/m quite womdering on your posts.
Guyes did you think i am bad anti-american ?
No…
Get to know with Kato:D
He is definitelly developed of my previous point;)
Firstly Kato leave the Paul Tibbets aside. He was just a solgier. Good soldier btw.
He carefully had realised its order - and drop the bomb. This is not his quilt.
The main guilt of this is on the AMERICAN POLITICANS, who prefered the inhuman demonstration of American power via the nuclear bombing of civils in pure political aims…
BTW do you know that the most of american hight military command did not support the idea to drope the bomb?
Oh what a brilliant discuss i’ve missed in here guyes.
Kato you definitelly have shocked me;)
I/m quite womdering on your posts.
Guyes did you think i am bad anti-american ?
At least you’re somewhat consistant…
Kato’s a bit ‘out there’ shall we say…
Get to know with Kato:D
He is definitelly developed of my previous point;)
Firstly Kato leave the Paul Tibbets aside. He was just a solgier. Good soldier btw.
He carefully had realised its order - and drop the bomb. This is not his quilt.
The main guilt of this is on the AMERICAN POLITICANS, who prefered the inhuman demonstration of American power via the nuclear bombing of civils in pure political aims…
BTW do you know that the most of american hight military command did not support the idea to drope the bomb?
I agree that if you’re going to blame anybody, then one must blame the politicians. Mainly the Japanese ones. I do think the target selection left something to be desired though…
But distilling the bomb drop down to “purely political aims” is just silly for reasons that have been stated numerous times.
Most in the US command did not like the bomb. But then, they (with the exception of Macarthur who had no qualms about using it in Korea, yet seemed upset at the bomb robbing him of his final coup de grâce) weren’t fully appraised of the situation. The US wanted the War over as quickly as possible, for various reasons.
The Japanese behavior in China certainly does seem odd given the question over why they would want to invade in the first place?
One thing I would be curious about is whether Japanese people can tell themselves apart from Chinese based just on physical appearance? The Chinese seem far more similar to the Japanese in appearance than many other people and I’m wondering how the Japanese would depict people who greatly resembled themselves as inferiors