The Atomic Bombs and the Japanese
-
Hey guys, the 61st anniversary of the first use of atomic power in warfare is coming up soon. What are your thoughts?
It is terrible about all the innocent children slaughtered, being a father of two baby boys, I should know. But cannot say I feel much pity for the adults. Their fathers, sons, brothers and husbands have left corpses, raped women and destroyed buildings in their wake all over Asia.
And up to this day, their prime minister still pays his respects to the war criminals at their war shrine! Can you imagine if the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, pays her respects to Hitler, Himmler or Goebbels? They only worship the Americans because they were soundly trounced by them. Their history books deny their heinous acts, they kill whales for "research"(how they say this without breaking out into giggles is just beyond me) and they are the most racist nation in the world.
To the Japanese, might is right. -
I am chewing HELLO KITTY chewing gum.
-
I'm listening to ayumi hamasaki latest singles.
-
i am enjoying pcc watching sora aoi movie.
-
Damn, almost 90% of us here are driving Japanese cars for Pete's sake...
Our homes are made up of Japanese appliances...
And we are all so love Sushi... -
Maybe Japanese girls starting getting attractive after we nuked em. Scrambling all their genes and stuff, ever thought of it that way?
And if you had children with a Japanese girl whose family came from Hiroshima or Nagasaki, your children might end up with 2 heads or something, know? -
The difference between the Imperial east and the Nazi west is that the Germans came to terms with their horrific past. With the admission of misdeeds by their past leaders and the severance of Nazism, Germany has rejuvenated into the industrial powerhouse of Europe.Originally posted by sourketchup:Hey guys, the 61st anniversary of the first use of atomic power in warfare is coming up soon. What are your thoughts?
It is terrible about all the innocent children slaughtered, being a father of two baby boys, I should know. But cannot say I feel much pity for the adults. Their fathers, sons, brothers and husbands have left corpses, raped women and destroyed buildings in their wake all over Asia.
And up to this day, their prime minister still pays his respects to the war criminals at their war shrine! Can you imagine if the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, pays her respects to Hitler, Himmler or Goebbels? They only worship the Americans because they were soundly trounced by them. Their history books deny their heinous acts, they kill whales for "research"(how they say this without breaking out into giggles is just beyond me) and they are the most racist nation in the world.
To the Japanese, might is right.
Angela Merkel is by far, a more conservative chancellor than Gerhard Schröder, and less willing to compromise on the sharing of technologies between industrial powers, particularly China, during her visit to Beijing and talks concerning Mag-rev technology. Clearly, she is a proud German, as are most Germans, especially those generations after the second World war.
The japanese, unfortunately prefer to gloss over their past atrocities, due largely to a 'face' issue, and pride over their imperial past. However, one is perfectly within their rights to visit war shines to honour their home guard and brave civil defence personnel, who led a futile defence of Japanese cities largely against the firestorm bombings by Boeing B-29s of the USAAF. Their inadequate wooden huts of the times simply incenerated under the intense heat and delayed fuse charges by devious American bomb-makers, designed deliberately to overwhelm already helpless fire-fighters with after-explosions.
The fact that they refuse, in their own words, to apologize for mistakes made by their ancestors, is an eternal shame on their wounded pride, a scar they must bear for future generations, until a brave leader, unhinged and unhindered by Japanese custom and cultural taboos, is willing to take the leap to answer, unconditionally, their historical crimes.
Whether we see it in our lifetime remains to be seen. -
I brought up Angela Merkel simply as a contrast between the two aggressor nations of WWII. NO WAY would any German leader bow to Hitler and his henchmen.
I hardly think Koizumi et al would bow in Yasukuni shrine just to honour the brave civil defence personnel during the firestorm raids by the B29s. Koizumi's party had vetoed the proposal to separate the war criminals from the "more innocent" Japanese who died during the Pacific War. That tells you a lot.
To Shutter Bug, I do not think using Japanese goods is totally incompatible to criticism of their behaviour, especially viz a viz WWII. Mildly contradictory perhaps, but that is being pragmatic. Still, I know of many old folks who would avoid buying Japanese goods if they can help it. -
if america dun drop the atomic bomb. history might changed. they might continue their conquest. and singapore may be called japanpore. if us were to invade japan. both sides will suffer heavy casualties. so why suffer both when japan ask for it. the babies all for nothing die. then pearl harbour oso for nothing die just because us duwan to sell the oil and planes to them.
-
Hmm, while most of us drive Japanese cars, many still aspire to own Audis, BMWs, Mercs, and, dare I say it, Ferraris.
Sorry, who lost the war again?
If anything, the Japs got more than even for getting nuked - they unleashed Karaoke on the world.
Seriously, though, I think there are a few things we do need to consider here. First, before all the brouhaha started, would the Japanese have jumped in if their sea routes hadn't been cut? Also, would the bomb have been necessary if the Potsdam Declaration included a clause that stated that the Emperor would have been left in power (which he was anyway)?
Not that it excuses the atrocities commited by the Japanese in the countries that they conquered (for that I'm still not too sorry to see photos of the mushroom clouds to this day), but certainly things could have been handled a lot better by the Allies before the fact. -
Dropping of the bomb was sanctioned primarily to save lives, not end them. Period.Originally posted by Gedanken:Hmm, while most of us drive Japanese cars, many still aspire to own Audis, BMWs, Mercs, and, dare I say it, Ferraris.
Sorry, who lost the war again?
If anything, the Japs got more than even for getting nuked - they unleashed Karaoke on the world.
Seriously, though, I think there are a few things we do need to consider here. First, before all the brouhaha started, would the Japanese have jumped in if their sea routes hadn't been cut? Also, would the bomb have been necessary if the Potsdam Declaration included a clause that stated that the Emperor would have been left in power (which he was anyway)?
Not that it excuses the atrocities commited by the Japanese in the countries that they conquered (for that I'm still not too sorry to see photos of the mushroom clouds to this day), but certainly things could have been handled a lot better by the Allies before the fact.
Japan's stubborn refusal to accept unconditional surrender sparked off the Hiroshima Bomb. Their subesquent hesitation to negotiate after the inital drop sealed Nagasaki's fate.
Not that it would have mattered anyway. In the end, Emperor Hirohito arrogantly still 'refused' to willingly surrender, instead in a radio broadcast to his people to accept the terms, he claimed that the Japanese people had no other option because the aggressors had developed a weapon so powerful and so vile that to resist would have not only meant the extinction of the Japanese, but all life on earth.
Perhaps one can begin to understand the 'cursed' pride of the Japanese and how they have somehow become wholely enslaved by it. -
More lives could have been saved if the Potsdam Declaration had been worded properly. From a diplomatic perspective, the Allies knew that retaining the Emperor's power was to be either the key or the stumbling point to Japan's acceptance of the conditions set forth, yet they left it out.
Was the ommission accidental? Considering the fact that Hirohito was left in place after the surrender, it seems very unlikely that such an crucial angle to the surrender could have been left out.
Bottom line is that there were options other than dropping the bomb. Considering that the uneasy alliance between the West and Russia was about to come to an end, it is entirely possible that the bombs were not only dropped to end the war but to send a warning to Stalin not to try anything after the surrender. -
i saw this on a documentary few months back in SBS...
1 of the few reasons why the americans drop atomic bombs in japan was to test the destructive power and effects of the bomb...
-
sigh .....
here we go again .......... -
The Pacific War during WW-2 - was a war amongst the Colonial Powers and had its roots in the Great Depression - with these Colonial Powers imposing high tarriffs and protectionist policies over their extended domains. All the territories affected were colonial extensions except for China which was slowly carved up by the European and Japanese powers.
It is not surprising that the colonial thinking extended with the drafting of the Potsdam Declaration as a demand on the Japanese War Government to surrender - with racist overtones.
Following the defeat of Adolf Hitler, the Potsdam Conference was called as a result of the realisation by the US Political Leadership that after all their efforts to liberate Europe, the chances"...... was that France would go Communistic, so would Germany, Italy and the Scandinavians, and there was grave doubt about England staying sane. "
On the Japanese side, there was ongoing internal debate between the War Cabinet and the Pacifist Members of Government - some of whom were advisors to the Japanese Emperor - resulting in recorded attempts at clandestine negotiations in Switzerland between the US O.S.S and Japanese negotiators being made through the Russian Government, who had maintained a Treaty of Neutrality and Non-Aggression with Japan throughout WW-2.
"The Potsdam Conference, a meeting of the victorious leaders of the Allies in Europe, attempted to confront the delicate balance of power of the opposing governmental structures, democracy and communism. Held in an unbombed suburb of Berlin, it commenced July 17 lasting to August 2.
Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Truman began the conference for their respective countries.
On the agenda was the partitioning of the postwar world and resolving the problems of the war in the Far East. This included hammering out the details regarding the division of Germany; the movement of populations from Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Italy; the creation of a Council of Foreign Ministers to administer the agreed upon zones of occupation; and issuing a proclamation demanding unconditional surrender from the Japanese government. Truman, despite his relative inexperience in dealing with foreign diplomats, was holding a trump card that would give him confidence in making demands of the other leaders. . .the atomic bomb. The most powerful and destructive armament to date, the atomic bomb was solely in the hands of the United States government."
Unfortunately, Stalin had his own political ambitions and agenda, and did not convey the early acceptance of the Japanese Emperor's acceptance to a negotiated surrender, and resulted in the first A-Bomb falling on Hiroshima of 6 August 1945.
On 9 August 1945. Russia broke its long held Treaty of Non-Aggression and declared war on Japan during the closing moments of WW-2, after the first A-Bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.
Co-incidentally, the second atomic bombing with an H-Bomb was dropped on Nagasaki on 9 August 1945.
The US Government had justified the use of the A-Bomb on a large civilian population center with a significant military presence so as to show the destructive impact to the Japanese War Government, and force it to accept an unconditional surrender, and at the same time save the lives of countless US soldiers in an invasion of Japan - with estimates of a million casualties.
Unfortunately, in the aftermath of the Japanese capitulation with the acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration, the justification of the use of the A-Bomb and the suppression of the truth of the war crimes from both the warring sides had helped in the perpetuation of the Japanese attitude to this day.
Out of self-interests, the US government compromised its moral position.
The manner in which Japanese surrender was accepted is probably the cause of the current attitudes of the Japanese Officials and Society towards their obligation to the International Community in giving a sincere apology, renouncing of its War Criminals, and to the sensitive subject of Post-war Compensation.
"Truth-telling is important. The war-crimes trials following the Pacific War, however, departed from the truth in significant respects: U.S. officials suppressed evidence relating to the emperor's war guilt, to Japanese biological warfare (so that the U.S. military could gain access to Japanese experimental data), and to the war crimes of the Allies. Much data on Japanese atrocities was produced, but its impact on the Japanese public was surely lessened by the fact that the trials represented victors' justice. A few major Japanese war criminals were executed, but many of the guilty were soon back in control. "
With the pre-war structure of the Japanese societal elites - (including the Emperor) - remaining largely in place, it is not surprising that even some Class A War Criminals - and others who had supported the war efforts - continue in influential governmental positions to mould and guide the present day Japanese policies and attitudes. -
Well, go figure their culture. They claimed to be more cultured than the Chinese and that Korea was heavily influenced by them in terms of culture.Originally posted by sourketchup:Hey guys, the 61st anniversary of the first use of atomic power in warfare is coming up soon. What are your thoughts?
It is terrible about all the innocent children slaughtered, being a father of two baby boys, I should know. But cannot say I feel much pity for the adults. Their fathers, sons, brothers and husbands have left corpses, raped women and destroyed buildings in their wake all over Asia.
And up to this day, their prime minister still pays his respects to the war criminals at their war shrine! Can you imagine if the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, pays her respects to Hitler, Himmler or Goebbels? They only worship the Americans because they were soundly trounced by them. Their history books deny their heinous acts, they kill whales for "research"(how they say this without breaking out into giggles is just beyond me) and they are the most racist nation in the world.
To the Japanese, might is right. -
If my brother was a murderer, I would still pay respects to him even though I think he is guilty. Does that make me a bad person?
To me, paying respect is fine. It's not as if they are saying that these people are not guilty. It's just that they acknowledge that these people have given up their lives for what they thought was for the best of their country. It's an acknowledgement of their patriotism and not a denial of their guilt.
As for Japanese morals, please...read the newspaper. There are alot of countries with alot worse transgressions than the Japanese. -
I would consider you a "bad person", as you put it, if you deny that what your brother did was wrong, or if you try to whitewash his crimes, which is what the Japanese leaders are doing.Originally posted by kheldorin:If my brother was a murderer, I would still pay respects to him even though I think he is guilty. Does that make me a bad person?
To me, paying respect is fine. It's not as if they are saying that these people are not guilty. It's just that they acknowledge that these people have given up their lives for what they thought was for the best of their country. It's an acknowledgement of their patriotism and not a denial of their guilt.
As for Japanese morals, please...read the newspaper. There are alot of countries with alot worse transgressions than the Japanese.
I agree that there are some people or races worse than the Japanese(very very few, though, mind you), but since we are talking about the upcoming anniversary of the first (and hopefully) use of military atomic power and their consequent surrender, it is not relevant. -
I must have skipped school when they covered this part. How does pumping people full of water and then jumping on their guts or tying them to tractors and skinning them alive count as patriotism?
Those were atrocities, plain and simple, and if they had anything even vaguely resembling decency, they would have not only gotten on their knees and begged for forgiveness, but they would have written it into their school history textbooks so that current generation would know what bloody mongrels their grandfathers were and know that this is NOT how civilised nations behave. -
The word 'thought' was used i believe.Originally posted by Gedanken:I must have skipped school when they covered this part. How does pumping people full of water and then jumping on their guts or tying them to tractors and skinning them alive count as patriotism?
Those were atrocities, plain and simple, and if they had anything even vaguely resembling decency, they would have not only gotten on their knees and begged for forgiveness, but they would have written it into their school history textbooks so that current generation would know what bloody mongrels their grandfathers were and know that this is NOT how civilised nations behave.
In any case, torture of prisoners and experimentation will always been kept secret, with the general public completely unaware of the going-ons within the POW camps.
It's the same with the Afghan POWs at Guantanamo base. Had the whistleblowers not discretely slipped video footage and pictures of prisoner abuse to the press, would the general public have believed hearsay?
Japanese on a whole, cannot be blamed for the mistakes of their ancestors. And many of them are apologetic and ashamed of their historical past, but cultural taboo and national pride prevents them from 'doing the right thing'.
The ones to be blamed are the senior political figures who have deliberately whitewashed the significance of Japan's history, and marginalised the atrocities for what they actually are. -
Ahhh, if you want to go there, why don't you tell the truth and, in particular, the whole truth? Wasn't "thought" used in the sentence, "given up their lives for what they thought was for the best of their country"?
Sorry, whose lives were given up here? The torturers or the tortured? Should the torturers be paid tribute to?
Are you claiming that the torture carried out by the Japanese is still kept secret from the current Japanese population? That's pretty damned stupid, isn't it, considering it's already general knowledge to the rest of the world?
Sorry, Bills, but your argument doesn't stand. While the US could have avoided using the Bomb, should we be too sorry about their civilians being deep-fat-fried after what they did to other civilian populations? I think not. If anything, they got off easy by being turned instantaneously into crispy critters instead of being peeled like bananas over periods of hours until they bled to death.
What are their cultural taboos compared to the horrors they perpetrated on the countries they conquered? If natural justice were to be applied here, they ought to be nuked until they come to their senses. Hell, gutting a Nip with a straight razor ought to become a national sport until they decide to behave decently and face their crimes. -
If this topic is truly about the anniversary of the atomic bomb, then the atrocities of the Japanese has no relevance either. The anniversary is just a poor excuse to bring up this issue again.Originally posted by sourketchup:I would consider you a "bad person", as you put it, if you deny that what your brother did was wrong, or if you try to whitewash his crimes, which is what the Japanese leaders are doing.
I agree that there are some people or races worse than the Japanese(very very few, though, mind you), but since we are talking about the upcoming anniversary of the first (and hopefully) use of military atomic power and their consequent surrender, it is not relevant.
The Japanese did not deny what they did was wrong. They have issued countless statements of apology admitting their wrongdoing. And contrary to popular perception, debate in Japan about what happened is not restricted or regulated. Different political parties would take on a different stance. So how can you judge the entire Japanese race when they all have different view points?
So what type of apology is sufficient to satisfy everyone's pride and ego? -
They can committ atrocities and yet still be patriotic. What's your point?Originally posted by Gedanken:I must have skipped school when they covered this part. How does pumping people full of water and then jumping on their guts or tying them to tractors and skinning them alive count as patriotism?
Those were atrocities, plain and simple, and if they had anything even vaguely resembling decency, they would have not only gotten on their knees and begged for forgiveness, but they would have written it into their school history textbooks so that current generation would know what bloody mongrels their grandfathers were and know that this is NOT how civilised nations behave.
The facts are out there. Anyone can find out what really happened. School textbooks are not the only source of knowledge. The problem is in the interpretation. You want the facts to be intrepreted firmly as "Your grandfathers are mongrels." The problem is alot of people do not think any less of the people who commited these atrocities even if they knew the truth. They'll just say atrocities happen in every war, that the violence in the war made them irrational and inhumane. -
My point is that the torture and murder of civilians has absolutely nothing to do with patriotism, be it in Syonan-to, Gitmo or Beirut. Whitewashing crimes under the lame banner of patriotism is just plain gutless.
And you're right - the facts ARE out there for anybody to find out. The very fact that despite this the Japanese have literally censored it from their school syllabus is a slap in the face for all of the countries that suffered under their subjugation, because the message is that they will simply not acknowledge what they did, and if they're not going to even admit their crimes, how much stock can you put on what they have to say about it?
Do some research, kheldorin, and you'll see that despite paying a lot of lip service, the Japanese view of WW2 is that they just took a little excursion through Southeast Asia, and they've got bugger-all to apologise for. Don't get sucked in by the lame statements that they try to pass off as apologies, and instead look at actions such as their refusal to educate their people about their crimes. That will tell the true story of where they stand.
Inhumane, yes, irrational, no. The very fact is that the nature of their crimes with regards to torture was deliberate and planned. What they did certainly would not constitute grounds for manslaughter instead of murder in any court of law in the world. Anybody who would try to write these crimes off as irrational acts is simply deluding himself. I'm happy to let actions carried out in battle slide. Deliberate and slow torture and murder is another matter altogether.
The bottom line is that on account of their behaviour, what they got in return by the end of the war was a real bargain. Let's face it, after kicking off their war effort with a sneak attack, do they really have a leg to stand on crying foul about being nuked? I think not. -
Yeah, well, then why not just condemn the Japanese government instead of the whole Japanese race?Originally posted by Gedanken:My point is that the torture and murder of civilians has absolutely nothing to do with patriotism, be it in Syonan-to, Gitmo or Beirut. Whitewashing crimes under the lame banner of patriotism is just plain gutless.
And you're right - the facts ARE out there for anybody to find out. The very fact that despite this the Japanese have literally censored it from their school syllabus is a slap in the face for all of the countries that suffered under their subjugation, because the message is that they will simply not acknowledge what they did, and if they're not going to even admit their crimes, how much stock can you put on what they have to say about it?
Do some research, kheldorin, and you'll see that despite paying a lot of lip service, the Japanese view of WW2 is that they just took a little excursion through Southeast Asia, and they've got bugger-all to apologise for. Don't get sucked in by the lame statements that they try to pass off as apologies, and instead look at actions such as their refusal to educate their people about their crimes. That will tell the true story of where they stand.
Inhumane, yes, irrational, no. The very fact is that the nature of their crimes with regards to torture was deliberate and planned. What they did certainly would not constitute grounds for manslaughter instead of murder in any court of law in the world. Anybody who would try to write these crimes off as irrational acts is simply deluding himself. I'm happy to let actions carried out in battle slide. Deliberate and slow torture and murder is another matter altogether.
The bottom line is that on account of their behaviour, what they got in return by the end of the war was a real bargain. Let's face it, after kicking off their war effort with a sneak attack, do they really have a leg to stand on crying foul about being nuked? I think not.
Japan isn't like Singapore where there is just 1 school textbook and the government can censor whatever they want there. The ministry did try to reject/censor 1 of the submitted textbooks and they got sued.
The fact is very few schools adopted the new textbooks that the Japanese government is heavily promoting. That tells the true story where the Japanese people stand.