NationStates Jolt Archive

I have met many Americans who seem to bear a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor. What do the Americans around this forum say about that?

When people watching a war movie more or less cheer when the Japanese are being burned alive you start wondering.

I had a talk with a German guy yesterday. Whenever he tells someone that he's German, people have this little pause of the impact of "I'm German" just because 65 years ago the Germans started a brutal war. Really weird, but it's true

I have met many Americans who seem to bear a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor. What do the Americans around this forum say about that?

When people watching a war movie more or less cheer when the Japanese are being burned alive you start wondering.I am happy to say, I've never met these people. however, I do have co workers who have... in the southern nations... and even then it was mostly isolated cases.

I can understand those who were actually in the war being bitter, but those who dislike them merely for their past and have no experience with them have no respect from me.

Live and let live.

I've never actually met anyone like that, even among my older relatives who fought in the Pacific war.

I had a talk with a German guy yesterday. Whenever he tells someone that he's German, people have this little pause of the impact of "I'm German" just because 65 years ago the Germans started a brutal war. Really weird, but it's true
I'm German, and I've seen this before even though BOTH sides of my family moved out of Germany during the depression after WWI. :(

What are you talking about?
I have never met a USian who dislikes the Japanese because of the war. In fact, most USians I know think the Japanese really caught us with our pants down at Pearl Harbor but missed their chance to really stick it to us cause the carriers weren't home. I have found almost universal respect for Yamamoto.
Hell, my grandmother who was in her 20's during the war doesn't dislike the Japanese. Her exact words when I left for Japan were quite funny. "The Japanese, ah, nice people, very friendly and polite. . .but you can't trust them." She still had mistrust but there was no dislike there. She is quite comfortable with my wife being Japanese and wants to meet her.

Personally, I'm just surprised that some americans think they still have the right to hold a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor considering the fact that we turned two of their cities into craters in return.

I'm the first of my family to be born in America. The line came from the Phillipine islands. My grandfather was killed by Japanese soldiers during the occupation.

Last year, I decided to go to Japan to teach English and learn about another culture, having never left the U.S. before. I thought my father would be offended that I chose Japan. But he never had a problem with it.

My father never held me responsible for his battles. I think he was trying to teach me that it would be wrong to hold 135 million people responsible for the wars of their fathers.

During my time in Japan, I encountered sincere courtesy, genuine kindness, and deep human respect. I hope my efforts to behave in the same way were successful.

The Americans aren't the only ones. My whole family hates the Japanese (except myself, I can't seem to bring myself to hate an entire people because of the actions of a few bad ancestors). This is probably because my grandmother is from PuKou, a town not far from NanJing, China (do I need to remind anyone what happened there?). Where I lived before going to college, there were many Chinese and Korean people whose parents, and grandparents have bad memories of Japanese occupation and hate them even though they were never there themselves. Furthermore their relatives still in China and Korea also hate the Japanese, even the ones who were not born before or during the occupation.
As for myself, I don't hate all Japanese, just the ones responsible for the massacres in China and the attempt to erase the Korean culture. I even have a great deal of respect for some aspects of Japanese culture (I own an original Yoshida woodcut, one of my favourite works of art).

I think in every society there are people who base their opinions on sources other than what's in front of them. The version of history taught in the US places the blame for the Pacific War on Japan, and paints Pearl Harbour as an entirely unjustified and despicable attack... partly true perhaps, but so oversimplifid that it makes it easier for individuals to draw mental black-white lines. Likewise, in Japan, history tends to gloss over Japanese actions nd focus on the terible act of the atomic bombings... some Japanese thus have the same sort of negative impressions of Americans, who 'brutally ended their mission to liberate Asia from imperialism'.

Every society has their bad eggs, I suppose.

Really? My grandpa was put under Jap. occupation in Burma. I don't bear a grudge at all.

If any, I dislike their terrible anime exporting.

Korea was under the brutal Japenese control for thirty five years, if anyone should hold a grudge against Japenese, it should be Koreans, or any other country Japan has oppressed for a period of time. However, I don't hate the Japenese, I have a few Japenese freinds.

Actually, most of the people here love Japan, their people, their women, and their animation. There are even pretenders here in California. Also, i've noticed that everyone wants some Japanese in them. It's really annoying hearing people say "I'm 1/4 Japanese" and "I have some Japanese in me. 6 generations ago my white father married a Japanese woman" or stuff like that.

The Japanese have changed a lot since WWII. I don't see why anyone would hold a grudge, unless they are racist, but still, the Japanese are so isolated in huge diplomatic things. One thing that hasn't changed is that they are nice and polite.

I would imagine the lingering chagrin would rest more with people of my grandparents' generation -- IE, those who were alive in the 1940s and fought in WWII or maybe Korea.

Although... I have to say, I don't notice any anti-Nipponism ("Japaneseism" is awkward) around me.

In the business world they are admired for their industriousness, their loyalty to companies, their electronic and automotive genius.

Actually, most of the people here love Japan, their people, their women, and their animation. There are even pretenders here in California. Also, i've noticed that everyone wants some Japanese in them. It's really annoying hearing people say "I'm 1/4 Japanese" and "I have some Japanese in me. 6 generations ago my white father married a Japanese woman" or stuff like that.

I have several friends like that...

I'm not very fond of the Japanese. Partly because of what they did during the war (Not so much Pearl Harbor, but what they did to conquered people and Allied POWs (Yes, even though I wasn't alive then)), partly because I don't really like many of the ones I've met aaand partly because of the whole obsession with all things Japanese going on. I guess it's sort of like how some people resent all the American stuff going into their countries. I don't care if you think I'm horrible!

Oh and...The cheering when the Japanese burns alive in a war movie, I think people do that no matter what the nationality...as long as the one dying is trying to kill the main characters.

Really? My grandpa was put under Jap. occupation in Burma. I don't bear a grudge at all.

Was he on the railway?

Was he on the railway?
No, he was a kid at the time.

No, he was a kid at the time.

Ah, although he probably didn't have the best of times there, he was lucky. My grandfather was on the railway - it fucked up his health for life. He did survive until the mid-seventes, but he was a shattered man for thirty years.

hey i don't dislike the Japanese for Pearl Harbor for to reasons

1. We knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen

2. The Japanese invented anime

My mother is Korean, so I've never had any respect for the Japanese. Not only did they do Pearl Harbor, they enslaved millions and oppresed nearly every ethnic group in East Asian, along with forcing Allied POWs to slave on death camps.

I have met many Americans who seem to bear a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor. What do the Americans around this forum say about that?

When people watching a war movie more or less cheer when the Japanese are being burned alive you start wondering.

*Shrug* Nobody I know still holds a grudge. I like the food, and if you want to read a truly beautiful book, try The Sound of Waves by Mishima.

I personally don't hold any animosity towards contemporary Japan for their actions during WWII. I am tempted to blame Emperor Hirohito, whom some term "Asia's Hitler", for Japanese atrocities during the war, but even then many historians view him as simply a figurehead who had no control over the direction of the war. In fact, many view him as a source of social cohesion in Japanese society following the war leading to American occupation. I suppose the only one's culpable are the Japanese military brass during WWII, look at how they manipulated soldiers to do their bidding (ex. Kamikaze).

I never have, and never will have a grudge to Japan. I mean, why isn't there hostility to Germans or Italians? They killed many Americans, sank our ships and shot down planes and yet there isn't any hostility!

I hold no grudge either. What happened was part of war. And the key word there is "was". Besides, we have them to thank for PS2, PSP, Nintendo, Sony, other electronic stuff, and anime. Quite frankly, I think that of late, they've been a big help to the world society.

Then again, I'm just a big anime fan, but hey, there's no reason to hold a grudge anymore.

I think that of late, they've been a big help to the world society.


Plus, they have the best green tea and they gave us bonsai! :)

Yea, I have one of those next to my comp.!

The Japanese have changed a lot since WWII. I don't see why anyone would hold a grudge, unless they are racist, but still, the Japanese are so isolated in huge diplomatic things. One thing that hasn't changed is that they are nice and polite.

less than we may think; what used to be isolated, militarist thought (very similar to the thought that provoked world war II) is now mainstream in japan. Further, the Japanese are still denying their atrocities and falsifying matters in their textbooks.

So yes, I do bear a grudge against them because they still havent decided to admit their past wrongs. Sadly, a bunch of rightist-revisionist historians are taken as authorities on their subjects.

The rape of Nanking didnt happen? Japanese units did not test biological weapons on asian prisoners?

I think not.

There are Americans who can't let the Civil War go. This really doesn't surprise me. Pearl Harbor was for many an attack on the American psyche and American innocence. However backward it might be, it's hard for some people to let that go.

Personally, I'm just surprised that some americans think they still have the right to hold a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor considering the fact that we turned two of their cities into craters in return.

But in their defence, the Americans during the 20th Centtury never commited an atrocity quite on the level of the Rape of Nanking.

I don't really hate the Japanese in a racist sense, but I'm not particularly fond of Japan as a nation. The main reason is that they are reputed to be quite xenophobic, though I hear conflicting claims on this, so I'm not sure just how true this is.

The fact that they hunt endangered whales and reputedly have high rates of pædophilia doesn't sit well with me at all. I'm again not sure whether they are as pædophilic as claimed, but I certainly hear claims.

It is a pretty well-confirmed fact that Japanese society is quite classist and sexist, so that is another strike against Japan, for an anarchist, anyway. It is hard for me not to find such things repungent.

As much as I like anime, I can't help but wonder if it is stealing socialist philosophical concepts such as absurdism and existentialism (and often feminism, obviously not Japanese, and hints of utopian socialism).

My grandfather was sent to Japan right after we occupied it. He came back with this big, awesome camera.

Hirohito was not in control of Japan in WWII, dictator Hideki Tojo was. Hirohito did have to denounce his title as the head of Shinto though.

But there is one thing left over from the war that causes tension between us and them. Our troops came back with samurai swords as souvenirs and apparently some of those were sacred artifacts. Only several have ever been recovered so far and there's a big reward for them.

Also, what's with those stories about people finding Japanese soldiers still fighting in caves in the Philippines?

I guess the worst Japan has to offer now are the Type-R Honda craze, those strange religious sects that suddenly appeared there after the war, and bad anime and cosplaying. I mean come on, Americans wearing kimonos and waving fans....

Random stuff that has not been mentioned but was and still is or new in Japanese culture especially pop culture- ninjas, samurai, Godzilla, Domo-kun, and Akira Kurosawa.

Textbooks.... every nation whitewashes but probably not to the extent the Asian nations do it especially Japan with the war and China with its own history.

Some people actually think that 3000 dead Americans balances out evenly with the hundreds of thousands of dead Japanese in the nuclear bombs. I seem to remember them on this forum, using similar 'balancing' to justify whatever we do because of 3000 dead in the WTC.

I dig the Japanese. I view them as a vibrant culture, which can lead to many great things, such as scientific innovation, electronics, cultural things and such. Beyond that, I also view the Japanese as a vital ally in Asia, and one of the potential "containment points" should we ever get into a cold war with China.

The Japanese are a good people, and we should forgive them of their nations sins in the past.

Some people actually think that 3000 dead Americans balances out evenly with the hundreds of thousands of dead Japanese in the nuclear bombs. I seem to remember them on this forum, using similar 'balancing' to justify whatever we do because of 3000 dead in the WTC.
See also: Japanese Internment Camps.

I have met many Americans who seem to bear a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor. What do the Americans around this forum say about that?
I (generally) don't hold decendants responsible for the wrongdoings of their parents unless said decendants think that the actions of their ancestors were good ideas.

The war was a long time ago. It was horrible, but it's long over. Let's learn our lessons from it and move on. Forgiveness is very hard to practice, but the alternative is to carry that pain, anger, and hatred with you all of your life.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

Ok, the way I view it is as following: ALL nations have done its evil deeds. The British Empire's harsh oppression isn't something Brits should be proud of. Americans should not be proud of McCarthy, their own imperialism(Spanish-American war, Hawaii), etc. My country(Sweden) has also its bad parts. I don't blame Russians for the fact that thousands of our captured soldiers disapeared in Siberia after the Great Northern War(early 1700s).

I don't like how Germans are treated because of a certain Austrian, who shall remain nameless. I think Pearl Harbor is nothing compared to the invasion of the USSR by Germany.

I think it is a shame that Germany will never itself leave it behind them, they seem to be embarrased to be Germans. The German people is bombarded by the Holocaust. By contrast Japan just pushes ww2 aside.

Just a few months ago I saw a documentary here(in a US-school) which was a propaganda film in disguise. It did not only explain how evil the attack was, like they were killing school kids(it was a military target after all). Then they claimed that the Japanese were beaten back :confused: . I love history and I have never read anywhere a claim that the Japanese were beaten back. The other students swallowed it like it was 100% accurate and true. WTF???

This is what bothers me, these people really seem to hate the Japanese!
Just wants to know if this is average US education.

No Kardova, it's not. but one thing interesting tho... Japanese don't teach Pearl Harbor. many Visitors to the Arizona Memorial learn of the attack for the first time there.

hearing how the Japanese Teach their history... it makes sense.

they spend so much time in feudal Japan that anything in the 20th century is condensed because there is no time to teach it.

don't know if that's true tho.

When people watching a war movie more or less cheer when the Japanese are being burned alive you start wondering.

It makes my eyebrows twitch when I experience this. What gives? Pearl harbour is sixty+ years ago. And you won by nuking two cities.

Get over it.

It makes my eyebrows twitch when I experience this. What gives? Pearl harbour is sixty+ years ago. And you won by nuking two cities.

Get over it.there are some things that shouldn't be "gotten over" like the Holocaust.... Pearl Harbor... Hiroshima/Nagasaki... Nanking... WTC...

the hatred should be gotten over, but the horror of those events must be remembered.

The forecast for the invasion of Japan was pretty gruesome. If nuking those two cities saved any allied lives then it was worth it. Read the book "Thank God for the Atom Bomb" written by a fellow who was scheduled to go in the second wave where csaualty rates were expected to be only 75%. The absolute refusal of Japan to recognize any guilt regarding their atrocities really gets to me, I'm a Canadian and have yet to forgive Hong Kong. When the Japanese owe up to what they did I will begin to forgive, it worked for the Germans.

The forecast for the invasion of Japan was pretty gruesome. If nuking those two cities saved any allied lives then it was worth it. Read the book "Thank God for the Atom Bomb" written by a fellow who was scheduled to go in the second wave where csaualty rates were expected to be only 75%. The absolute refusal of Japan to recognize any guilt regarding their atrocities really gets to me, I'm a Canadian and have yet to forgive Hong Kong. When the Japanese owe up to what they did I will begin to forgive, it worked for the Germans.


Japan's conduct during the first half of the 20th century contains examples of extreme brutatality, and deserve to be condemned by Japan. However, Japan has apologized for much of its conduct.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1599642.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1586040.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1533436.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/187954.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/47293.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/46748.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/46730.stm

The above links contain apologies from multiple Japanese prime ministers to the US, UK, South Korea, China, POW's, and "victims of war" in general. I think Japan needs to do a much better job of making sure the next generation learns what Japan has done, but I also think the scandals are overblown somewhat. The most recent scandals come from the Japanese government allowing the use of textboosk which China and South Korea say play down Japanese war crimes (by saying that "many people died" instead of giving a number of dead at the Nanjing massacre, for example). However, it is important to remember that this textbook is used in less than one percent of Japanese schools.

Another source of scandal is that Japan refuses to pay reparations to the vicims of Japanese aggression in WWII. Japan refuses on the grounds that they signed treaties with China, South Korean, and the US, among other nations, were those nations agreed not to seek reparations. I think it would be better for Japan to compensate the victims, but they do have a sound legal case. Many, many people in East Asia have good reasons to dislike the Japnaese, but I can't help but feel some of the current generation's hatred of the Japanese is the work of the government of China and South Korea. While neither government does this as much anymore, both governments often stirred up hatred of Japan many times in the past simply to distract citizens from domestic issues. Japan has a lot to do to win the trust of it's East Asian neighboors (such as stopping the visits to Yasukuni), but South Korea and China must play their part too.

It will certainly help the Japanese image in East Asia to keep apologizing publicly for their atrocities. However, I wonder how many US high school history textbooks talk about the 200,000 or more Phillippine civilains who died in the Phillippine Insurrection? http://www.historyguy.com/PhilipineAmericanwar.html
I think countries apologizing for their past misdeeds is a good way to move foward. Does anybody know if the US has ever apologized for this? I couldn't find anything. Just trying to point out every country has things to apologize for.

I'm German, and people are eternally making me feel bad for something my family never took part in. I can't wait for WWIII so we can:

1) Laugh while the US is overrun by the Chinese.
2) Make people forget about the Holocaust due to China killing billions of people.

I'm German, and people are eternally making me feel bad for something my family never took part in. I can't wait for WWIII so we can:

1) Laugh while the US is overrun by the Chines.the US is already overun with Chinese... almost every major city has a Chinatown...
2) Make people forget about the Holocaust due to China killing billions of people.and that's them only making 1 kill per soldier... :D

and Sorry if I ever made you feel bad for what a couple of nuts did back then.

But in their defence, the Americans during the 20th Centtury never commited an atrocity quite on the level of the Rape of Nanking.

The atomic bombings were worse than Nanking.

Let's put this into perspective: Hiroshima and Nagasaki CEASED TO EXIST. You wiped them off the face of the planet. Out of the human plane of existence.

I consider the atomic bombings to be the worst crime commited in the 20th century. Well, 2nd worst.

The atomic bombings were worse than Nanking.

Let's put this into perspective: Hiroshima and Nagasaki CEASED TO EXIST. You wiped them off the face of the planet. Out of the human plane of existence.

I consider the atomic bombings to be the worst crime commited in the 20th century. Well, 2nd worst.but it got the point accross without the prolonged war that would've happened.

and while there is a love-hate with the atomic weapons... had they not been dropped, the true horrors of those weapons would've been realized later... say Vietnam? or perhaps on Kuaite? or Iraq? or 9/11

after all, there would be no regulations because there would be no true evidence of the horror. that would've been worse because more nations would have em and would be willing to use em.

What's wrong with you people? I thought everyone knew that the only people that it is acceptable and popular to look down on or hate for the actions of thier government or military are Americans.

My grandad, whilst serving as a liason and training officer with the Indian Navy was captured by the Japanese in late on in the war. He was taken to Burma and worked on the railway before being moved to a small POW camp for almost a year. He went in a healthy 13 st. and came out just 5 1/2. He had nightmares about his friends being shot in front of him by the Korean (not Japanese) guards, the appaling living conditions etc for years afterwards.

A few years ago the Japanese offered compensation to all those who had been in the camps, but my grandad refused point blank to take it up. Only after persuasion from my mother and my grandmother did he sign (he refused to fill in the form, only sign it). He forgave the Japanese for what had happened, he liked what some officers had done for him in the camps, but of the Korean guards, despite forgiving them as well, he never mentioned another word after telling me one story about how they shot his friend.

The point is that even my grandad, who lived through some of the worst atrocities that men can inflict upon one another, still forgave those who did it. In other words, forgive but never forget.

I have met many Americans who seem to bear a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor. What do the Americans around this forum say about that?

When people watching a war movie more or less cheer when the Japanese are being burned alive you start wondering.

If you read about events where Americans were crowded into holes and burnt alive by Japanese captors, or the slave labor camps, or the Rape of Nanking, you wouldn't feel so sympathetic either.

They cheer because thats the emotion the film makers wanted to convey. In the end you know that japanese, chinese, german, polish, russian, all the worlds people are still people and they suffer the same pains when hurt and the same fears in battle. War brings out the worst and the best in people. I wouldn't put much stock into a movie designed to evoke that image. You think anyone watching TaeGuKi was crying when North Koreans were fighting for their lives in the bunker scene? Of course not, movies paint heros.

In short, before you chalk this all up to being about Pearl Harbor I would learn some of the history of the Japanese in WW2.
Read about the Prison camps, read about the slave labor camps, the war crimes, the rape of an entire city in China, and you can understand better.

Not that there weren't American war criminals, but lets face it, history is written by the winners.

My grandad, whilst serving as a liason and training officer with the Indian Navy was captured by the Japanese in late on in the war. He was taken to Burma and worked on the railway before being moved to a small POW camp for almost a year. He went in a healthy 13 st. and came out just 5 1/2. He had nightmares about his friends being shot in front of him by the Korean (not Japanese) guards, the appaling living conditions etc for years afterwards.

A few years ago the Japanese offered compensation to all those who had been in the camps, but my grandad refused point blank to take it up. Only after persuasion from my mother and my grandmother did he sign (he refused to fill in the form, only sign it). He forgave the Japanese for what had happened, he liked what some officers had done for him in the camps, but of the Korean guards, despite forgiving them as well, he never mentioned another word after telling me one story about how they shot his friend.

The point is that even my grandad, who lived through some of the worst atrocities that men can inflict upon one another, still forgave those who did it. In other words, forgive but never forget.*standing ovation*

The atomic bombings were worse than Nanking.

Let's put this into perspective: Hiroshima and Nagasaki CEASED TO EXIST. You wiped them off the face of the planet. Out of the human plane of existence.
during the rape of nanking about 300,000 people ceased to exist... of course the entire massacre took several months instead of a split second, but Japanese soldiers went into the city and countryside and for no reason at all started to rape and murder unarmed civilians who already surrendered to the invaders. the barbaric behavior and cruelty of the soldiers was unmatched... Japanese officers actually competed with each other in "killing competitions" which were then covered in the next morning's Tokyo newspaper as sports. 10 million Chinese civilians plus millions of other Asians died in the Japanese war crimes throughout WWII, which consisted of slavery, massacres, extermination camps just like in Nazi occupied Europe. the Pacific Holocaust is not as well known in the west as the Nazi Holocaust, but it was just as barbaric.

*standing ovation*

I have to make a point of saying it, although I look at his memory through rose tinted glasses, my grandads actions earned him a lot of respect from a great many people, but what happened to him and others like him should never be forgotten. I have a whole collection of stories about him that would be just a suitable for this discussion, although the one above is the most relevant.


I just wish he was still around to tell more of them :(

my grandfather would tell tales about the camps...

he knew why and didn't hold it against the US.

But lets face it, history is written by the winners.

Which in my opinion is half the problem....


...that said you can now write history by starting your own blog with little or no research and one opinion...


...as a student of history i can't decide which is worse. :(

my grandfather would tell tales about the camps...

he knew why and didn't hold it against the US.

Are these the camps for Japanese/Americans that were on the main land? I only know a little about them...

Ironically, I just completed a paper for my Asian International Relations class that has some relevence here. I looked at the past and current relationship between China and Japan.

Yes, horrible things were done to China. Japan still hasn't fully acknoledged its own atrocities. It needs to do this. At the same time, China has a "victim complex" and needs to move on as well. Granted, that is much, MUCH easier said than done, but there it is.

I have nothing against the Japanese, or Germans and Italians for that matter. Who hasn't had an insane militaristic government that attacked people for no reason and committed atrocities? Nobody. Disliking an entire country of people for things their ancestors did is pretty stupid.

The death toll by the two atomic bomb is at 215 thousand.
The estimated death toll in military personnel for an invasion of Japan would have been millions.

And of course this is after the Japanese high command refused to surrender, after the first threat they refused, after the first bomb, they refused, after the second bomb, they still refused by Hirohito managed to get his way and bring an end to the war.

Want to know how many people were killed in the Rape of Nanking?
369,366.
An estimated 80 thousand women and girls were raped.

Method of killing by Atomic bomb?
Instant incineration at the epicenter, third degree burns several miles out, and years of radiation sickness.

Methods of killing by the rape of Nanking?
Beheading, bayoneting, live burial, disembowelment.

There are records of soliders playing catch with babies, catch with their *bayonets* that is.

Of killing contests by officers by shows of how far they could make a beheaded Chinese civilians head roll when they chopped it off.

People weren't burnt to ash in a flash, they were tortured, killed, raped, all in front of each other by Japanese who had every chance to limit the killing. Instead they spent months, December 1937 to March 1938, in fact, killing civilians.

The Japanese government has also refused to apologize for this.
I'd prefer immolation over seeing my friends and family, raped, disemboweled, buried alive, or behead over the course of several months by people who had every chance not to kill unarmed defenseless civilians and POW's.

You decide which is worse.

I don't think dropping the atomic bomb was good thing, but I believe it prevented millions more deaths.

I can't possibly find any excuse whatsoever for the Rape of Nanking.

Now that the scope of the atrocity that the Rape of Nanking was is down, I have to say that I don't blame modern Japanese for something their forebearers did. Its not their fault. I personally think the Japanese government should apologize for it.


Which in my opinion is half the problem....


...that said you can now write history by starting your own blog with little or no research and one opinion...


...as a student of history i can't decide which is worse. :(

Don't pull this elitist BS please. Any fool can tell a well researched piece of history from a crazy unresearched blog. Some bloggers are history professors and majors too.

Don't mistake the majority of people for stupid, its that kind of ridiculous arrogance that leads to a great deal of contempt for "Intellectuals".

The worse thing is the continued lack of the Japanese government to offer apology to China and it's other victims during WWII. Germany had apologised. Japan continues to deny anything, even approving new revisionist textbooks (this was very recently).

Lost some unknown relatives when they marched into Malaysia. But surprisingly they are tales of kindness and brutality in all forms. Especially since Japanese hated the Chinese because they were still at war with them. (Though they treated the other nationalities better).

My (now deceased) Grandmother was heavily pregnant with my oldest aunty when they marched into the island of Penang. Surprisingly, a Japanese captain, gave her his tri-shaw, which my grandfather used to carry her when they were leaving the city to the outskirts.

Usually alot of atrocities were carried out by the lower level soldiers, as alot of them were also criminals given a new lease to join the army.

Don't pull this elitist BS please. Any fool can tell a well researched piece of history from a crazy unresearched blog. Some bloggers are history professors and majors too.

Don't mistake the majority of people for stupid, its that kind of ridiculous arrogance that leads to a great deal of contempt for "Intellectuals".

:eek: Woah! Don't jump on me for that! If it came across as being eliteist to you than I'm sorry. It wasn't meant in that way. My point was simply that now there is such easy access to instantly accessible media, there is a lot of BS that gets floated around like its historical fact. Also the fact the winners write history, despite being irrefutable, is also dangerous if you want to come to an unbiased and objective conclusion about whatever you are trying to research, as you simply can't get all the facts without having bias opinion thrown in your way.

I know many bloggers are qualified history professors etc, still doesn't mean that they do their research. As for your assumption that I treat the majority of people as stupid, I really must refute that. I don't think I am intellectual let alone treat others as if i were!

:eek: Woah! Don't jump on me for that! If it came across as being eliteist to you than I'm sorry. It wasn't meant in that way. My point was simply that now there is such easy access to instantly accessible media, there is a lot of BS that gets floated around like its historical fact. Also the fact the winners write history, despite being irrefutable, is also dangerous if you want to come to an unbiased and objective conclusion about whatever you are trying to research, as you simply can't get all the facts without having bias opinion thrown in your way.

I know many bloggers are qualified history professors etc, still doesn't mean that they do their research. As for your assumption that I treat the majority of people as stupid, I really must refute that. I don't think I am intellectual let alone treat others as if i were!
Its just one thing that peeves me, no offense to you personally.

Its true that there is alot of bad non-info out there, but I believe that the average person is perfectly capable of sifting through the garbage.

Its just one thing that peeves me, no offense to you personally.

Its true that there is alot of bad non-info out there, but I believe that the average person is perfectly capable of sifting through the garbage.errr... don't hold your breath...

Its just one thing that peeves me, no offense to you personally.

Its true that there is alot of bad non-info out there, but I believe that the average person is perfectly capable of sifting through the garbage.

Don't get me wrong, it bugs me as well, having been spoken down to by numerous people who actually describe themselves as 'intellectual' it can be infuriating....

...as for the average person being able to tell between the two...maybe, but as Nekone said, I wouldn't hold your breath...too many people want instant answers and don't spend the time sifting through it all to form their own opinion, they just grab the first shred of 'evidence' and many take it as gospel.

Don't get me wrong, it bugs me as well, having been spoken down to by numerous people who actually describe themselves as 'intellectual' it can be infuriating....

...as for the average person being able to tell between the two...maybe, but as Nekone said, I wouldn't hold your breath...too many people want instant answers and don't spend the time sifting through it all to form their own opinion, they just grab the first shred of 'evidence' and many take it as gospel.

I simply mean that people can find true information if they desire true information.
People aren't stupid, they're impatient.

I simply mean that people can find true information if they desire true information.
People aren't stupid, they're impatient.

Most definitely true, well now that misunderstanding is cleared up :)

Have u noticed that americans HATE the japanese so much just for killing a few thousand people in pear harbour??? Hey, the americans killed MILLIONS with the atomic bombs, yet the japanese don't hate americans for it!!

Have u noticed that americans HATE the japanese so much just for killing a few thousand people in pear harbour??? Hey, the americans killed MILLIONS with the atomic bombs, yet the japanese don't hate americans for it!!

This is wrong, read above posts.
We killed 215 thousand people with two nuclear bombs.
The japanese slaughtered 369 thousand unarmed chinese civilians in the rape of Nanking.

And by the way, some Japanese do hate the Americans for the atomic bomb.

Check your facts.

Page,
Well, its been an interesting debate and I'd love to see a poll over the results of it. Do other countries still hold grudges?
I'm an Australian, and during the war, appart from a whole lot of graffiti on the Steps of Giza (to my knowledge) we didn't realy take part in many attrocities (well none on our part, sure every part of war.. blah blah, you get my idea). And I also guess that we are kinda issolated, but I know ALOT of Japanese people and a few korean's and Chinese (as mentioned their part in this debate earilier)
Now I may only be recently out of school, but from what I've seen, Japanese people, at least THIS generation, are willing to forgive and forget, and I've yet to find a group of Japanese that dislike any nations (infact they do seem too nice *evil eyes*) and instead, its the Chinnese who still hold grudges against the Japanese, and as for the Korean's, well I've never heard them mention anything, but then again I guess that they are just happier to be in such a peacfull country (unlike poor little korea, remember M*A*S*H people).
I think as the next generation of Eastern and Western children grow up, they will be able to diferntiate between History and personal attack. The English people don't hate the Dutch (or Holandish or whateva) for invading in the 10th century (I believe).

Secondly, on the note of getting all our facts straight. This is an open forum, for anybody logged on with Nationstates to discuss whether countries still hold grudges over the World Wars. Now this is mostly based on opinion. We've also got to take in to regard, that although some of us maybe history proffesors and the sorts, we have an amazingly diverse group of people here, from obviously people in their late 20's, 30's... to People like myself in their Teen's.. to undoubtably (as some of the N00b-ish behavior shows) still in grade school. If our facts are wrong (and I suppose alot of mine are) then sure, its okay to private TG another user and inform them so they may edit their post, but to public explode at another user because their knowledge upon history may have been sourced by a false history text, or even social text, is plain and obviously immature.
On behalf of Karley and Quipoth I appologize to the other User's and I hope that we can continue this debate in an orderly and (As its been so far) interesting matter.
Its history people lets not loose our cool.
Thomas Page
President and Leader of the Cardial Socialist Republic party

On behalf of Karley and Quipoth I appologize to the other User's and I hope that we can continue this debate in an orderly and (As its been so far) interesting matter.
Its history people lets not loose our cool.

It is not your place to apologise on my behalf, both myself and Quippoth came to a conclusion that I had made a less than clear comment, for which I was rightly made to clarify, and both of us have cleared our misunderstandings up. :)

But as you rightly said, back to the discussion :)

I am curious?

Don't people realize that the atomic bombs saved japanese lives as well?

Or has that just gone by the wayside.

The death toll by the two atomic bomb is at 215 thousand.
The estimated death toll in military personnel for an invasion of Japan would have been millions.

And of course this is after the Japanese high command refused to surrender, after the first threat they refused, after the first bomb, they refused, after the second bomb, they still refused by Hirohito managed to get his way and bring an end to the war.

Want to know how many people were killed in the Rape of Nanking?
369,366.
An estimated 80 thousand women and girls were raped.

Method of killing by Atomic bomb?
Instant incineration at the epicenter, third degree burns several miles out, and years of radiation sickness.

Methods of killing by the rape of Nanking?
Beheading, bayoneting, live burial, disembowelment.

There are records of soliders playing catch with babies, catch with their *bayonets* that is.

Of killing contests by officers by shows of how far they could make a beheaded Chinese civilians head roll when they chopped it off.

People weren't burnt to ash in a flash, they were tortured, killed, raped, all in front of each other by Japanese who had every chance to limit the killing. Instead they spent months, December 1937 to March 1938, in fact, killing civilians.

The Japanese government has also refused to apologize for this.
I'd prefer immolation over seeing my friends and family, raped, disemboweled, buried alive, or behead over the course of several months by people who had every chance not to kill unarmed defenseless civilians and POW's.

You decide which is worse.

I don't think dropping the atomic bomb was good thing, but I believe it prevented millions more deaths.

I can't possibly find any excuse whatsoever for the Rape of Nanking.

Now that the scope of the atrocity that the Rape of Nanking was is down, I have to say that I don't blame modern Japanese for something their forebearers did. Its not their fault. I personally think the Japanese government should apologize for it.




Don't pull this elitist BS please. Any fool can tell a well researched piece of history from a crazy unresearched blog. Some bloggers are history professors and majors too.

Don't mistake the majority of people for stupid, its that kind of ridiculous arrogance that leads to a great deal of contempt for "Intellectuals".


2 million German women were raped by the Soviets.

Allies are eviller than the Axis. Axis is holy.

I think the Japanese people themselves are not too bad. They are polite, friendly and hard-working. Japan is a fine nation actually.
The only thing I dislike about Japan is the attitude they deal with the horrifying atrocities they did in WWII and they seem to be full of ambitions(say for example including islands as their land which are other countries' territories) even till now. They are trying to cover all those war crimes, neglecting the facts, sometimes even praising them. And the Japan government refused to apologize to victims of Japanese occupation during WWII till now. That is simply unacceptable. So it is quite normal for Chinese and Koreans, which had suffered so much in Japanese hands before to hold a grudge for them and protest in furious ways. Relations will certainly be much better if Japan apologizes and recognizes its atrocities before.

Why do some Japanese still hate Americans for the nuclear weapons?

Maybe because Pearl Harbor was a MILITARY target and Hiroshima a CIVILIAN target?

Quippoth, honestly, that's a load of American propaganda bullshit.

"Want to know how many people were killed in the Rape of Nanking?
369,366."

Uhmm... that number wouldn't stand 5 seconds, simply since there is no real count. And I don't take counts by the Chinese government serious, simply because the government merely abandoned Nanking and basically left the civilians (and the completely unorganized Chinese army, at that point) there at the mercy of the Japanese (and a handful of foreigners, mainly Americans, a few English, and... *GASP* John Rabe, a Nazi).

The official number of deaths is somewhere around 140,000 as determined by the warcrimes tribunal after the war.

Also the comparison of Nanking and the nukes is pretty stupid. Both nukes mainly hit civilians (just like Nanking) who were surely not responsible for Nanking at a point where Japan was already on its knees (the way I see it, the Americans kicked someone in the ribs who was already down for the count, very brave indeed).

The invasion of Japan was only one out of many options. Another option was just starving them out (and in August 1945 Japan was already pretty starved). Also it's very doubtful that all military officers would have followed an order to defend Japan at all costs (and no, the old "the emperor orders it" argument doesn't work here. If you read Sakai's "Samurai!" you'll see that, for NCOs and low ranking officers like him the emperor was some obscure figure somewhere in Tokyo.)

Also the estimations of losses during an invasion are highly overdone and usually just American propaganda to justify their warcrimes. (And I know that there are always examples taken from Okinawa where Japanese civilians have killed themselves. But well, those were a miniority, and such things happened in Germany as well. It's a pretty weak argument). Basically... Winner's propaganda, just like the warcrimes tribunals in Europe and Japan were winner's justice (people like RAF Air Marshall Harris never faced a trial).

And well, the nuclear weapons were not a military decision (the recommendation to drop them did not come from the military). For once the US had blatantly ignored earlier attempts of a Japanese surrender (attempts made via the Germans and the Swiss; in those attempts the Japanese wanted to keep the emperor, that was the main point, since the Americans wanted to remove the emperor in the beginning, and thus those attempts were ignored. Then the Americans drop the bomb, Japan surrenders and the Americans allow the emperor to stay? Doesn't make sense to me), and secondly it was a political decision to drop those.

Eisenhower said after the war that it wasn't necessary. MacArthur said that he wasn't even asked about it, etc. Spaatz said that it was a decision done in war times, but in the end it wasn't really the best option. And if you look at the first images of the crews of both bombers, when they're climbing out of their aircraft right after returning from the mission... the looks on their faces and their eyes say enough. (Yes, I know Tibbets defended it, but eh, Tibbets was just colonel, he was told to fly to Hiroshima and drop a cargo he didn't know anything about, he was just the delivery boy, if he wouldn't have done it, somebody else had flown that bird.)

It was a sign from the USA towards the USSR "Look what we've got, commies." (In July 1945 the relationship between the USSR and the western allies was already going downhill fast.)

Nanking was done by elemnts of one Japanese army (and surely not every soldier and officer went to "work" with full motivation or liked doing it). The events that led to it are pretty interesting. For example, if you've ever read Iris Chang's "Rape of Nanking" you'll know what I mean, the order that was given out to not take any POWs (which came not from the office of the commanding general, but from the office of a general who was related to the emperor). After the war one of the staff officers of that emperor's uncle (I think it was an uncle) said he had faked the order, which makes you wonder why there was never an new order and why that officer had never been punished (faking orders of a general? That's a serious crime, yet nothing happened to him).

And well, that imperial cousin or uncle? He was never punished. The army CO? Was hanged, even though there was nothing he could have done against an order coming from the office of someone who's related to (at that point) the divine emperor.

Besides, if you'd know how brutal the discipline in the Japanese army at that time used to be you'd rethink quickly. Not to mention that, if it was an order, soldiers usually obeyed. And please no "they could have disobeyed"; It takes such an incredible ammount of courage to say "No", I don't think anyone would have done it. Also, if a soldier had disobeyed then he would have ended up in the execution line as well. The military of a dictatorship is not a democracy, sorry to burst that bubble.

Not to mention that Japanese reporters who were moving with the army were censored in their reports. Those men were shocked about what happened and sent their reports back to Japan, of course, none of those were ever published. Those reporters were muted quickly and the government made a little "Nanking tour" through the unharmed areas of the city for fresh reporters from the mainland.

So Quippoth, what you're basically saying is that Nanking was worse because more people have been killed in a different way?

That's BULLSHIT. This disreagard of human life is just disgusting.

Fact is, civilians were killed, it doesn't matter how they were killed in the end and how many were killed. Innocent people are dead, period. Both events are warcrimes (and both are certainly not military motivated, and you can apply the same thing for napalming Japanese cities). Which makes me wonder, when does it start to be bad? At 3? 30? 3,000? 300,000? 6 million? 60 million? Personally I hate this deathtoll-crap and that "No, there weren't 140,000 people killed, there were more than 300,000" and the "No, only 30,000". I mean, what's the point. It's completely irrelevant. Even if they would have killed "only" 1 civilian, that would have been 1 too much.

Fighting evil with evil doesn't work, you know? Best proof? USSR and the western allies.

You can blame the situation between China and Japan not only on some right winged Japanese, but also on people who make such weird comparisons.

Btw... ever seen how people with 3rd degree burns die? It's surely not pretty and takes days, sometimes even weeks. Then think of the situation in Japanese field hospitals in August 1945... barely any morphine, now add 3rd degree burns to that... That's a death I wouldn't want to die. The people there didn't just die, they croaked. People, you get it? Not "Japanese", but people. You can't tell me that a random woman who was working for Mitsubishi in one of their factories really wanted the war (it's not that people are usually asked anyway) and I doubt she also wanted the rape of Nanking happening.

Sure, I'd like to see Koizumi do something similar to what Willy Brandt did in Poland back in the days, but that won't happen. Yep, imagine the Japanese PM to visit Nanking and then kneel in front of the memorial there. It would be a great gesture. It would be an outstanding event... It would be suicide (keep in mind that some right wing nut shot the mayor of Nagasaki in the early 90s for saying that the Emperor may have had some connection and knowledge about warcrimes and that he may have been a bit responsible for the pre-war aggression). Koizumi wouldn't outlive such a thing for long. And then? What then? Then you open the door for the radicals, just like in the late 1920s.

The Japanese mentality is different than, let's say, the Chinese. Japan has been isolated for most of its recorded history. They had more than 250 years of peace under the Tokugawas with complete isolation from the outside. They moved from a feudal system to a modern industrial society within just a few decades in the 19th century (pretty impressive if you ask me). They have only lost one war (against the Americans) and have never been invaded. If I take China and compare it... OW...

Yes, I'd love to see the history textbooks being revised to showing the historical truth, but well... Nothing I can do to make the government change that.

I would advise to have a look at Japanese history and find out how Japan was turned into a militaristic regime before WW2.

Oh yes, the IJNAF pilots had a saying... "We're not butchers, we're not the army."

The dropping of the atmoic bomb prevented nothing. It only did one thing. It brought us closer to extinction. Look what happened after WW2. Everyone wanted a nuclear bomb, and still, until today, every shitty little dictator wants a nuke. Or take the cold war. I don't want to know how often the fingers from both sides were close to the little red button that would have killed everyone.

The GF of my best friend is Japanese. We've had some heated discussions over that issue in the past (mainly since she has some great-grand uncle, or something like that, who was at Nanking and who is, most likely, a war criminal).

Oh and if you really want to know... I am Chinese. I don't see the Japanese as an enemy. Why would I hate, let's say, my friend's GF? Just because she's Japanese and I'm Chinese? Because of her distant ancestor? That would be extremly dumb.

Yes, I do have some issues with the way the Japanese government is dealing with certain things. But the Japanese government is not the Japanese people. I can't blame the people for the stupidity of their government (that doesn't only go for the Japanese, it also goes for the Americans, British, Austrians, etc etc etc).

And yes, I consider the current protests in China as pretty stupid. It won't change anything. It'll only hurt a few Japanese companies, and will pour oil into the fires of those small right-winged groups in Japan.

From two countries that are so old like China and Japan, and thus, should be a bit more civilized than the Europeans or Americans, I would expect a bit more than such things.



Oh yes...

Ever had a look at how many thousands of people were killed during Mao's little revolution and the civil war?

Why do some Japanese still hate Americans for the nuclear weapons?

Maybe because Pearl Harbor was a MILITARY target and Hiroshima a CIVILIAN target?

Quippoth, honestly, that's a load of American propaganda bullshit.

"Want to know how many people were killed in the Rape of Nanking?
369,366."

Uhmm... that number wouldn't stand 5 seconds, simply since there is no real count. And I don't take counts by the Chinese government serious, simply because the government merely abandoned Nanking and basically left the civilians (and the completely unorganized Chinese army, at that point) there at the mercy of the Japanese (and a handful of foreigners, mainly Americans, a few English, and... *GASP* John Rabe, a Nazi).

The official number of deaths is somewhere around 140,000 as determined by the warcrimes tribunal after the war.

Also the comparison of Nanking and the nukes is pretty stupid. Both nukes mainly hit civilians (just like Nanking) who were surely not responsible for Nanking at a point where Japan was already on its knees (the way I see it, the Americans kicked someone in the ribs who was already down for the count, very brave indeed).

The invasion of Japan was only one out of many options. Another option was just starving them out (and in August 1945 Japan was already pretty starved). Also it's very doubtful that all military officers would have followed an order to defend Japan at all costs (and no, the old "the emperor orders it" argument doesn't work here. If you read Sakai's "Samurai!" you'll see that, for NCOs and low ranking officers like him the emperor was some obscure figure somewhere in Tokyo.)

Also the estimations of losses during an invasion are highly overdone and usually just American propaganda to justify their warcrimes. (And I know that there are always examples taken from Okinawa where Japanese civilians have killed themselves. But well, those were a miniority, and such things happened in Germany as well. It's a pretty weak argument). Basically... Winner's propaganda, just like the warcrimes tribunals in Europe and Japan were winner's justice (people like RAF Air Marshall Harris never faced a trial).

And well, the nuclear weapons were not a military decision (the recommendation to drop them did not come from the military). For once the US had blatantly ignored earlier attempts of a Japanese surrender (attempts made via the Germans and the Swiss; in those attempts the Japanese wanted to keep the emperor, that was the main point, since the Americans wanted to remove the emperor in the beginning, and thus those attempts were ignored. Then the Americans drop the bomb, Japan surrenders and the Americans allow the emperor to stay? Doesn't make sense to me), and secondly it was a political decision to drop those.

Eisenhower said after the war that it wasn't necessary. MacArthur said that he wasn't even asked about it, etc. Spaatz said that it was a decision done in war times, but in the end it wasn't really the best option. And if you look at the first images of the crews of both bombers, when they're climbing out of their aircraft right after returning from the mission... the looks on their faces and their eyes say enough. (Yes, I know Tibbets defended it, but eh, Tibbets was just colonel, he was told to fly to Hiroshima and drop a cargo he didn't know anything about, he was just the delivery boy, if he wouldn't have done it, somebody else had flown that bird.)

It was a sign from the USA towards the USSR "Look what we've got, commies." (In July 1945 the relationship between the USSR and the western allies was already going downhill fast.)

Nanking was done by elemnts of one Japanese army (and surely not every soldier and officer went to "work" with full motivation or liked doing it). The events that led to it are pretty interesting. For example, if you've ever read Iris Chang's "Rape of Nanking" you'll know what I mean, the order that was given out to not take any POWs (which came not from the office of the commanding general, but from the office of a general who was related to the emperor). After the war one of the staff officers of that emperor's uncle (I think it was an uncle) said he had faked the order, which makes you wonder why there was never an new order and why that officer had never been punished (faking orders of a general? That's a serious crime, yet nothing happened to him).

And well, that imperial cousin or uncle? He was never punished. The army CO? Was hanged, even though there was nothing he could have done against an order coming from the office of someone who's related to (at that point) the divine emperor.

Besides, if you'd know how brutal the discipline in the Japanese army at that time used to be you'd rethink quickly. Not to mention that, if it was an order, soldiers usually obeyed. And please no "they could have disobeyed"; It takes such an incredible ammount of courage to say "No", I don't think anyone would have done it. Also, if a soldier had disobeyed then he would have ended up in the execution line as well. The military of a dictatorship is not a democracy, sorry to burst that bubble.

Not to mention that Japanese reporters who were moving with the army were censored in their reports. Those men were shocked about what happened and sent their reports back to Japan, of course, none of those were ever published. Those reporters were muted quickly and the government made a little "Nanking tour" through the unharmed areas of the city for fresh reporters from the mainland.

So Quippoth, what you're basically saying is that Nanking was worse because more people have been killed in a different way?

That's BULLSHIT. This disreagard of human life is just disgusting.

Fact is, civilians were killed, it doesn't matter how they were killed in the end and how many were killed. Innocent people are dead, period. Both events are warcrimes (and both are certainly not military motivated, and you can apply the same thing for napalming Japanese cities). Which makes me wonder, when does it start to be bad? At 3? 30? 3,000? 300,000? 6 million? 60 million? Personally I hate this deathtoll-crap and that "No, there weren't 140,000 people killed, there were more than 300,000" and the "No, only 30,000". I mean, what's the point. It's completely irrelevant. Even if they would have killed "only" 1 civilian, that would have been 1 too much.

Fighting evil with evil doesn't work, you know? Best proof? USSR and the western allies.

You can blame the situation between China and Japan not only on some right winged Japanese, but also on people who make such weird comparisons.

Btw... ever seen how people with 3rd degree burns die? It's surely not pretty and takes days, sometimes even weeks. Then think of the situation in Japanese field hospitals in August 1945... barely any morphine, now add 3rd degree burns to that... That's a death I wouldn't want to die. The people there didn't just die, they croaked. People, you get it? Not "Japanese", but people. You can't tell me that a random woman who was working for Mitsubishi in one of their factories really wanted the war (it's not that people are usually asked anyway) and I doubt she also wanted the rape of Nanking happening.

Sure, I'd like to see Koizumi do something similar to what Willy Brandt did in Poland back in the days, but that won't happen. Yep, imagine the Japanese PM to visit Nanking and then kneel in front of the memorial there. It would be a great gesture. It would be an outstanding event... It would be suicide (keep in mind that some right wing nut shot the mayor of Nagasaki in the early 90s for saying that the Emperor may have had some connection and knowledge about warcrimes and that he may have been a bit responsible for the pre-war aggression). Koizumi wouldn't outlive such a thing for long. And then? What then? Then you open the door for the radicals, just like in the late 1920s.

The Japanese mentality is different than, let's say, the Chinese. Japan has been isolated for most of its recorded history. They had more than 250 years of peace under the Tokugawas with complete isolation from the outside. They moved from a feudal system to a modern industrial society within just a few decades in the 19th century (pretty impressive if you ask me). They have only lost one war (against the Americans) and have never been invaded. If I take China and compare it... OW...

Yes, I'd love to see the history textbooks being revised to showing the historical truth, but well... Nothing I can do to make the government change that.

I would advise to have a look at Japanese history and find out how Japan was turned into a militaristic regime before WW2.

Oh yes, the IJNAF pilots had a saying... "We're not butchers, we're not the army."

The dropping of the atmoic bomb prevented nothing. It only did one thing. It brought us closer to extinction. Look what happened after WW2. Everyone wanted a nuclear bomb, and still, until today, every shitty little dictator wants a nuke. Or take the cold war. I don't want to know how often the fingers from both sides were close to the little red button that would have killed everyone.

The GF of my best friend is Japanese. We've had some heated discussions over that issue in the past (mainly since she has some great-grand uncle, or something like that, who was at Nanking and who is, most likely, a war criminal).

Oh and if you really want to know... I am Chinese. I don't see the Japanese as an enemy. Why would I hate, let's say, my friend's GF? Just because she's Japanese and I'm Chinese? Because of her distant ancestor? That would be extremly dumb.

Yes, I do have some issues with the way the Japanese government is dealing with certain things. But the Japanese government is not the Japanese people. I can't blame the people for the stupidity of their government (that doesn't only go for the Japanese, it also goes for the Americans, British, Austrians, etc etc etc).

And yes, I consider the current protests in China as pretty stupid. It won't change anything. It'll only hurt a few Japanese companies, and will pour fire in those small right-winged groups in Japan.

From two countries that are so old like China and Japan, and thus, should be a bit more civilized than the Europeans or Americans, I would expect a bit more than such things.



Oh yes...

Ever had a look at how many thousands of people were killed during Mao's little revolution and the civil war?
Wow, this is one of the best posts I've ever read. Although that last bit about Mao was irrelevant...

Well, I'd say Mao and his revolution killed more Chinese than the Japanese army.

Well, I'd say Mao and his revolution killed more Chinese than the Japanese army.
So? Does that justify Japanese war crimes any more than Nanking or Pearl Harbor justify Hiroshima?

i dont get it, during the war australias mian enemy was japan, with many conflicts and acts of inhumannity occuring, like in the changi prison. but no one is aangry bout that now. the olny thing that they cant do, as with all of the axis countrys is that they cant march in the anzac day parade. but thats all, otherwise there is no difference. u dont see some1 who is jap and say, oh u did this and u did that. and dont say, oh well they never brought the war home. cos they bombed darwin (Capital of Northern Territory) killing many people. so i dont get y some people can hold a grudge 4 so long. cos there is none of that over here

Page,
and as for the Korean's, well I've never heard them mention anything, but then again I guess that they are just happier to be in such a peacfull country

Actually, from what I've seen, many Koreans still do hold grudges against the Japenese. The reason being, how Japan has tried to erase the Korean culture and the Koreans were also victims of atrocities.

So? Does that justify Japanese war crimes any more than Nanking or Pearl Harbor justify Hiroshima?

No, but it points out how much the communists really care about their people. That is, not at all.

My grandfather fought the Japanese and Germans, but I have no grudge against either nation. I'm part German, and I'm proud of my roots! :) The Germans and Japanese did really great things too. The only time I think about Pearl Harbor, Korea, or Europe is when I watch the History Channel or a war movie. That's about it. I have stuff in my house saying "made in Japan" or "Made in Germany", and I don't plan on burning it. It's stupid to people before they are born, and is just wrong, so I have no respect for them. It's terrible that there are people like that!

I lived in Japan last year as a resident alien, but I never made it down to the bomb sites (I was up North in Miyagi Prefecture, and was too broke to travel).
I worked with a lot of Canadians, Australians, Britons and one fantastic perpetually besotted New Zealander who was prone to diving onto the hoods of moving cabs when we needed one. I miss those guys.

But one of them, a Canadian, defined the U.S. as a terrorist nation because of our use of nuclear weapons. I countered that if the U.S. is a terrorist nation, it is probably more because it uses fear to control its citizens and others. As far as the means of causing an explosion on civilian targets, I asked why a fleet of Canadian or British manned Lancasters dropping firebombs on Dresden and burning thousands of women and children to death was morally distinguishable from killing thousands with a nuke. He said "Well, firebombs don't cause birth defects". If I had one leg because it was blown off when I was a baby in my crib by a RAF bomber, I wouldn't be sitting around saying "Well, least its not a birth defect". (I stress I respect and admire the RAF, they saved New York when they saved London, I'm just trying to say that the monstrosity of war is not a function of technical device)

But, I have a question. Its been said that the Japanese had attempted to surrender prior to the nuclear attacks. I would be very interested in finding out more about that. Could somebody post some good sources on that?

Also, the idea that the bombs were dropped to affect the post-war balance with the Soviets would also be cool to follow up on, if anybody's got some good directions for that. I know, "Google it yourself, jackmunch", but internet sources range in quality, and if somebody has already scoped some good data, I'd appreciate it, onigaishimasu.

As an American, I've never encountered this. My grandfather, of the WWII generation himself, has always admired the Japanese, particularly for their pro-business attitudes. And I can't imagine being upset about them starting a war that we won, in which they received more than their fair share of payback.

I do wish they'd be more honest about their wartime history; they could learn a lot from the Germans there. But, then again, so could we.

Whatever the case, they have a hell of a lot more to answer for regarding the degenerate scourge called "anime" currently infecting American pop culture than they do an attack of seven decades ago.

But, I have a question. Its been said that the Japanese had attempted to surrender prior to the nuclear attacks. I would be very interested in finding out more about that. Could somebody post some good sources on that?

I've never heard that before. Rather I've heard the contrary -- that the attacks themselves are not what ended the war, and that there were still members of the imperial military establishment who wanted to press on with the fight AFTER the bombs had been dropped. Ultimately something happened politically and the pro-surrender people got the upper hand, but it wasn't specifically because of the bombings. I won't swear by that explanation as it's been years since I read it, and I'm obviously fuzzy on the details... I think it may be detailed in a book about Hirohito that came out 5 or 6 years ago. Sorry, best I could do.

Also, the idea that the bombs were dropped to affect the post-war balance with the Soviets would also be cool to follow up on, if anybody's got some good directions for that. I know, "Google it yourself, jackmunch", but internet sources range in quality, and if somebody has already scoped some good data, I'd appreciate it, onigaishimasu.

This is pretty much accepted wisdom at this point. It's no accident that the bombs were dropped to coincide with the (long expected) Russian declaration of war on Japan, and it's well known that at Potsdam a month before Hiroshima, Truman made no secret of his new secret weapon and tried to use that to his advantage v. Stalin. Look at it this way: with the Russians landing in August 1945, what if the war had gone on for several more months? Where would East Asia be today?

The Americans aren't the only ones. My whole family hates the Japanese (except myself, I can't seem to bring myself to hate an entire people because of the actions of a few bad ancestors). This is probably because my grandmother is from PuKou, a town not far from NanJing, China (do I need to remind anyone what happened there?). Where I lived before going to college, there were many Chinese and Korean people whose parents, and grandparents have bad memories of Japanese occupation and hate them even though they were never there themselves. Furthermore their relatives still in China and Korea also hate the Japanese, even the ones who were not born before or during the occupation.
As for myself, I don't hate all Japanese, just the ones responsible for the massacres in China and the attempt to erase the Korean culture. I even have a great deal of respect for some aspects of Japanese culture (I own an original Yoshida woodcut, one of my favourite works of art).

Bingo. I'm from the US and have never seen what the OP describes (Americans cheering at old war movies). I do know that the Chinese, Koreans and other Asians have deep and abiding bad memories of the occupation. Australians, New Zealanders, and the Brits also seem to have stronger feelings, but as with the US, these tend to be more the older generation.

The worse thing is the continued lack of the Japanese government to offer apology to China and it's other victims during WWII. Germany had apologised. Japan continues to deny anything, even approving new revisionist textbooks (this was very recently).

Yep. Pisses me off as well.

BTW, you do remember PM Murayama's apology, don't you. Many were not satisfied with it, understanably.

http://www.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/NanjingMassacre/NMAPOLOGY.html

This isn't helped by the enshrining of war criminals as honored dead at Yasakuni and the politicians visiting Yasakuni.

The varioous Chinese and Korean governments (CCP and DPRK especially) also make good use of it to strengthen themselves through nationalism. Give the people a good enemy, especially one that is guilty, to some degree, and it gives them a good distraction from their own troubles at home.


The US, on the otherhand, doesn't need to demonize Japan. Japan's under the US thumb to some degree. Plus the US has other enemies it can demonize (muslims, middle easterners) if need be.

Greater Yubari:
Good post.
However there were legitimate military targets at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (Doesn't make it right.)

Hiroshima military targets:
1) The headquarters of the Fifth Division
2) Field Marshal Hata's 2nd General Army Headquarters (commanding the defense of southern Japan)
3) Various military communications and storage facilities.
4) The city also served as an important assembly area for troops.

Nagasaki military targets included a number of war materials industries, particularly ordnance, ships, and other military equipment. Also note that Nagasaki was the secondary target for Fat Man. The Kokura Arsenal was the primary target.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/046.html
http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/BOMB/bomb16.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Choice_of_targets

Note that I've lived in Japan 14 years, including a full year in Nagasaki, and the only Japanese who ever questioned me about the atomic bombings either knew very little or nothing about the war, and Japan's conduct, or were ultra nationalists of the "gaijin go home!" variety.

Just this week I had a very interesting conversation with an older lady. Her first memory was the firebombing of Osaka March 13, 1945. Her childhood home was situated next to a militarily strategic factory. She described in vivid detail (and with eerily beautiful imagery "like a flower") the bomb that burned the factory, and her house. Then she told me of her first overseas trip. She spent a year as a teacher in Singapore in the 60s. She had grown up knowing nothing of Japan's war crimes, and was shocked at what she learned.

I've had many similar stories related to me over the years. I am utterly convinced that the average Japanese:
a) is ignorant of why Japan is hated by some in China and Korea, and elsewhere. These people are usually pacifistic. When they aren't, they want to see Japan as a "normal" nation. This last group is the most dangerous.
b) knows what went on, and has no desire to see a repeat of WWII. These are usually older people, like the lady above, or younger people. In both cases they tend to be well traveled. They are also almost exclusively pacifistic.
or
c) is foolish. These types exist everywhere.

Finally, I haven't seen mention of Yoshio Nishina's "Institute of Physical and Chemical Research" (Rikken) or the Imperial Navy's F-Go program. These were Japan's nuclear weapons programs. They didn't seem to have made very significant progress, but there is some speculation that the USSR and US governments captured and covered up some of their research.

Also left unmentioned are Unit 731, Unit 100, and Unit 516, Japan's well documented biological and chemical warefare units in China. These units not only engarged in horrific experements, but also carried out biological and chemical weapons attacks, generally against civilian populations.

http://globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/japan/nuke-ww2.htm
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/bw/
http://www.skycitygallery.com/japan/japan.html
http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/germwar/731rev.htm

To sum up what you said, Greater Yubari, war sucks.

Greater Yubari, what do tou base the statement that the Japanese were ready to surrender or defenseless on?

I lived in Japan last year as a resident alien, but I never made it down to the bomb sites (I was up North in Miyagi Prefecture, and was too broke to travel).
I worked with a lot of Canadians, Australians, Britons and one fantastic perpetually besotted New Zealander who was prone to diving onto the hoods of moving cabs when we needed one. I miss those guys.

:D Used to live up that way - Niigata (another city targeted for an atom bomb).

But one of them, a Canadian, defined the U.S. as a terrorist nation because of our use of nuclear weapons. I countered that if the U.S. is a terrorist nation, it is probably more because it uses fear to control its citizens and others. As far as the means of causing an explosion on civilian targets, I asked why a fleet of Canadian or British manned Lancasters dropping firebombs on Dresden and burning thousands of women and children to death was morally distinguishable from killing thousands with a nuke. He said "Well, firebombs don't cause birth defects". If I had one leg because it was blown off when I was a baby in my crib by a RAF bomber, I wouldn't be sitting around saying "Well, least its not a birth defect". (I stress I respect and admire the RAF, they saved New York when they saved London, I'm just trying to say that the monstrosity of war is not a function of technical device)

[quote]But, I have a question. Its been said that the Japanese had attempted to surrender prior to the nuclear attacks. I would be very interested in finding out more about that. Could somebody post some good sources on that?

Also, the idea that the bombs were dropped to affect the post-war balance with the Soviets would also be cool to follow up on, if anybody's got some good directions for that. I know, "Google it yourself, jackmunch", but internet sources range in quality, and if somebody has already scoped some good data, I'd appreciate it, onigaishimasu.

My understanding is that the civilian leadership was open to a surrended, but not the military leadership.

Because the Allies had broken Japan's codes, the men responsible for making the decision to drop the bomb had some clues about the split among Japan's leaders. But debate continues today on how much the Allies knew.

On July 26, 1945, Allied leaders issued the Potsdam Declaration, calling for Japan to surrender or face destruction.

Japanese Premier Kantaro Suzuki described his reaction to the Potsdam Declaration as "to kill it with silence" - the equivalent of saying, "No comment."

But the Japanese military told newspapers July 28 that Suzuki's reaction was to "treat it with silent contempt." And that was the message received by the Allies.

Some Nagasaki survivors like Uchida blame the military for continuing the war until the bombs dropped. He said he felt "rage, anger and fierce fury" at Japanese military leaders "for not surrendering when they knew we had lost the war."
http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/BOMB/bomb15.html

There were feelers and attempts made. The following site details some:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html

Note that all of these were made by the civiliam leadership.

Greater Yubari, what do tou base the statement that the Japanese were ready to surrender or defenseless on?

I have heard before that Imperial Japan tried to surrender before the atom bombs were dropped, but I don't know much about it. Here's what I was able to dig up. EDIT: Look at Daistallia 2104's post. It has much better info. Anyway, at least this shows that Truman knew about Japanese attempts to surrender in July, 1945.

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large/documents/fulltext.php?fulltextid=15

This is a copy of President Truman's diary from July 17-19, 1945. Its from the Truman Presidential Library website. The site has scanned pages in Truman's own hand, but I linked to the printed ones because they are easier to read. On July 18, Truman wrote:
"Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. of telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace. Stalin also read his answer to me. It was satisfactory. Believe Japs will fold up before Russia comes in. I am sure they will when Manhattan appears over their homeland."

This seems to show that Japan had tried to talk to the USSR about surrendering (to the US, since Japan and the USSR weren't at war at the time), but the USSR said no. If I remember correctly, the main problem was that Japan wanted to surrender, but keep the emperor, and we wanted an unconditional surrender. After the unconditional surrender, the emperor was allowed to stay on anyway, but we still got the unconditional surrender. One of my history professors in college thought that Truman wanted the unconditional surrender to show that he was as tough as Roosevelt, who had said he would accept nothing less.

BTW, you do remember PM Murayama's apology, don't you. Many were not satisfied with it, understanably.

I agree with you that the average Japanese person knows far too little about their country's conduct during the war years. However, there have been several apologies from the Japanese government towards Korea, China, POW's, and victims of the war in general. Several of these are much better than Murayama's apology, in my opinion, actually saying "sorry" in addition to "we regret". They probably have more to apologize for, but it's a good start. Here is the list of apologies I was able to find on the BBC in a five minute search (from my post on page 3).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1599642.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1586040.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1533436.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...ific/187954.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/47293.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/46748.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/46730.stm

Meabashi, that seems more like an attempt to take advantage of growing tensions between the USSR and the western allies than an attempt to surrender.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1599642.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1586040.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1533436.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...ific/187954.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/47293.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/46748.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/46730.stm

The first 4 don't work....


(And just as I am about to submit this, guess who comes driving by blairing the old military music? Yep, it's the "freindly" neigborhood Uyoku (http://www3.tky.3web.ne.jp/~edjacob/fringe.html)! :sniper: :mp5: :headbang: )

Meabashi, that seems more like an attempt to take advantage of growing tensions between the USSR and the western allies than an attempt to surrender.

Look at Daistallia 2104's second link, it has much more specific info about the surrender attempt. The Japanese asked the USSR to give the surrender terms to the US, they did not try to surrender to the USSR. They had to pass the surrender terms along this way because very few other countries still had diplomatic links with Japan at the time. The surrender document passed to Truman by the USSR was over fourty pages long, which is pretty long for a political ploy. In fact, the terms Japan offered to the US were the same terms the US would eventually accept, with the exception of immunity of the emperor, who was never prosecuted anyway. From Daistallia's second link:
This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:

* Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
* Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
* Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
* Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
* Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
* Surrender of designated war criminals.

In April, the Japanese also asked the Swedish ambassador to ask the British and the Americans for peace terms. The Swedesh ambassador was instructed to offer any terms up to the surrender of the emperor. Surely the Japanese were not trying to create strife between the Swedes and the Allies? ;)

It just seems to me that direct surrender on the battlefield would have been a more effective means of making peace than sending thier conditions through diplomats while thier military crashed planes into ships and fought on the ground of southern islands practically to the last man.

Meabashi, that seems more like an attempt to take advantage of growing tensions between the USSR and the western allies than an attempt to surrender.

Check the link I posted above. It lists at least 4 additional feelers put out by the civilian leadership towards finding a means of surrender, including: one through MacArthur, two through the Swedish, and one through the Portugese.

There is also a citation from intelligence sources of communications between Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo and ambassador Naotake Sato in Moscow dicussing possible surrender terms.

Navy Secretary James Forrestal termed the intercepted messages "real evidence of a Japanese desire to get out of the war." "With the interception of these messages," notes historian Alperovitz (p. 177), "there could no longer be any real doubt as to the Japanese intentions; the maneuvers were overt and explicit and, most of all, official acts. Koichi Kido, Japan's Lord Privy Seal and a close advisor to the Emperor, later affirmed: "Our decision to seek a way out of this war, was made in early June before any atomic bomb had been dropped and Russia had not entered the war. It was already our decision."

However, I'll reiterate that all of the above were carried out by the civilian leadership, not the military. AFAIK, the military did not attempt to surrender. This can further be seen in the scattered holdouts, some of whom did not surrender until the 70s.
http://www.wanpela.com/holdouts/registry.html
(Note the unconfirmed report of holdouts as late as the 1970s in Okinawa.)

(I just now noticed you beat me to it Maebashi. :))

The first 4 don't work....


(And just as I am about to submit this, guess who comes driving by blairing the old military music? Yep, it's the "freindly" neigborhood Uyoku (http://www3.tky.3web.ne.jp/~edjacob/fringe.html)! :sniper: :mp5: :headbang: )

Man, I swear I tested those when I posted them a couple of days ago...Anyway, here are the first couple of articles again. If that doesn't work and you still want them, telegram me your email and I'll em them to you. Sorry for the inconvenience.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1599642.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1533436.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/187954.stm

P.S.--I realy hate those Uyoku! :mad: How are we supposed to listen to their slogans in the future if the trucks deafen us?

It just seems to me that direct surrender on the battlefield would have been a more effective means of making peace than sending thier conditions through diplomats while thier military crashed planes into ships and fought on the ground of southern islands practically to the last man.

Well, as I've noted twice now, these were all made by the cvilian leadership. The military leadership was in a much stronger position, and was not willing to surrender.

Man, I swear I tested those when I posted them a couple of days ago...Anyway, here are the first couple of articles again. If that doesn't work and you still want them, telegram me your email and I'll em them to you. Sorry for the inconvience.


Cool they work now. :)

P.S.--I realy hate those Uyoku! How are we supposed to listen to their slogans in the future if the trucks deafen us?

At least they're musical. The "HELLO! I'M SUZUKI! VOTE FOR ME! HELLO! I'M SUZUKI! VOTE FOR ME! HELLO! I'M SUZUKI! VOTE FOR ME!" election vans are even worse. :mad:
And the bosozoku, recyclers, various sales vans, etc. :headbang:

Damn this country needs some noise ordinances.

I don't see the significance of officials who were in no position to surrender the military having made offers to do so.

I don't see the significance of officials who were in no position to surrender the military having made offers to do so.

It wasn't a matter of officials who were not in position to surrender. These were high civilian officials, including prime minister and the Emperor. The civilian government was in a weaker position than the military leadership, not a totally subservient one. It was the Emperor who made the decision to surrender afterall.

The main point is that it was a more complicated matter than is sometimes presented by either side. That gets lost in all the back-and-forth arguing over the end of the war.

If you look at it we're buying most of our stuff from Japan, but then again we are buying more stuff from China. So, I guess that just crosses out that opinion.

I have met many Americans who seem to bear a grudge against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor. What do the Americans around this forum say about that?

When people watching a war movie more or less cheer when the Japanese are being burned alive you start wondering.
I don't hate Japanese for Pearl Harbor. I do, however, take Japanese and my Japanese teacher is absolutely horrible. She is by far my worst teacher ever. That, plus the fact that the Japanese society is so strict and gives pretty much no room for personality, makes me dislike them.

I don't hate Japanese for Pearl Harbor. I do, however, take Japanese and my Japanese teacher is absolutely horrible. She is by far my worst teacher ever. That, plus the fact that the Japanese society is so strict and gives pretty much no room for personality, makes me dislike them.

Don't let a bad teacher spoil it for you.

And Japanese mores aren't really that strict. I know plenty of Japanese who are full of personality.

Korea was under the brutal Japenese control for thirty five years, if anyone should hold a grudge against Japenese, it should be Koreans, or any other country Japan has oppressed for a period of time. However, I don't hate the Japenese, I have a few Japenese freinds.

yep! I'm a Korean and I agree. I don't hate the Japanese as an individual, but as a nation :mp5:
Mostly b/c they never EVER said they were wrong for all the atrocities they've commited... Dokdo IS our's, too ;)

Don't let a bad teacher spoil it for you.

And Japanese mores aren't really that strict. I know plenty of Japanese who are full of personality.
Oh, I know, my first Japanese teacher was awesome. Its not so much that Japanese people (at least outside Japan) are strict, it is that the society is strict. School in Japan is absolute hell, and on top of that, they have to go to "examination hell" for 3-4 hours after school. Their child suicide rate is enormous ( I believe the top, or near the top of the world). I can't stand the whole system.

yep! I'm a Korean and I agree. I don't hate the Japanese as an individual, but as a nation :mp5:
Mostly b/c they never EVER said they were wrong for all the atrocities they've commited... Dokdo IS our's, too ;)
Thats right. Dokdo was Korea's property for a long time. Japan has no right to take it away from korea. Mabe Japenese militarianism isn't really gone.

Why do some Japanese still hate Americans for the nuclear weapons?

Maybe because Pearl Harbor was a MILITARY target and Hiroshima a CIVILIAN target?

Quippoth, honestly, that's a load of American propaganda bullshit.

"Want to know how many people were killed in the Rape of Nanking?
369,366."

Uhmm... that number wouldn't stand 5 seconds, simply since there is no real count. And I don't take counts by the Chinese government serious, simply because the government merely abandoned Nanking and basically left the civilians (and the completely unorganized Chinese army, at that point) there at the mercy of the Japanese (and a handful of foreigners, mainly Americans, a few English, and... *GASP* John Rabe, a Nazi).


Because the Chinese army left them there it gives the invading japanese army the right to go in on a raping and killing spree of civilians? Riiiiight. You claim that the counts are wrong but you have no proof to back it up, yet the International Tribunal for the Far East puts the deathtoll above 200k.


The official number of deaths is somewhere around 140,000 as determined by the warcrimes tribunal after the war.

Also the comparison of Nanking and the nukes is pretty stupid. Both nukes mainly hit civilians (just like Nanking) who were surely not responsible for Nanking at a point where Japan was already on its knees (the way I see it, the Americans kicked someone in the ribs who was already down for the count, very brave indeed).

Except the Japanese high command *refused* to surrender. I guess you missed that part. And this thread was about people disliking Japan. I simply am bringing up possible reasons why some people disliked the country, the Rape of Nanking is one of them.


The invasion of Japan was only one out of many options. Another option was just starving them out (and in August 1945 Japan was already pretty starved). Also it's very doubtful that all military officers would have followed an order to defend Japan at all costs (and no, the old "the emperor orders it" argument doesn't work here. If you read Sakai's "Samurai!" you'll see that, for NCOs and low ranking officers like him the emperor was some obscure figure somewhere in Tokyo.)

Very doubtful the military officers would have followed the orders to defend Japan to the last man? There are numerous records of Japanese officers and soliders throwing themselves off cliffs rather than deciding to surrender to American soliders.


Also the estimations of losses during an invasion are highly overdone and usually just American propaganda to justify their warcrimes. (And I know that there are always examples taken from Okinawa where Japanese civilians have killed themselves. But well, those were a miniority, and such things happened in Germany as well. It's a pretty weak argument). Basically... Winner's propaganda, just like the warcrimes tribunals in Europe and Japan were winner's justice (people like RAF Air Marshall Harris never faced a trial).

Right, fighting a fanatical, well entrenched enemy in their homeland would have been a walk in the park. If the war didn't end when it did you would likely have a long drawn out Iraq type situation.


And well, the nuclear weapons were not a military decision (the recommendation to drop them did not come from the military). For once the US had blatantly ignored earlier attempts of a Japanese surrender (attempts made via the Germans and the Swiss; in those attempts the Japanese wanted to keep the emperor, that was the main point, since the Americans wanted to remove the emperor in the beginning, and thus those attempts were ignored. Then the Americans drop the bomb, Japan surrenders and the Americans allow the emperor to stay? Doesn't make sense to me), and secondly it was a political decision to drop those.

We blatantly ignored their attempts to surrender? We told gave them a chance to surrender before we dropped any atomic bombs on any of their cities. Complete and unconditional surrender or utter annihilation was the line. The high command *refused* to surrender. So whose not accepting surrender here? If they were so keen on surrendering then they should have agreed to unconditional surrender. If you take a look after the war (and its post-war constitution) the idea was the bring Japan to the point where it could no longer invade other countries.


Eisenhower said after the war that it wasn't necessary. MacArthur said that he wasn't even asked about it, etc. Spaatz said that it was a decision done in war times, but in the end it wasn't really the best option. And if you look at the first images of the crews of both bombers, when they're climbing out of their aircraft right after returning from the mission... the looks on their faces and their eyes say enough. (Yes, I know Tibbets defended it, but eh, Tibbets was just colonel, he was told to fly to Hiroshima and drop a cargo he didn't know anything about, he was just the delivery boy, if he wouldn't have done it, somebody else had flown that bird.)

Pre-bomb estimates from MacArthurs mouth were over a million more deaths.


It was a sign from the USA towards the USSR "Look what we've got, commies." (In July 1945 the relationship between the USSR and the western allies was already going downhill fast.)

Possible.


Nanking was done by elemnts of one Japanese army (and surely not every soldier and officer went to "work" with full motivation or liked doing it). The events that led to it are pretty interesting. For example, if you've ever read Iris Chang's "Rape of Nanking" you'll know what I mean, the order that was given out to not take any POWs (which came not from the office of the commanding general, but from the office of a general who was related to the emperor). After the war one of the staff officers of that emperor's uncle (I think it was an uncle) said he had faked the order, which makes you wonder why there was never an new order and why that officer had never been punished (faking orders of a general? That's a serious crime, yet nothing happened to him).

Did I ever claim that the Japanese delighted in the Rape of Nanking? Of course not, its also not as if we stuck the entire US military in the Enola Gay on a tailgate/bombing run of Hiroshima. There are various stories of German soldiers working the concentration camps refusing to kill Jews and stories of Japanese soliders befriending US soldiers even in camps like Cabatuan.


And well, that imperial cousin or uncle? He was never punished. The army CO? Was hanged, even though there was nothing he could have done against an order coming from the office of someone who's related to (at that point) the divine emperor.

Besides, if you'd know how brutal the discipline in the Japanese army at that time used to be you'd rethink quickly. Not to mention that, if it was an order, soldiers usually obeyed. And please no "they could have disobeyed"; It takes such an incredible ammount of courage to say "No", I don't think anyone would have done it. Also, if a soldier had disobeyed then he would have ended up in the execution line as well. The military of a dictatorship is not a democracy, sorry to burst that bubble.

Not to mention that Japanese reporters who were moving with the army were censored in their reports. Those men were shocked about what happened and sent their reports back to Japan, of course, none of those were ever published. Those reporters were muted quickly and the government made a little "Nanking tour" through the unharmed areas of the city for fresh reporters from the mainland.

Aware of all of this already.


So Quippoth, what you're basically saying is that Nanking was worse because more people have been killed in a different way?

Your missing the entire subject of this thread. The subject is about people disliking Japan under the assumed notion that it was because of Pearl Harbor. I said that there are a variety of reasons related to WW2 why people disliked Japan one of them being the Rape of Nanking. I also said I don't believe in disliking Japanese because of something done decades ago by people who are not even represinting mainstream Japan anymore.


That's BULLSHIT. This disreagard of human life is just disgusting.

Sorry but I think that several months of torture, murder, and rape, of thousands done by people who had every chance to *not* do it is worse than death by an impersonal force of an atomic bomb. You may think thats sick and wrong, so be it, but I think its unrealistic to claim that being killed by a bomb is worse than or even equal to seeing your wife and daughter raped, your infant being thrown in a game of *catch* with a bayonet, your sons and familiy members heads being chopped off in games of seeing whose head can roll farther. The atomic bomb leaves out a very large very important human component in killing and warcrimes that makes it so terrible.


Fact is, civilians were killed, it doesn't matter how they were killed in the end and how many were killed. Innocent people are dead, period. Both events are warcrimes (and both are certainly not military motivated, and you can apply the same thing for napalming Japanese cities). Which makes me wonder, when does it start to be bad? At 3? 30? 3,000? 300,000? 6 million? 60 million? Personally I hate this deathtoll-crap and that "No, there weren't 140,000 people killed, there were more than 300,000" and the "No, only 30,000". I mean, what's the point. It's completely irrelevant. Even if they would have killed "only" 1 civilian, that would have been 1 too much.

I'd take 1 civilian dead in any shape or form over 200 thousand killed by atom bomb or move conventional means. In the end you need to work for the great good.


Fighting evil with evil doesn't work, you know? Best proof? USSR and the western allies.

You can blame the situation between China and Japan not only on some right winged Japanese, but also on people who make such weird comparisons.

Fighting evil with evil works quite well actually. Vlad Teppes staked prisoners on wooden pikes and made a forest of impaled bodies outside his fortress. Evil.

The Turks invaded his country and turned back when they saw the forest of decomposing corpses. What would have happened if they hadn't? Mass murder, rape, pillaing, evil in short. Are they better off with Vlad? Not really, but it certainly beat the other evil, and since you seem to not quantify evil, how can you judge which is "less evil."


Btw... ever seen how people with 3rd degree burns die? It's surely not pretty and takes days, sometimes even weeks. Then think of the situation in Japanese field hospitals in August 1945... barely any morphine, now add 3rd degree burns to that... That's a death I wouldn't want to die. The people there didn't just die, they croaked. People, you get it? Not "Japanese", but people. You can't tell me that a random woman who was working for Mitsubishi in one of their factories really wanted the war (it's not that people are usually asked anyway) and I doubt she also wanted the rape of Nanking happening.

I'm aware of how long it takes for sufferers of third degree burns to die, and i'm aware how painful and disfiguring burns are. I've seen the photos of people walking the streets after the bombs who don't look human, who have lost their facial features, who have bits of bones sticking out of their charred flesh. But i'm also aware that there are more levels of pain that physical. There is mental anguish and anxiety that comes from not being able to help those you care for when they are being killed by the completely sentient absolutely capable of self regulating human being. Bombs can't choose who they hurt, its logistical. A human with a machine gun, a bayonet, a katana, can choose.


Sure, I'd like to see Koizumi do something similar to what Willy Brandt did in Poland back in the days, but that won't happen. Yep, imagine the Japanese PM to visit Nanking and then kneel in front of the memorial there. It would be a great gesture. It would be an outstanding event... It would be suicide (keep in mind that some right wing nut shot the mayor of Nagasaki in the early 90s for saying that the Emperor may have had some connection and knowledge about warcrimes and that he may have been a bit responsible for the pre-war aggression). Koizumi wouldn't outlive such a thing for long. And then? What then? Then you open the door for the radicals, just like in the late 1920s.

The Japanese mentality is different than, let's say, the Chinese. Japan has been isolated for most of its recorded history. They had more than 250 years of peace under the Tokugawas with complete isolation from the outside. They moved from a feudal system to a modern industrial society within just a few decades in the 19th century (pretty impressive if you ask me). They have only lost one war (against the Americans) and have never been invaded. If I take China and compare it... OW...

Maybe i'm mistaken here but I believe the Japanese lost a war against the Koreans. But thats really besides the point.


Yes, I'd love to see the history textbooks being revised to showing the historical truth, but well... Nothing I can do to make the government change that.

I would advise to have a look at Japanese history and find out how Japan was turned into a militaristic regime before WW2.

Oh yes, the IJNAF pilots had a saying... "We're not butchers, we're not the army."

The dropping of the atmoic bomb prevented nothing. It only did one thing. It brought us closer to extinction. Look what happened after WW2. Everyone wanted a nuclear bomb, and still, until today, every shitty little dictator wants a nuke. Or take the cold war. I don't want to know how often the fingers from both sides were close to the little red button that would have killed everyone.

The creation of the atomic bomb had accomplished that, not the dropping.


The GF of my best friend is Japanese. We've had some heated discussions over that issue in the past (mainly since she has some great-grand uncle, or something like that, who was at Nanking and who is, most likely, a war criminal).

Oh and if you really want to know... I am Chinese. I don't see the Japanese as an enemy. Why would I hate, let's say, my friend's GF? Just because she's Japanese and I'm Chinese? Because of her distant ancestor? That would be extremly dumb.

I already said before that I don't have a problem with Japanese people. I live in Hawaii and a large amount of our population *is Japanese*. I myself am Korean so what can I say.


Yes, I do have some issues with the way the Japanese government is dealing with certain things. But the Japanese government is not the Japanese people. I can't blame the people for the stupidity of their government (that doesn't only go for the Japanese, it also goes for the Americans, British, Austrians, etc etc etc).

And yes, I consider the current protests in China as pretty stupid. It won't change anything. It'll only hurt a few Japanese companies, and will pour oil into the fires of those small right-winged groups in Japan.

From two countries that are so old like China and Japan, and thus, should be a bit more civilized than the Europeans or Americans, I would expect a bit more than such things.



Oh yes...

Ever had a look at how many thousands of people were killed during Mao's little revolution and the civil war?
I'm more than aware of how many people died in it. But that has nothing to do with disliking Japanese people which is the topic.

yep! I'm a Korean and I agree. I don't hate the Japanese as an individual, but as a nation :mp5:
Mostly b/c they never EVER said they were wrong for all the atrocities they've commited... Dokdo IS our's, too ;)

I agree that Korea has a much better historical claim to the Dokdo islands than Japan does. Whichever prefecture that was that claimed that the islands belong to Japan was foolish to do so. I wonder if they were trying to hurt Korean-Japanese relations.

Japan has more to apologize for, and should issue apologies for specific war crimes, such as Nanking and the comfort women. However, Japan has issues several apologies over the years to Korea and others for it's actions during the WWII era. Several of the later apologies are real apologies, using the word "sorry" instead of simply "we regret". In the most recent apology to Korea, PM Koizumi not only apologized, but placed flowers on the graves of Korean anti-Japanese fighters. I personally was moved by this. Below is a link to a list of times Japan has apologized for it's actions before and during WWII. For more info, please check out my links near the top of the previous page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan

2 million German women were raped by the Soviets.

Allies are eviller than the Axis. Axis is holy.

Did you forget who started this war? Did you forget about german atrocities?
About destroying Warsaw, about Holocaust, about starting this horrible war?

It'll be a long time before it's forgotten.

I don't hate Japanese for Pearl Harbor. I do, however, take Japanese and my Japanese teacher is absolutely horrible. She is by far my worst teacher ever. That, plus the fact that the Japanese society is so strict and gives pretty much no room for personality, makes me dislike them.Psst... if you are male, I hope she let you know that men and women speak differently there. a man using female words will sound like a 'Flaming to the point of a Monty Python skit' foreigner...

Psst... if you are male, I hope she let you know that men and women speak differently there. a man using female words will sound like a 'Flaming to the point of a Monty Python skit' foreigner...
And this is relevant to what?