What Japan did in World War 2

[Richard III]

Originally posted by klazlo
Personally I don't think that using the A-bombs was necessary, it had more political reason than military one. If the Americans didn't want to invade Japan (which I understand they didn't want) they could have carpet bomb the country with the 'traditional' methods like in the case of Tokyo.

This subject has been thoroughly debated in other threads, but I should note:

1) I don't think its fair to claim revenge was the motivation. There is no evidence that the bomb was dropped out of spite; in fact, there was a good deal of hand-wringing about civilian casualties by leading officials in several cases, both related to the A-bombings and conventional attacks as well.

2) The US was also motivated by intelligence that demonstrated that the air and sea blockade was not effective in preventing the armament of the civilian population, preparations for an invasion defence or in demoralizing the military regime.

It's not like they could have just "waited" a year for Japan to cave; half the reason for the war was to liberate peoples under occupation, and at that point, that figure included several countries and a healthy quantity of starving Allied prisoners.

See "Downfall" by R. Frank and the LAst Great Victory by Weintraub for more on these themes.

R.III

 

[Sayhueque]

The Japanese commited atrocities, but the Americans knew it and covered it up so that they could obtain the NBC technology.

 

[klazlo]

Originally posted by Richard III


1) I don't think its fair to claim revenge was the motivation. There is no evidence that the bomb was dropped out of spite; in fact, there was a good deal of hand-wringing about civilian casualties by leading officials in several cases, both related to the A-bombings and conventional attacks as well.
R.III

What I basically wanted to say (and maybe was not entirely clear) is that using the A-bomb was not plain revenge, they wanted to use (test in live) an ultimate weapon to finish the war as soon as possible (because they had enough of it) and it was correlated with their political interests as well. It was a good occasion to try a new weapon with major public support.
But you're right, sorry for hijacking this thread with this.

 

[roadwarrior]

Originally posted by Sayhueque
The Japanese commited atrocities, but the Americans knew it and covered it up so that they could obtain the NBC technology.

I think that the US covered up for the Japanese government more because of growing tensions with the Soviets. Policy makers saw that a friendly base of operations near mainland Asia would be very beneficial, so they mad a conscious decision to downlplay Japanese atrocities in order to gain acceptance for their policies. Like we are told that Hirohito really didn't want war, while there has been evidence that he was as militaristic as any of his generals. It is reasonable to think that getting ahold of Japanese wartime technology factored into the treatment of Japan psot-WW2, but that is not the only or even the primary reason.

 

[Case]

The Australian government was very keen to hang Hirohito for his various war crimes. However, the Americans (probably correctly) decided that this wouldn't really be in the long term interests of Japan and the west.

 

[stationery2]

One of the biggest japanese atrocities would be the 'comfort women' where they conscripted women from korea, china, philipines etc to make a institutionalized army prostitutes.
As a person who studies korean history, i'm sometimes enraged at the way japanese committed atrocities and how they are victimized only because they got 'imprisoned' in North america and because they got smashed by an a-bomb.
Thinking about the people they killed....
It's so sad.
And they don't even apologize and actually, still glorify the war criminals.
There is another saying that, without korean specimens used in biological and chemical experiment done by japan, world medicine would have been 30 years backward.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

I have pretty much the same feelings, stationery. It's one of my rants against the present-day Japanese govt and people, esp when yet another high lvl Japanese govt official (the PM sometimes) makes yet another visit to that shrine.

BTW, are you Korean per chance?

 

[stationery2]

No. Canadian.
Just studying korean history and all that.
What about you?
Probably Chinese. I saw you refered to China as 'us'.
So you must be Chinese.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Yep, Chinese. Not China Chinese, but M'sian Chinese.

 

[aska26]

The Japanese raped tevery women in our country not only us but in thier occupied countries they are merciless in raping women not only women but also gays they are sexually maniac during war times and pluder our rich natural resources

 

[Evie]

I suppose they eat children while they're at it?

That Japanesse soldiers in World War II raped many women in conquered territories is definitely true (then again, it's true of many armies throughout history - not like the Japanesse invented it, though they kept the idea around somewhat longer than most). Using the term "every" is, of course, an exxageration.

As for plundering your rich natural resources, they did what just about every other "modern" civ did before and after them. Heck, now most poor countries have a handful (like 1%) of locals plus international companies plundering the resources while the rest stay poor). Why Japan should get more blame out of it is beyond me...

As for raping gay everywhere, care to document that claim?

 

[cegman]

I read most but I am tired hope I didn't miss someone saying this.
Now is it completely true that they were innocent civilians. I mean they weren't part of the Army but they were going to fight. Did we save more people by dropping the bombs? We may have but that will never be known because we can't go back.

 

[Sabotage]

Yes dropping those bombs saved the lives of people. If the Allied forces were to stage an assault on Japan, not only would Japanese soldiers be involved, but the Japanese civilians, most of them armed with nothing but bamboo spears would also go on the defensive. In other words, if the allied invaded Hiroshima, not only would those civilians that would have died in the nuke explosion die anyway, but they'd take hundreds of thousands of Allied Soldiers with them.

No good national leader would send his troops off to die when there are alternative methods. Roosevelt knew this and decided that it'd be better to win by a show of force rather than a bloody amphibious landing.

 

[cephyn]

Originally posted by Sabotage
Yes dropping those bombs saved the lives of people. If the Allied forces were to stage an assault on Japan, not only would Japanese soldiers be involved, but the Japanese civilians, most of them armed with nothing but bamboo spears would also go on the defensive. In other words, if the allied invaded Hiroshima, not only would those civilians that would have died in the nuke explosion die anyway, but they'd take hundreds of thousands of Allied Soldiers with them.

No good national leader would send his troops off to die when there are alternative methods. Roosevelt knew this and decided that it'd be better to win by a show of force rather than a bloody amphibious landing.

This has been debated on other threads as well, but the bottom line is Japan was prepared to surrender, but not unconditionally. The US dropped the bomb to force unconditional surrender and pre-empt the Soviet invasion, which would have entitled the Soviets to land holdings because of agreements at Yalta. After the Soviets entered the war, Japan knew that their plans for a condtional surrender were hopeless (they wanted the Soviet Union to broker the deal) and surrendered. What did we do? Gave them a conditional surrender, like they wanted, because we wanted to control Japan and turn it into a non-communist buffer state against the Soviet Union.

It has been documented that the dropping of the A-bombs did little, if anything, to change the mind of the Japanese government. The real moment which forced their immediate surrender was the entrance of the Soviet Union into the Pacific War. They had been trying to open diplomatic channels for weeks with the Soviets, but the Soviets had stonewalled them. The Soviets wanted a piece of Japan, so they could set it up like they did in Germany.

 

[Richard III]

Um, no cephyn. No.

I won't bother with the tiresome debate about the Soviets, but I will bother to dispute the issue with the surrender. Because the real moment which forced their immediate surrender was the second bomb - which barely succeeded in doing the persuading. I should add that this is not just an opinion; japanese documentation confirms it.

And the conditional surrender that the Japanese wanted until that second bomb was not just the preservation of the emporer, but the preservation of Japanese soveriegnty. Essentially, the government wanted to be able to "barter colonies" for territorial and institutional integrity - in other words, to achieve a reward for their aggression that would allow the idealogy of Japanese militarism to save face and come away with a moral victory.

Which, considering the immorality of what was done prior, was and should be unnacceptable to anyone.

 

[cephyn]

Originally posted by Richard III
Um, no cephyn. No.

I won't bother with the tiresome debate about the Soviets, but I will bother to dispute the issue with the surrender. Because the real moment which forced their immediate surrender was the second bomb - which barely succeeded in doing the persuading. I should add that this is not just an opinion; japanese documentation confirms it.

Got a source? I want to see it. I've not seen any documentation to that effect. Here's the info i have:

July 26, Potsdam Declaration, ignored by Japan. Stalin plans to enter the war on Aug 11

Aug 6 Hiroshima bombed
Aug 7 Minister Togo sends urgent telegram to Sato, ambassador to Soviet Union (still counting on Soviet mediation)
Aug 8 Stalin changes date of invasion to Aug 9, gives Molotov the declaration of war on Japan
Aug 9 Soviets enter teh war, Manchuria invaded 5 hours before teh Japanese hear of the declaration of war
Aug 9 Nagasaki bombed
Aug 9 Japanese War Council convened, split 3-3 over surrender. Don't you think that, if the Nagasaki bomb had such an effect, they would have voted to surrender??
Aug 10 Imperial Council called (after they hear of the Soviet invasion and declaration of war, first time an Imperial Council had been called during the war) decision made to accept Potsdam Declaration with ONE condition, sent to Byrne
Aug 11 Byrne rejects 1-condition surrender
Aug 14 2nd Imperial Council, decides to accept unconditional surrender
Aug 15 US orders cease fire, Soviets move into Kuril Islands

Now, if the Nagasaki bomb was so decisive, why was the War council split? Why did it take 2 unprecedented Imperial Councils to accept unconditional surrender 4 days after the bomb?

Im open to debate. 8)

 

[stationery2]

That Japanesse soldiers in World War II raped many women in conquered territories is definitely true (then again, it's true of many armies throughout history - not like the Japanesse invented it, though they kept the idea around somewhat longer than most). Using the term "every" is, of course, an exxageration.

Well, yes, soldiers raping women happened a lot in history.
But What is important here is that japan institutionalized it and made it something that is totally ok to do.
My general understanding is that, throughout the history, army leaders refrained their soldiers from raping and robbing if they were sensible leaders. However, in japan's case, we see that the high officials actually encouraged the soldiers to do it and they set it up for them. Not only that, after the war, they killed those women as if they were trash that is done and over with.
And Using the therm 'every' is of course exageration. If someone doesn't understand that it is an exageration, I doubt that person's intelligence.

As for plundering your rich natural resources, they did what just about every other "modern" civ did before and after them. Heck, now most poor countries have a handful (like 1%) of locals plus international companies plundering the resources while the rest stay poor). Why Japan should get more blame out of it is beyond me...

Oh, so it's ok to plunder other country because everyone did it back than?
Maybe I should go about killing people because some murderers are doing it as well.

 

[akinkhoo]

i remind you that after carpet bombing,
the people are killed, some might survive
building break apart, but the land is only burn....

but after nuclear bombing,
all people in the city are rip apart,
anyone not in NBC near the city dies slow painfully death
(think : cancer spreading to every cell in minutes)
nuclear cloud spead the decay to nearby settlement...
the land is unihabitable for 100 of years...



how many have work with radioactivity stuff before?
biotechnologist use them for many reasons like locating inserted GM etc....
but most importantly, it is the easiest way to create genetic mutation

for a person who say the nuke is just a very powerful bomb....
you haven't seen the effect of a nuclear fallout.
you may think I am bluffing but I am not....

- - - - -

The japanese imperial rapist marine corp..... well you know!
they are mass rapist.... it was in their blood!

for the US to side with them.....
that truely sux!!!

 

[cephyn]

>>>>nuclear cloud spead the decay to nearby settlement...
the land is unihabitable for 100 of years...
<<<<

for modern nukes, in the 10s of megatons, yes. But for the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs, not so -- Nagasaki and Hiroshima are large metropolises today, and theyre not full of radioactive mutants.

 

[stationery2]

True, japan doesn't suffer that kind of mutation problems or anything like that do they?
That's out of question. Japan doesn't even suffer from the points you made, akinkhoo.