Kyuma apologizes, retracts comment on atomic bombing [Archive]

Ewok85

Jul 3, 2007, 09:02

Ok then if one is to follow your logic here then there is nothing wrong with the Health minister making the statement that women are "baby making machines" either.
It is just "his" opinion.

That was made during a diet session while he was working in an offical capacity. Thats a world apart from what happened here.

It's quite refreshing to see a Japanese politician show some semblance of b@11s about this matter, after all the lies and disingenuous crap thrown around about this subject. As I understand it, when Japan started losing the war, Japan turned to Russia for assistance and Russia responded by declaring war on them. Japan's military and government were pretty much off their collective rocker at that point. If the US hadn't ended the conflict quickly, the country quite possibly could have been split in half between USA and Russia.

The history of the days leading up to the surrender are interesting - there was a failed "coup" to try and stop the Emperor from delivering the radio message and deliver their own to get the people to keep on fighting.

Could have been completely different if they had suceeded.

KirinMan

Jul 3, 2007, 12:25

That was made during a diet session while he was working in an offical capacity. Thats a world apart from what happened here.

Sorry once again you are mistaken here, it was in an official capacity and not as a person making "private" remarks to friends or relatives, it was in a very public setting as a public official.

On Saturday, Kyuma spoke to an audience at Reitaku University in Kashiwa, Chiba Prefecture.

"I now have come to accept in my mind that in order to end the war it could not be helped that an atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and that countless numbers of people suffered great tragedy," he said in his speech.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 12:39

It's quite refreshing to see a Japanese politician show some semblance of b@11s about this matter, after all the lies and disingenuous crap thrown around about this subject. As I understand it, when Japan started losing the war, Japan turned to Russia for assistance and Russia responded by declaring war on them. Japan's military and government were pretty much off their collective rocker at that point. If the US hadn't ended the conflict quickly, the country quite possibly could have been split in half between USA and Russia.

And im sure thats better then being A bombed....twice. The reason the US used their bombs was so that they could beat russia in the race of who Japan would surrender to.

Ewok85

Jul 3, 2007, 12:45

Sorry once again you are mistaken here, it was in an official capacity and not as a person making "private" remarks to friends or relatives, it was in a very public setting as a public official.

It was a personal view given during a talk at a university. That is still a whole different world to what you say during a diet session.

And im sure thats better then being A bombed....twice. The reason the US used their bombs was so that they could beat russia in the race of who Japan would surrender to.

Based on what? They would have had higher casualty rates and very defintly lost huge amounts of land (Hokkaido at the very least) to Russia. Had the war not been ended on Japans terms the country would have been carved up and "controlled" by a variety of nations.

JimmySeal

Jul 3, 2007, 12:52

And im sure thats better then being A bombed....twice. The reason the US used their bombs was so that they could beat russia in the race of who Japan would surrender to.
Really? The dropping of the bombs ultimately saved far more Japanese lives than it cost, so whether it was right or not is very much a matter of opinion, and not remotely so black and white as:
And im sure thats better then being A bombed....twice.

I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the United States returned all of Japan's land once the occupation was over, whereas Russia still claims possession of the little bit that they took.

Japanese politicians, and a lot of Japanese people, like to act as though Japan had no part in the conflict and that Americans just flew across the pacific to drop bombs on them for no reason. I am overjoyed to see a politician taking the other stance and it's a pity that he had to backpedal on his statement.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 13:43

Theres no need to draw my attention to it im aware of todays situation. IMO when people join or are forced to into the army they know they are fighting, more so during that period and still today but the women and children didnt ever sign up to burning away in their own homes. Im sure that when america dropped the bombs they were not thinking "lets save lives people". I think the words of the pilot were more simular to "I am the destoryer of worlds"

KirinMan

Jul 3, 2007, 14:01

Really? The dropping of the bombs ultimately saved far more Japanese lives than it cost, so whether it was right or not is very much a matter of opinion, and not remotely so black and white as:

We are also using today to judge the actions of yesterday. None of us can appreciate truly the thought process that went into the use of the atomic weapons at that time.

I'd bet anything that if Japan had the bomb at the time it would have used it, as would have Germany if they had developed it in time. However it is all moot as the fact remains that the US used them.

I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the United States returned all of Japan's land once the occupation was over,

I'd like to draw your attention to Kadena Air Base, Camp Foster, Camp Kinser, MCAS Futenma, Yokosuka and Sasebo Naval Bases, Yokota Air Base, Iwakuni Air Base among a list of other locations that still have not been returned.

Japan is still literally paying a price for the "occupation" and "WWII".

It was a personal view given during a talk at a university. That is still a whole different world to what you say during a diet session.

True what one politician said in a diet sesson carries more weight, however he was invited to speak because he is Japan's first Defense Minister. He was there because he is a public official.

His opinions and thoughts private or otherwise will come under scrutiny when given in a public forum as he did.

It's because it was in public that he made these comments that this issue arose, it wasn't as if he was having a conversation over dinner with his family.

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 14:20

there are two view.
one is crime of USA as mass kiling
the other is End of War because of that.
I think both is correct and concurrent

there is no meaning that we discuss it more.
the problem is media and stpid Democratic party though Kyuma is also stpid.

The report bends a good interpretation of their convenience.
Their article are improper.

The Prime Minister Abe warned him
and Kyuma already apologized in public.
This problem is not a thing of the properties that should show expanses more than this

Ozawa of Democratic party insist " he must be dismissed and this is a point at issue of House of Councillors election in July"

it seems it is so ridiculous

JimmySeal

Jul 3, 2007, 14:23

I think the words of the pilot were more simular to "I am the destoryer of worlds"
That was Robert Oppenheimer, the director of the Manhattan Project, not the pilot of the plane. And he was not bragging.
Oppenheimer lamented the weapon's killing power after it was used to destroy the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Japan provoked America's soldiers into conflict to be killed and surely would have killed American civilians, given half the chance. It surely wasn't only soldiers they were killing and raping as they steamed through East Asia. In Nanking alone, the Japanese killed 100,000-300,000 non-combatants, and Japan was the first country to bomb civilian targets, in the 1920s when until that time it was considered a heinous war crime. And what about the Japanese commanders in Okinawa who ordered civilians to kill themselves?

Why should Japanese civilians be the only people free from harm, when nobody else was safe? Why are the atomic bombings an atrocious murder of Japanese people when just as many civilians were killed in the bombing of Tokyo?

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 14:44

The director? sokka. His meaning doesnt matter but the point stays that the bombing wasnt to save lives.

No doubt if Japan had of made the A bomb they would of used it, no doubt given the chance they might of killed civilians but its not my intention to have a "my dad has more hair then your dad" arguement. Im not sure if its your intention but are you suggesting that Hiroshima was fair revenge? Its simular to asking why should 9/11 not happen when other people are dying violently throughout the world? Isnt the answer of "those innocent people were not enolved" enough? Does this reply mean that 2 wrongs make a right?

To dull it down its like a gang member commiting a crime against your family and you going into their neighbourhood and petrol bombing a random home, not caring who you hurt or kill doing so. If that justice? or rightous?

Lets not forget that a bomb is a bomb. But an A-Bomb is one that poisins the land for years affects the next generations who in this age just crave for peace. Are they paying the price of revenge for Japanese soldiers raping in other countries?
If we go witht his trend what revenge do you suggest against american soldiers who rape women today in a time of so called peace?

JimmySeal

Jul 3, 2007, 15:07

The difference is that we were engaged in a war with them (which includes the entire country, including cities, as the government started the war and the cities are under their jurisdiction) and we attacked and killed some of their people, just as they would have done to us if we hadn't fought them all the way back to their side of the ocean and stopped them from attacking us further. It was all part of the same conflict. It wasn't revenge, and we didn't drop any bombs to punish them. If the Japanese had massacred Nanking, then just gone home and sat on their bums, no, that wouldn't justify dropping a bomb on them, but that's not what happened. We dropped those bombs to end the ongoing war.

No, the bomb wasn't dropped primarily to save Japanese lives, but I'm sure that the idea wasn't completely overlooked either. The fact remains that it did save lives on both sides and few Japanese are willing to admit that. Open a Japansese social studies book and you will see it jump from Hitler killing Jews to Americans killing Japanese, with nothing in between, as though these bombs just came out of nowhere. So this politician saying something somewhere in the realm of reality is a great thing, in my opinion.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 15:22

On going? when the bombs were dropped Japan was losing resources and retreating back to Japan, its also said that they were about to surrender to russia. Im sure that the fact Russia got to dead hilter first and were about to take Japan also had nothing to do with it after all we cant have it look like Russia won the war, even if they did lose 11 million in the process.
Just a thought...at pearl habour after Japan attacked the navy do you think that they couldnt of went on the mainland america to continue bombing? Theres no proof that dropping 2 A-bombs saved lifes. They say that Japan taking over korea actually helped them develope but of course saying that is taboo in korea and just because it helped them doesnt make it right.

I still cant agree with the idea of bombing innocents because Japan started it. For many of your points you can re-read my above post.

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 15:26

but that's not what happened. We dropped those bombs to end the ongoing war.

in order to end of WAR, this excuse is very convenient.
why did not USA use it in korean WAR

KirinMan

Jul 3, 2007, 15:30

It wasn't revenge, and we didn't drop any bombs to punish them. If the Japanese had massacred Nanking, then just gone home and sat on their bums, no, that wouldn't justify dropping a bomb on them, but that's not what happened. We dropped those bombs to end the ongoing war.

I agree with you here.

No, the bomb wasn't dropped primarily to save Japanese lives, but I'm sure that the idea wasn't completely overlooked either. The fact remains that it did save lives on both sides and few Japanese are willing to admit that.

I wonder if the thought of saving Japanese lives even came into the equation, but I agree here as well that in the long run it ended up saving lives on both sides.

However, in a quote taken from the link in the OP he wrote;

I now have come to accept in my mind that in order to end the war it could not be helped that an atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and that countless numbers of people suffered great tragedy," he said in his speech.

There certainly was an option, particularly after the Battle of Okinawa, Japan could have just as easily sued for peace. America was at it's doorstep getting prepared for the final assault on the mainland. Japan had nowhere and noone to turn to for assistance.

The US was expecting somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000,000 casualties in it's preparation for the invasion of the mainland. From that point of view alone it is hard to dispute their use of the "new" weapon at that time.

The Japanese government at the time knew the end was coming but didn't want to face that reality. That is until the reality was dropped on them in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Looking back it from the knowledge we have today, that may not have been the best choice. Once again hindsight is 20/20.

in order to end of WAR, this excuse ia very convenient.
why did not USA use it in korean WAR

It's not a convenient excuse it is a fact, plus Korea is a different story altogether, it wasnt a world war for one thing and another thing it wasn't even a declared war either.

KirinMan

Jul 3, 2007, 15:36

Update here......
Defense chief Kyuma steps down over gaffe
Japan's defense minister, Fumio Kyuma, resigned today for triggering outrage with his statements that appeared to justify the 1945 atomic bombing of Nagasaki.(July.3) [more]

Defense chief Kyuma steps down over gaffe
(http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200707030282.html)

JimmySeal

Jul 3, 2007, 15:37

There certainly was an option, particularly after the Battle of Okinawa, Japan could have just as easily sued for peace. America was at it's doorstep getting prepared for the final assault on the mainland. Japan had nowhere and noone to turn to for assistance.
Yeah, you make a good point. Perhaps the bombs were the only sensible option available to the Americans, and the only way the war was going to end sensibly, because the Japanese government wasn't acting sensibly. They were busy telling their people to arm themselves with sticks and poles to fight off the invading soldiers.

Interesting hole in Kyuma's statement.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 15:40

Ahh so in essance..its like the Japanese leaders bombed their own people right?

JimmySeal

Jul 3, 2007, 15:47

Ahh so in essance..its like the Japanese leaders bombed their own people right?
Yea, pretty much.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 15:51

LOL LOL LOL LOL what a funny way of thinking. after all Japan knew that america had that top secret bomb and i guess that means that in the long run they wanted to be bombed in order to save lives.

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 3, 2007, 16:12

Read in The International Heral Tribune

Abe; No plans to seek US apology for atomic bombings of Japan

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/07/02/asia/AS-GEN-Japan-Atomic-Bomb.php

Mr.Kyuma's words are in many newspapers from all over the world.
It is really amazing, that is why I couldn't believe my eyes when I read it all in the Asahi News.
Why on earth did he say such a thing, knowing that it were the A-bombs that made Japan a victim instead of an offender in WWII???
Because Russia attacted Japan after it was A-bombed? Was Russia too late to occupy the north of Japan? Had Stalin planned to occupy Japan?
It really would be interesting to look into the Russian archives.
And who knows what Mr.Kyuma knew that we don't know. History is absolutely fascinating.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 16:17

Good points Elizabeth. I think its true that we know only what governments let us know. Dispite the usage of the A-bombs i dont see Japan as victims, only the innocent people that were unlucky enough to be born. id like to look through many countries achieves it would be interesting to see what they hide.

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 18:14

kyuma is really stupid, inability and idiot.

it was an evil practice of japanese Commies education.

as for the russian matter about that , he would be scorned by even kids because of sophistry。

Kyuma said in congress last year" american invasion of Iraq was a mistake"
of couese it is sure...

However, Ａbe did not dismiss him...
it means Abe is not a friend of USA.

abe's cabinet will be ended soon because of USA's strategy.
comfrot women problem is also one of strategy that take out Abe

I hope ASO is next

Ewok85

Jul 3, 2007, 18:25

The director? sokka. His meaning doesnt matter but the point stays that the bombing wasnt to save lives.

My BS detector just went off the scale! Is that a "I don't give a damn about the facts, you will listen to my rant" I see there?

Im not sure if its your intention but are you suggesting that Hiroshima was fair revenge?

You have a major issue understanding the idea that Japan had declared war on the United States, laid the first blow, and was not standing down.

Isnt the answer of "those innocent people were not enolved" enough?

What of the 30million civilians that died throughout Asia at the hands of the Imperial Japanese forces?

Lets face facts - Hiroshima was the location of the Second General Army HQ. Hiroshima was a major industrial harbour town. Hiroshima was where most of the soldiers disembarked to go overseas and kill innocent civilians in countries throughout Asia.

Hiroshima was not some random town.

The schoolchildren had been evacuated in March (1945). Those remaining were (forced) to work for the government in assisting the military by working in factories or directly related positions. Those who remained were aware that their country was at war, and that Hiroshima was a target.

Does this reply mean that 2 wrongs make a right?

Of course not. But you are suggesting that this wrong forgives all other wrongs, to make the wrong-doers right.

To dull it down its like a gang member commiting a crime against your family and you going into their neighbourhood and petrol bombing a random home, not caring who you hurt or kill doing so.

Poor analogy - see why above.

Lets not forget that a bomb is a bomb. But an A-Bomb is one that poisins the land for years affects the next generations who in this age just crave for peace.

Tell me what the current levels of radiation are in Hiroshima, if they are dangerous, and just how long they were dangerous for. You are speaking out of the wrong orifice.

Mikawa Ossan

Jul 3, 2007, 18:29

Calm down, guys. Keep it civil.

I really don't like closing threads, but I will do so if necessary.

frostyg02uk

Jul 3, 2007, 18:37

Sorry if i offend you but its just my way. terrorists p1ss me off because instead of fighting the armies they bomb innocents. Ive never said once that America were wrong to defend themselves but i believe at that point in the war a nuclear bomb was not necessary. Maybe i just value human life more then others. If your aware of the story behind Oragami your also be aware that not all civilains had left the cities bombed.

Edit: sorry i missed your radiation question. Last i knew some babies are still being born with defects due to radiation. unlike Buildings that can be rebuilt the earth cannot.

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 18:38

Tell me what the current levels of radiation are in Hiroshima, if they are dangerous, and just how long they were dangerous for

also In their DNA as birth defect.

Lets face facts - Hiroshima was the location of the Second General Army HQ. Hiroshima was a major industrial harbour town. Hiroshima was where most of the soldiers disembarked to go overseas and kill innocent civilians in countries throughout Asia.

Hiroshima was not some random town.

The schoolchildren had been evacuated in March (1945). Those remaining were (forced) to work for the government in assisting the military by working in factories or directly related positions. Those who remained were aware that their country was at war, and that Hiroshima was a target.

they did not worry of civilian's life at all ??

JimmySeal

Jul 3, 2007, 19:24

LOL LOL LOL LOL what a funny way of thinking. after all Japan knew that america had that top secret bomb and i guess that means that in the long run they wanted to be bombed in order to save lives.
Japan could have easily saved all the lives in Hiroshima by surrendering when they realized that they had no chance of winning the war and that continued battle would only mean more death, with no gain for them. Instead they went the other way, telling their people to arm themselves with sharpened bamboo poles and fight against soldiers toting firearms. There was no reason to assume that Americans would stop bombing cities, the way they did with Tokyo, so in effect, the Japanese government was writing a death warrant for its citizens, and as Ewok pointed out, there were those who were unwilling to stand down even after Americans decimated two of their cities with nuclear weapons.
The government willingly invited the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Japanese people for the sole purpose of avoiding surrender, and to that extent, one could say that the government bombed its own people.

KirinMan

Jul 3, 2007, 19:34

they did not worry of civilian's life at all ??
Caster whether or not you want to accept the following is one thing, however it would help you to understand the reasons for the bombs being dropped by looking the the logistical nightmare and casualty projections, gleened from previous land battles with the Japanese Imperial Army to understand some of the reasons or rational behind using the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Remember the US never bombed Kyoto, as it was considered to be at that time as well as a cultural heritage site. The US had the capability at the time to turn the Japanese islands into a virtual wasteland. The rulers of Japan at the time choose not to surrender, they KNEW they were defeated but fought a war of attrition. However the US, even though sick of war was going to finish the job one way or the other.

Think about it, Nagasaki was 100% preventable it took getting hit over the head twice before the powers that be here in Japan decided that surrender was the only "honorable" way out of the predicament that they were in at the time.

The government willingly invited the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Japanese people for the sole purpose of avoiding surrender, and to that extent, one could say that the government bombed its own people.

Pride goith before the fall...or in the case of many Japanese the suicide.

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 3, 2007, 19:47

KirinMan

Jul 3, 2007, 19:52

Well, if Japan had only signed the Treaty of Potsdam together with Germany in 1945,then there would never have been those horrible A-bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
But the order in Japan to all people was: "Fight until the last man".

Elizabeth Japan was still at war with the "Allies" at the time of Potsdam and from what I remember of history of the time, were not included in the conference nor invited as well.

Japan was warned however from a declaration from the conference to surrender or face total anihilation.

pipokun

Jul 3, 2007, 20:09

Google Kyoto Kushu (sorry not kyushu)
As Kyoto was the target, few air-raid, this was the same in Hiroshima & Nagasaki, but it was true there were rational Americans then.

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 20:50

Google Kyoto Kyushu
As Kyoto was the target, few air-raid, this was the same in Hiroshima & Nagasaki, but it was true there were rational Americans then.

kyuma resigned.
i really hate kyuma. is he a brain damege?
if I were him and when I resighn, I would say like this before that.

to all japanese, american surely dropped A-bomds to kill us indiscriminately in Japan.
in human history, it was the cruellest thing.
to tell the truth, I give up it as "shikataganai" to calm my mind becase of WAR.
I realized many civilians still hate them.
I am really sorry to say that..............................
USA was an evil ..

abe's approval rating will be UP?:p

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 3, 2007, 21:20

Elizabeth Japan was still at war with the "Allies" at the time of Potsdam and from what I remember of history of the time, were not included in the conference nor invited as well.
Japan was warned however from a declaration from the conference to surrender or face total anihilation.

Yes Obeika, that is what I meant. America asked them, pleaded the Japanese government to surrender, but alas they have refused. The Japanese men had to fight until the last man died. It was a "orders are orders" mentality, they all had to die for the Emperor of Japan.

But Japan was also busy with A-bombs,only America was further.

Nevertheless when I see an exhibition about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or a film of all those burnt people, I get tears in my eyes. It is really so horrible, so sad, so dramatic. I agree with Japan and most others of us in this world: "This must never happen again".

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 21:29

Remember the US never bombed Kyoto, as it was considered to be at that time as well as a cultural heritage site. The US had the capability at the time to turn the Japanese islands into a virtual wasteland. The rulers of Japan at the time choose not to surrender, they KNEW they were defeated but fought a war of attrition. However the US, even though sick of war was going to finish the job one way or the other.
it is natural to do that
Think about it, Nagasaki was 100% preventable it took getting hit over the head twice before the powers that be here in Japan decided that surrender was the only "honorable" way out of the predicament that they were in at the time
it was a same to kill.
why dont use a-bomd in Iraq to quit

The Emperor said to Tojo.
It is not necessary to use such a terrible weapon for winning

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 3, 2007, 21:36

it is natural to do that
it was a same to kill.
why dont use a-bomd in Iraq to quit

But caster51, how can you say such a thing?
The Iraqi don't deserve an A-bomb at all!
Neither would I wish Japan an A-bomb from North Korea.

No more A-bombs please.

caster51

Jul 3, 2007, 21:39

But caster51, how can you say such a thing?
The Iraqi don't deserve an A-bomb at all!
Neither would I wish Japan an A-bomb from North Korea

he would not understand it
thet are still braiwashed by american education

pipokun

Jul 3, 2007, 21:58

Aso-Abe-Koike is the greater three top formation than counterproductive nitpickings.

KirinMan

Jul 5, 2007, 08:38

abe's approval rating will be UP?

Which seems to be the only reason that Abe accepted his resignation in the first place. But then that is politics, if there wasnt an election coming up I'd be willing to bet that there would have been no thought given to resigning at all.

Oh well.

frostyg02uk

Jul 5, 2007, 08:50

Has anyone seen gladiator with russel crowe? at the beginning one of the men says something like "people should know when they have been conquered" Russel replys " would you?"

I dont see this going in one direction or another. one side has their opinion that wont change as does the other i dont think we are even listening to each other anymore just blindly repeating our posts.

JimmySeal

Jul 5, 2007, 10:05

Has anyone seen gladiator with russel crowe? at the beginning one of the men says something like "people should know when they have been conquered" Russel replys " would you?"
Yes, because we should base military policy on, and interperet history through, pop culture films.

In the movie, I believe Russel was referring to fighting to the end against people who intended to kill him, whereas refusing defeat in Japan`s case meant continuing to send other people to their deaths against a military that didn`t have any intention of fighting them in the first place.

frostyg02uk

Jul 5, 2007, 10:16

KirinMan

Jul 5, 2007, 12:19

Thats the way you have interpereted it. If i wanted you to hear my view i would of wrote it. the point is to make people think or maybe, just maybe try to understand the thoughts.
With the believe you have writen i dont think you know whcih part im talking about.

However this isnt quite fair either. When you leave something open to interpretation to the reader without giving your opinion, that leaves it open for anyone to decide what or how it means to them.

I understand you wanting people to think, and if you had left you comment at that that and had not added anything after that I probably wouldn't have replied to your post here.

Now I would ask you to please share what "part" you are talking about so as not to misunderstand or assume something that may be incorrect. Thanks!

frostyg02uk

Jul 5, 2007, 12:32

I see. To leave out any confusement im refering to the part of the movie at the start when they are fighting the germanians, people that had been conquered and ruled by rome. The reason i assume we are not talking about the same part is that the people they were fighting didnt intend to kill Russel but were fighting for thier freedom against rome.
Like i said i wanted people to think about it without choosing a side but by trying to imagine being in their shoes for a minute and how they might of felt. Of course i have my opinions and you have yours and the next poster will have theirs also. I didnt post mine because its not my intention to start a new tick for tack arguement just for others to try and understand the mind of the defeated and im not asking anyone for theirs either, just that for a minute before the poster dismisses a post without thinking about it and jumping to their "sides" defence to think more about it. After all what answer or question is worth reading or writing if its not thought about seriously.

JimmySeal

Jul 5, 2007, 12:39

Nevertheless, the Japanese were not fighting for freedom from an occupying force; they were fighting to be able to be the occupying force and the US was only there in the first place to stop them from going any further (and we wouldn't have been doing that if they hadn't attacked us in the process).
Your analogy is ridiculous and you have the Romans and the Germanians reversed. Why can't you get it through your head that Japan was the aggressor, and America was the one fighting back?

frostyg02uk

Jul 5, 2007, 12:59

....Have you read anything ive said? Im NOT asking you to take it as literal im asking you to show a little f-ing sympathy for the people who died. Does it matter who started it first? If you read anything ive said you might notice that ive said that Japan were the aggressor there is no denying that im not saying America were wrong for fighting back heck dont worry im not attacking your freedom for gods sake. Look at my flag where am i from? to say america was wrong is like saying england were wrong for fighting hilter. i dont care who started the war but i feel sorry for the innocents hurt weather they were english, jewish, german and dare i say Japanese. I dont care about who was right to start a war 50 years ago i care about the people that died. For ages we have been talking about Hiroshima, even if people knew their government was wrong what else can they do? run away like they did in russia and die for being traitors anyway? I cant believe someone can be so inhumane or am i just too innocent to know the ways of the adult world? Behind the words use the bomb are people on the other end who were not just sad stats for our history books. Do you know why an A-bomb is the last resort of war? Im trying to get you to understand the people that died but instead you'd rather force your opinions through your posts. I dont think you have thought about any posts on here at all but instead have been reacting right away to defend your countrys honour at all costs. You think america should of bombed hiroshima, i think that the amount of lives envolved were wasted thats the end of it i guess.

...oh and if my history or take of the movie isnt correct and that the roles were reversed does that mean that the germanians had conquered and ruled rome...and that it was rome that were fighting for freedom?

KirinMan

Jul 5, 2007, 13:00

Like i said i wanted people to think about it without choosing a side but by trying to imagine being in their shoes for a minute and how they might of felt.

Being in whose shoes the Roman's or Germanians? Either way one would have to choose a side.

Yet I think I understand your point, that you wanted people to think of it from all sides right? If that isnt the point then please correct me, because one would have to choose a side to imagine being in their shoes or feeling how they may have felt.

I didnt post mine because its not my intention to start a new tick for tack arguement just for others to try and understand the mind of the defeated and im not asking anyone for theirs either,
That may not have been the intent, however if one is to understand the meaning and intent behind the actions of Kyuma it is necessary to understand the mindset of the Japanese, even though they were originally the agressors in WWII.

Too many times in regards to the issues raised by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki it seems to me that many Japanese people, NOW, feel as if they were the victims. Yet they fail to study their own history and realize that they started the war and that they were and still today are paying the price for starting it and losing it for that matter.

There are no real winners in war, however there are losers on all sides, it isnt all black and white either.

However let's not forget one important fact, if Japan had not started the war in the Pacific one never knows but the bombs might never had been developed at that time nor used. Once again hindsight is 20/20.

frostyg02uk

Jul 5, 2007, 13:15

Haha sorry i mustnt of wrote it correctly. sometimes you write things you understand without thinking others might not haha. But yes your correct i did want the posters to think about all sides, the romans, the germanians, the americans, the people of hiroshima at that time. I dont want to try and covert anyone to my way of thinking haha but maybe to try and understand it. Ive said in a previous post that i think the people of the said bombed cities were victims, in the sense they ended up being victims through their leaders ideals and ambitions. but i understand how you mean that overall people might feel like their country were the victims. Of course it takes all sorts but anyone from Japan ive spoken to about the war say that they cant have an army or other things because thats the price for starting and losing the war. I think in this sense maybe the government should take the stance that germany did by trying to educate their people who also feel like victims of hilter. Your 100% right there are no winners in war but i feel sorry for the civilians who die because of it as its always them who seem to pay the price weather they be chinese, korean, vietnamese, or whoever. I dont care about their race or nationality. A person i respect on here is Elizabeth, a dutch women who was personally a victim of the war at the hands of the Japanese yet trys to forgive them and also she visited the germans graves i really admire her way of thinking. I feel she doesnt worry about winners or losers but about the sheer amount of lives lost. Thats whats important to me too.
I do think that even without the war the bombs would of been developed maybe by germany i heard once that they were close to making one before surrendering who knows if it wasnt made and used maybe it would of been my country, my city that it was used on.

caster51

Jul 6, 2007, 13:35

if Japan had not started the war in the Pacific one never knows but the bombs might never had been developed at that time nor used. Once again hindsight is 20/20.
I dont think so at all.
and if US never had not planed...
I think your view of WAR started from 1941?
I understandThe holocaust ends war fast
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UJWS3ClKzw
I think time has come that Japan counterattack for comfor waman issue.
Next is Iraq problem..
I t will be interesting..
The hatred will spread, too by Past history.
chinese are pleased Now
Japanese at war, as a result, Japan lost WAR, they lost Land.
wvwn today many asian might be still slaves of them?
BTW Kyuma was a clown for that?

Sinocentrism rocks

Ewok85

Jul 7, 2007, 07:57

What you don't understand caster is that while you are saying that America was wrong to kill civilians, the Japanese killed far, far more civilians in many different horrible ways.

You can't talk about one and not talk about the other.

And "counterattack" for the sex slaves issue? Why is that? Are you going to deny it outright now?

frostyg02uk

Jul 7, 2007, 08:25

Ewok is right you cant say poor Japan without saying poor china and korea. Ive been trying to say that for a while but while everyone wants to say japan did this and that no one wants to agree that america did the same things (comfort women and the issue of bombing civilians). I think every country envolved did something wrong its just the measurement of what they did. Even England who only defended themselves bombed a church in germany to break moral. But while A blames B and B defends themselves while blaming C these posts often get lost and it stops being a thread that considered the victims and becomes a blaming game.

caster51

Jul 7, 2007, 10:37

And "counterattack" for the sex slaves issue? Why is that? Are you going to deny it outright now?
Of course.
I can not understand this foolish at all that american congress is about to judge the History by majority rulewithout any investigation and evidences.
Because they just feel " POOR women"
American Justice is Just Feeling? without an objective evidence
because of Christianity?
it is scary
bring an evidence if there is ..
it is really nagative culture shock for Japanese.
again, history is not like the religion
this comfot women's ,This problem struck the ugly wedge into the relation between Japan-U.S..

we remember the there was no evidevce that Iraq was having...

and they Knew it
that is way USA could atecked from beginning...

KirinMan

Jul 7, 2007, 11:37

Let me share with everyone here what I think Caster's view of Japan in WWII is.....oopps first off the "name" it isn't WWII but "The Pacific War".
Anyway Japan did not "invade" any country in the region, they liberated Korea, parts of China, the Phillipines, and everywhere else they set their footprint. They tried to liberate Australia but were stopped by the barbarians and their allies. The reason for this liberation was not for increasing their access to natural resources which as everyone here knows Japan is very limited in but to stop "western" read that as "white" hegemony in the region. Japan wanted to liberate it's fellow Asian's.

Now then along the way their troops needed to be comforted because they were so far from their "women" back home so the military contracted out to local business men for something in the neighborhood of 200,000 hookers.
Hell it didnt matter how they got the women or girls nothing matter except "comforting" the liberating troops. Poor innocent girls, what do you mean, hell they got better pay than the generals.

This issue is mostly coming from Korea, they are just mad at us because we couldn't finish what we started when we liberated them back in 1905. They want us to come back, but since we refuse they want us to pay money for some phantom Comfort Women thing. Who ever heard of that, they were prostitutes. Once a girl takes the money you know what that makes her...a prostitute. She didnt "have" to do it, she could have killed herself instead.

Just like the poor Japanese girls did when the big bad US Military invaded our little island paradise. Rape, you gotta be kidding me the men paid good money for their services, where does rape come into it. Any man that raped a woman would have been shot, nope never happened just a figment of you imagination, give me proof. Hard evidence.

The US Military raped thousands maybe millions of Japanese women and girls and nothing was ever done about it. Why should we Japanese have to acknowledge this "Comfort Women" issue, the Americans are guilty of worse. Show me "evidence" that these women were coorced.

Oh I wont accept "human" testimony only something written in Japanese by the Japanese government. Everything that is in English isnt verifiable from the Japanese government so I wont believe it.

Oh also there was a "rumor" as well of one unit 731, that supposedly performed all sorts of experiments on, heaven forbid, humans from among the people that Japan liberated. But no, it wasnt like that they were all dead already before any experiments were performed, Japan is being "falsely" accused here. We would never do that. Show me the "evidence".

Oh I also digress, Rape of Nanking, what's that the name of a new ramen? Never heard of it. Ahh the battle, there was no "rape", 200,000 deaths, you gotta be kidding the Japanese Army didn't have 20,000 bullets how are they going to murder, and rape that many people. It's just propaganda by the Chinese government to get us to pay them more money. There is no "proof".

There is just so much more to write...but to make a long story short we Japanese are unjustly being forced to admit things we didnt do. We have to rewrite our history books because we were forced by those American's that invaded our country and perverted our minds by telling us we did something "wrong" by trying to liberate the world....sorry I mean Asia.

How dare they turn our own people against us.

People remember we are the victim's here, the US dropped those two bombs on us and look at all the people that died. Feel sorry for us, we deserve the pity. They should be held responsible. Pearl Harbor...what's that a new restraunt in Shinjuku.

This is just a small portion of how I feel Caster views Japan and it's part in WWII. Some is pure speculation, however some is from research of a number of his previous posts here on Jref.

caster51

Jul 7, 2007, 12:05

Let me share with everyone here what I think Caster's view of Japan in WWII is.....oopps first off the "name" it isn't WWII but "The Pacific War".
Anyway Japan did not "invade" any country in the region, they liberated Korea, parts of China, the Phillipines, and everywhere else they set their footprint.

at first I never said Japan never invaded

They tried to liberate Australia but were stopped by the barbarians and their allies. The reason for this liberation was not for increasing their access to natural resources which as everyone here knows Japan is very limited in but to stop "western" read that as "white" hegemony in the region. Japan wanted to liberate it's fellow Asian's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1br51hyPDI

Now then along the way their troops needed to be comforted because they were so far from their "women" back home so the military contracted out to local business men for something in the neighborhood of 200,000 hookers.
Hell it didnt matter how they got the women or girls nothing matter except "comforting" the liberating troops. Poor innocent girls, what do you mean, hell they got better pay than the generals.

yes they were prostitute.
it was not Japanese army's business

This issue is mostly coming from Korea, they are just mad at us because we couldn't finish what we started when we liberated them back in 1905. They want us to come back, but since we refuse they want us to pay money for some phantom Comfort Women thing. Who ever heard of that, they were prostitutes. Once a girl takes the money you know what that makes her...a prostitute. She didnt "have" to do it, she could have killed herself instead.

Dont make a faked story

Just like the poor Japanese girls did when the big bad US Military invaded our little island paradise. Rape, you gotta be kidding me the men paid good money for their services, where does rape come into it. Any man that raped a woman would have been shot, nope never happened just a figment of you imagination, give me proof. Hard evidence.
The US Military raped thousands maybe millions of Japanese women and girls and nothing was ever done about it. Why should we Japanese have to acknowledge this "Comfort Women" issue, the Americans are guilty of worse. Show me "evidence" that these women were coorced.

this became big discussion in the Japanese cogress at that time.
there are so many record of proceedings

Oh I wont accept "human" testimony only something written in Japanese by the Japanese government. Everything that is in English isnt verifiable from the Japanese government so I wont believe it.

you are a racist

Oh also there was a "rumor" as well of one unit 731, that supposedly performed all sorts of experiments on, heaven forbid, humans from among the people that Japan liberated. But no, it wasnt like that they were all dead already before any experiments were performed, Japan is being "falsely" accused here. We would never do that. Show me the "evidence".

why dont US Open it to the Pubic?
there are all doccument about 731 in USA
there is a reson that US cannot open?

Oh I also digress, Rape of Nanking, what's that the name of a new ramen? Never heard of it. Ahh the battle, there was no "rape", 200,000 deaths, you gotta be kidding the Japanese Army didn't have 20,000 bullets how are they going to murder, and rape that many people. It's just propaganda by the Chinese government to get us to pay them more money. There is no "proof".

Yes it is
WAR DAMAGE IN THE NANKING AREA
December, 1937 to March, 1938
著者名 Dr.Lewis S. C. Smythe(Professor of Sociology, University of Nanking)AND ASSISTANTS
出版社 THE MERCURY PRESS, SHANGHAI, CHINA

http://www.history.gr.jp/~nanking/LSCSmythe.pdf

There is just so much more to write...but to make a long story short we Japanese are unjustly being forced to admit things we didnt do. We have to rewrite our history books because we were forced by those American's that invaded our country and perverted our minds by telling us we did something "wrong" by trying to liberate the world....sorry I mean Asia.

Yes we are contributing now.
which is more important " today's reality or indecisive past"

The Making of Modern Asia
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,501050815-1090825,00.html

asia is not only china and Korea

KirinMan

Jul 7, 2007, 12:52

Let me share with everyone here what I think Caster's view of Japan in WWII is.....oopps first off the "name" it isn't WWII but "The Pacific War".

Anyway Japan did not "invade" any country in the region, they liberated Korea, parts of China, the Phillipines, and everywhere else they set their footprint. They tried to liberate Australia but were stopped by the barbarians and their allies. The reason for this liberation was not for increasing their access to natural resources which as everyone here knows Japan is very limited in but to stop "western" read that as "white" hegemony in the region. Japan wanted to liberate it's fellow Asian's.

Now then along the way their troops needed to be comforted because they were so far from their "women" back home so the military contracted out to local business men for something in the neighborhood of 200,000 hookers.
Hell it didnt matter how they got the women or girls nothing matter except "comforting" the liberating troops.

Poor innocent girls, what do you mean, hell they got better pay than the generals.

This issue is mostly coming from Korea, they are just mad at us because we couldn't finish what we started when we liberated them back in 1905. They want us to come back, but since we refuse they want us to pay money for some phantom Comfort Women thing. Who ever heard of that, they were prostitutes.

Once a girl takes the money you know what that makes her...a prostitute. She didnt "have" to do it, she could have killed herself instead.

Just like the poor Japanese girls did when the big bad US Military invaded our little island paradise. Rape, you gotta be kidding me the men paid good money for their services, where does rape come into it.

Any man that raped a woman would have been shot, nope never happened just a figment of you imagination, give me proof. Hard evidence.

The US Military raped thousands maybe millions of Japanese women and girls and nothing was ever done about it. Why should we Japanese have to acknowledge this "Comfort Women" issue, the Americans are guilty of worse. Show me "evidence" that these women were coorced.

Oh I wont accept "human" testimony only something written in Japanese by the Japanese government. Everything that is in English isnt verifiable from the Japanese government so I wont believe it.

Oh also there was a "rumor" as well of one unit 731, that supposedly performed all sorts of experiments on, heaven forbid, humans from among the people that Japan liberated. But no, it wasnt like that they were all dead already before any experiments were performed, Japan is being "falsely" accused here. We would never do that. Show me the "evidence".

Oh I also digress, Rape of Nanking, what's that the name of a new ramen?

Never heard of it. Ahh the battle, there was no "rape", 200,000 deaths, you gotta be kidding the Japanese Army didn't have 20,000 bullets how are they going to murder, and rape that many people. It's just propaganda by the Chinese government to get us to pay them more money. There is no "proof".

There is just so much more to write...but to make a long story short we Japanese are unjustly being forced to admit things we didnt do.

We have to rewrite our history books because we were forced by those American's that invaded our country and perverted our minds by telling us we did something "wrong" by trying to liberate the world....sorry I mean Asia.
How dare they turn our own people against us.

People remember we are the victim's here, the US dropped those two bombs on us and look at all the people that died. Feel sorry for us, we deserve the pity. They should be held responsible.

Pearl Harbor...what's that a new restraunt in Shinjuku.

This is just a small portion of how I feel Caster views Japan and it's part in WWII. Some is pure speculation, however some is from research of a number of his previous posts here on Jref.

Caster you missed the point of this post altogether. Please note the words "how I feel Caster views Japanand it's part in WWII ". This is my opinion of how you view things that happened during WWII. That comes from quite a few of your posts all over this board in your responses to these issues.

Someone told me that if it wasnt such a serious topic it might actually be funny, but Caster many times your replies on some of these topics read just like what I wrote above here, somewhere out of left field of the ballpark in the next county, or outerspace, take your pick.

you are a racist

Oh I forgot to add resorting to "name-calling" defeats any valid points you may or may not have.

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 7, 2007, 15:37

Hi Obeika,

Caster51's interpretation or his view on how WWII came over Japan, is because the Japanese Ministry of Education has taught him so.

When I was in Japan with a group of Dutch people who like me grew up in Indonesia, four of us were allowed to tell our war stories at several universities and one highschool. There were good dicussions with the students of the universities. But at the highschool in Kyoto, we were not allowed to speak to the pupils. There was a control (check on) of what we were telling the boys and girls. Three of us ( no not me) said what e-minister Kyuma said; "the A-bombs also saved many lives"'. When we were back in Holland the Japanese ambassador was very angry about these words so we were told.

My point is that the Japanese children between 16 and 18 years old where not allowed to ask us questions. In my eyes they were old enough to think for themselves.
But no, the Ministry of Education thinks for them. I think that it is extremely important in life, to learn to think for yourself and learn that the world is much bigger than the place where you live. Learn that life is not just black or white. Learn as young as possible that one can make friends with people from all over the world.

caster51

Jul 7, 2007, 16:03

Caster51's interpretation or his view on how WWII came over Japan, is because the Japanese Ministry of Education has taught him so.

??
I am not so old like you
my kid is still 9 years old
i was taught by commie teacher in 80':wave:

today, youger genration are increasing to realized it like me
it is a reflection of Exterm education.

most ppl dont want to discuss it with Foreigner because it makes a trouble(quarrel ) in friendly place.
it might be Parallel lines. They are pretending that they consent.

that is Tatemae. Wa shite douzesu

KirinMan

Jul 7, 2007, 16:06

Hello Elizabeth, Thank you for sharing here again.
I understand your point about Caster. His posts on many of these issues related to WWII and Japan's part in said history leave me scratching my head in amazement.

my kid is sill 9 years old

Caster when I was 9 my Dad was 64 years old.:p

caster51

Jul 7, 2007, 16:24

Caster when I was 9 my Dad was 64 years old.:p

WOW. I need a younger wife when I am 53

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 7, 2007, 17:32

Caster,
Yes, you are still very young, so it is now that you can learn so much!
And every generation has big problems, such is life. Today we have to deal with terrorists and with our dramaticily destroyed Earth. All of us have made a mess of it.
World War Two ended 62 years ago, now it is time to write down the things that really happened. It is good to know for all of us: to to learn how and why this terrible war could happen in Europe and in Asia. We have to learn from the past and then shake hands.

Caster I was just 16 year old when a Japanese doctor saved my younger sisters life. He sent my mother and sister to a hospital in Malang, East Java
and he gave my mother several medicines, that helped us a little later on in our concentration camp in Banyu Biru, Central Java.

So I was 16 years old when I learnt, that there are good and bad people all over the world. This Japanese doctor was a very fine man.

pipokun

Jul 7, 2007, 20:22

Three of us ( no not me) said what e-minister Kyuma said; "the A-bombs also saved many lives"'. When we were back in Holland the Japanese ambassador was very angry about these words so we were told.

Elizabeth van Kampen, your stories are really interesting, but when did you come to Japan? And how many times?
Correct me if I am wrong, but you came to Japan just once. You were not in Japan at the time of the kyuma's statement.

FYI, many Japanese teachers are more liberal than you think.

KirinMan

Jul 7, 2007, 21:26

Correct me if I am wrong, but you came to Japan just once. You were not in Japan at the time of the kyuma's statement.

Elizabeth was commenting that she said the same thing that Kyuma said, not that she was here when he said it.

Plus;

When we were back in Holland the Japanese ambassador was very angry about these words so we were told.

pipokun

Jul 7, 2007, 21:44

I know, but the logic of the friend of Elizabeth van Kampen is very dangerous that he/she gave the meaning of the nuke.

Ladies and gentlemen, I was 14 years young when Japan occupied the former Dutch East Indies, a school girl and I was 18 years old when that war was over.
I like her stories, but this is what I can not agree with her. Just imagine if a Japanese poster would say similar thing like her.

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 7, 2007, 21:58

Pipokun,

It was in October 2000 that I was only for 2 weeks in Japan.
No none of us ever met Mr. Kyuma. And of course does the whole world know about Hiroshima, ever since this town was bombed. But I'm afraid a lot less of Nagasaki, I find that a pity.

Not the Japanese teachers are a problem, but the Ministry of Education is.
When they forbid foreighners to talk with highschool boys and girls between 16 and 18 years old about WWII, then I don't see that as mistake from the teachers.

Please allow me to try to get a few things strait? I can't speak for others but this is how I have always seen WWII: During WWII there were German and Japanese war criminals and all the others were german people, German soldiers, Japanese people and Japanese soldiers.
Not even every Kempeitai or every Gestapo was a war criminal!
Just as today non of us would call every Muslim a terrorist.

I think, that is also what Obeika and several others try to tell the Japanese like you pipokun and caster51.

We call war criminals, war criminals, all the others are absolute no war criminals, just soldiers or whatever, doing their job. Fighting and doing their utmost best for their countries.

Germany had no problems in seeing this, they accepted that their war criminals were punished for what they have done wrong to others.
But many Japanese refuse to call Japanese war criminals as such. It always the other countries who were wrong.
And you pipokun can't even understand that I don't blame young Japanese men and women for what happened to my family during WWII. You and your parents were born after that war, so why on earth should I dislike you?
But I blame the Japanese government from 1937 till 1945. Governments in all countries over the world are responsible for what happens in their country pipokun.
The Japanese government has to take the responsability whether they like it or not. Archives have to opened, but then all of them, in America and in all the once occupied countries by Japan as well. Only then we can see what really happened.

pipokun

Jul 7, 2007, 22:19

Not the Japanese teachers are a problem, but the Ministry of Education is.
When they forbid foreighners to talk with highschool boys and girls between 16 and 18 years old about WWII, then I don't see that as mistake from the teachers.

Do you know the govenement gives subsidies even to North Korean supporting schools in Japan?

If the bureucrats really forbade you to talk what you wanted, the liberal teachers must be upset to hear that.
I just imagine...
At the school, you made speech about your stories, but you did not have QA session with students.
What did you do at the highschool? Nothing?

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 7, 2007, 23:23

Well giving subsidies to North Korea, that is wonderful.

I wish you a nice weekend.

KirinMan

Jul 8, 2007, 08:05

I like her stories, but this is what I can not agree with her. Just imagine if a Japanese poster would say similar thing like her.

You can't agree for what reason? I can not imagine a Japanese poster saying the same things because Japan was the agressor back then.

Your point of view and way of thinking is too narrow minded in my opinion to see that. You seem to deny at every given opportunity anything that puts Japan in a poor light. Japan started the war and the US finished it. There are victims on all sides, however Japan should never forget that it was Japan that was the aggressor not the US.

Please allow me to try to get a few things strait? I can't speak for others but this is how I have always seen WWII: During WWII there were German and Japanese war criminals and all the others were german people, German soldiers, Japanese people and Japanese soldiers.
Not even every Kempeitai or every Gestapo was a war criminal!
Just as today non of us would call every Muslim a terrorist.

I think, that is also what Obeika and several others try to tell the Japanese like you pipokun and caster51.

YES, Elizabeth well said. Politicians dont fight wars, regular folks like you and I are forced into it. Whether or not we believe in what we are fighting for, or possibly brainwashed into thinking is the reason.

And I think that the Japanese government at the time truly brainwashed it's people into believing so many lies about the reasons for the war in the first place.

That is what people are trying to stop today.

caster51

Jul 8, 2007, 12:00

Today, there are many coutries that have many A^boms.

what did they learn from Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Did they learn "A-bomd saved more Japanese"?

this logic will be used every excuses.
someday A-bomd may be dropped in USA.
I would be happy for this excuse

However . it is not learnt what real stupid is..from human history

Look at this stupid american guy
he never added a comment even like this " it was very regarettable that there were many victimes..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1br51hyPDI

There are victims on all sides, however Japan should never forget that it was Japan that was the aggressor not the US.

American has gone beyond the limit line as a human.
Lool at today, they are still planing to Use it definitely

KirinMan

Jul 8, 2007, 17:21

Did they learn "A-bomd saved more Japanese"?
You know outside of Japan now a days, noone probably cares much that Japanese lives were lost or saved because of the bombs.

Nor that probably more importantly from the US's side that probably a million US lives were saved.

Dont get that wrong, people are concerned about nuclear proliferation but the sands of time have passed and history fades.

People wont forget Hiroshima or Nagasaki but I'll bet they forget the real circumstances around why they were used.

pipokun

Jul 8, 2007, 18:57

You can't agree for what reason? I can not imagine a Japanese poster saying the same things because Japan was the agressor back then.
I am not here to say...
Ladies and gentlemen, I never existed then.
But I just refer to the Treaty of San Francisco or bilateral treaties. Japan paid the price for what Japan did to the countries. And most importantly, Japan never repeat the past till now.
Just look at the Korean govenment who cannot face the Vietnam war or the Chinese govenment who started the war under the name of punishment.

Obeika, you exsistance in Okinawa is a good example. You can live happily there, right? That is the present ultra-militaristic, xenophobic, far-right Japan.
There are victims on all sides,
True, but few American know the one-sidedness during the occupation.
But I know Japan also gave okinawa less than what people in Okinawa wanted except the reunification, therefore the "we are only victim" facism prevails as the lefty agitates.

*snip*
Elizabeth van Kampen, correct me if I am wrong, but during the turbulent post-war period, some "evil" kenpeitai protected and saved many Dutch people, 900 or so, lives from the fanatic locals in Semarang. Even with the act, many officers were persectuted after the trial, so I understand how intolerant things Japan did to Dutch people then.

caster51

Jul 9, 2007, 13:35

it is very interesting that Nourh korea also comented about A-mond By USA
" kyuma is stupid":blush: it is a nonsense of coward

http://www.asahi.com/international/update/0707/TKY200707060462.html

JimmySeal

Jul 9, 2007, 14:09

it is very interesting that Nourh korea also comented about A-mond By USA
" kyuma is stupid":blush: it is a nonsense of coward

http://www.asahi.com/international/update/0707/TKY200707060462.html
Yes, because North Korea is a recognized authority on morality :p

caster51

Jul 9, 2007, 14:19

Yes, because North Korea is a recognized authority on morality

So is USA.............:cool:

Elizabeth van Kampen

Jul 9, 2007, 14:51

*snip*
Elizabeth van Kampen, correct me if I am wrong, but during the turbulent post-war period, some "evil" kenpeitai protected and saved many Dutch people, 900 or so, lives from the fanatic locals in Semarang. Even with the act, many officers were persectuted after the trial, so I understand how intolerant things Japan did to Dutch people then.

Hello pipokun,

The Japanese military who protected the concentration camps in the former D.E.I. were ordered to do so by Mountbatten! Japan had lost the war and England that had to set the former D.E.I free had not enough British military yet. Don't forget that Holland had been occupied by Germany.

Do you know pipokun that many war criminals gor free in 1957? This was not the case with the German war criminals, they stayed in prison until the end of their lives. Germany paid in many ways for the crimes comitted during WWII. And look at Germany today it is an openminded country in Europe, Germany has become really "one of us"".

The Japanese government is just like you denying all the war crimes.
Always blaming others, is not something to be proud off. Sorry pipokun.

JimmySeal

Jul 9, 2007, 15:04

So is USA.............:cool:
By comparison, I think we have the high ground.

frostyg02uk

Jul 9, 2007, 15:19

By comparison, I think we have the high ground.

LOl more morality then N korea...be proud :-)

Sukotto

Nov 14, 2007, 16:32

My understanding is that part of the reasoning for the go ahead with the bombing (and many top military personal/advisors were actually against it) was to end the war quickly before the USSR could enter the Pacific war.

The USSR did not have benign rulers true,
but one simply cannot say for certain how things would have gone had the USSR occupied a part of Japan. If more or less lives would have been lost.

I mean, there has been US interference in the political affairs of post-occupation Japan for many years, via sending money to the LDP helping, if not ensuring defacto one party rule in Japan. And I thought I read something about violent suppression of street demonstrations at some point in the post-war period.

This may sound rather odd, or even extreme but,
A "divided Japan" or a "Japanese archipelago with political boundaries that do not look the same as a map of today" would not necessarily have meant more suffering of even having been a Soviet puppet or satellite. Wasn't there one or two eastern European countries that were not a part of the Eastern Bloc? Yugoslavia was it?

(and I type that not to support different boundaries today, but that only about a century or 2 ago, Hokkaido and Okinawa were considered like "frontier" [see chapter 5 of "Multicultural Japan: Palaeolithic to Postmodern"
In Part 2, Chapter 5, Tessa Morris-Suzuki shows how the Chinese way of thinking of one's own nation as the center was taken on in Japan, so peripheral areas including Ainu lands and the Ryukyus were considered foreign until the modern era. The Japanization of the Hokkaido area was a response to the Russification of the Kuriles. Assimilationist policies were later extended from Japan's periphery to its colonies abroad. The Western-introduced idea of civilization (bummei) allowed the periphery to be reinterpreted not as foreign spatially but merely as backward temporally.
So, a different looking archipelago would not necessarily have resulted in a "war of reunification", being closer to the beginning of the modern era that Morris-Suzuki describes.

Of course, all lay-person speculation on my part.

To go along with the bombing stuff,
and wasn't there something about Japan having sent envoys to Moscow in spring of that year (or a year earlier?) to "feel around for peace"...some Japanese prince comes to mind as the envoy?
Of course, the only sticking point was to be able to keep the emperor.
Which ended up being the case anywho.
So a land invasion and/or divided occupation, as well as a-bombing could have been avoided as well.