There are a lot of articles circulating on this subject, I advise you all to read as many of them as you can. Here's an interesting one: http://www.salon.com/2015/08/05/ame...ist_history_that_haunts_the_good_war_partner/
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Japan Emperor Akihito offers 'remorse' on WW II surrender anniversary
- Thread starter Walpurgis
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
BotchPoppaPump
Member
It's more that Imperial Japan could not be allowed to exist after all the impossibly fucked up shit they did. Total, unconditional surrender was a must. This could be accomplished in one of three ways: a long, protracted blockade (millions die of starvation), a long, protracted invasion (millions die on the beaches), or by nuking 2 cities. Total death toll, a few hundred thousand.
My issue in these conversations is just that it can seem like not enough effort is made to distinguish between Imperial Japan and the bog standard guy on the street.
KillerMan91
Member
Maybe because japan refuses to show a little bit remorse? Its always "yeah there were brothels were soldiers could rape women from conquered areas.... But who cares?" Maybe this sentiment would change when japan would start to act a little bit like germany?
Japan has apologized for the war and colonial rule for dozens of times. While there is certainly more they could make Korea and especially China would still use the Japan card as with it they can divert attention from internal problems. Not to mention it's not just because of WWII. These three nations have been hostile against each other since forever and one apology would not change that. For example highest grossing movie of all time in Korea is The Admiral that revolves around Battle of Myeongnyang circa 1597 against Japan. That is how far it goes.
shanshan310
Member
Interesting article, I thought Abe did make an apology this year as well.
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
You're right. Millions more should have died in a much longer, pointless, more protracted ground war, and millions more from likely starvation, instead of using two nuclear strikes to end the war early.
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that there was an attempted military coup after the Emperor announced that he was going to surrender and whose terms which had had the Emperor pretty much immune from the war crimes that Japan has committed.
Not to mention the complete disaster that was the Battle of Okinawa and the atrocities that were commited by the IJA on their people (not that America was free in sin of that battle, but the IJA was beyond awful).
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
We just had a 20 page thread explaining why people like you are completely wrong: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1091157&page=1
M1ch04c4n0
Banned
has America ever apologised for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Terrorists groups never apologize.
Most countries portrait themselves as the sole victim of any act of war. I'm not Japan do the same.
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
Pretty much. Although I don't know if the Emperor was to be executed so much as the Imperial House of Japan was to be dissolved, as part of the terms of surrender.
From the Salon article:
The Smithsonian also planned to inform its visitors that some key presidential advisers had urged Truman to drop his demand for unconditional surrender and allow Japan to keep the emperor on his throne, an alteration in peace terms that might have led to an almost immediate surrender. Truman rejected that advice, only to grant the same concession after the nuclear attacks.
DiipuSurotu
Banned
Japan's stance isn't "We will apologize when the US apologize for the atomic bombs". Japan's stance is "Huh? We didn't do anything wrong. Rape of Nanking? Unit 731? Never heard of that".
shanshan310
Member
Yeah, I was kind of simplifying it down. It was indeed a complicated and shitty situation all round. I maintain though that Hiroshima was at least a grey area and not the only option, and that Nagasaki at least was unnecessary for the surrender.You're conveniently ignoring the fact that there was an attempted military coup after the Emperor announced that he was going to surrender and whose terms which had had the Emperor pretty much immune from the war crimes that Japan has committed.
Not to mention the complete disaster that was the Battle of Okinawa and the atrocities that were commited by the IJA on their people (not that America was free in sin of that battle, but the IJA was beyond awful).
"people like me"? lol. Well I don't have time to read an old 20 page thread right now, so I'm just going to go ahead and continue to base my opinions off of the conclusions drawn from prior research I've read.We just had a 20 page thread explaining why people like you are completely wrong: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1091157&page=1
freenudemacusers
Member
I wonder if Germany kinda wishes they got hit with a nuke, makes for a good get out of genocide free card.
Or maybe they just need to ramp up their anime production.
Or maybe they just need to ramp up their anime production.
What the fuck.I wonder if Germany kinda wishes they got hit with a nuke, makes for a good get out of genocide free card.
"people like me"? lol. Well I don't have time to read an old 20 page thread right now, so I'm just going to go ahead and continue to base my opinions off of the conclusions drawn from prior research I've read.
Oh you've done research? That's good! In the last thread (which ended six days ago) I was really wondering where in the world people who claimed Japan was about to surrender were receiving their information, but turns out they were mostly just googling and Wikipediaing. Can you tell me what you've actually read to draw your strong conclusions?
shanshan310
Member
Thanks for posting this.There are a lot of articles circulating on this subject, I advise you all to read as many of them as you can. Here's an interesting one: http://www.salon.com/2015/08/05/ame...ist_history_that_haunts_the_good_war_partner/
I guess if you ignore the times they apologised sure. I mean, this thread is literally about the Japanese emperor apologising. They have tried to suppress some aspects of the war and I really despise that - especially for what happened to the Koreans, but to suggest that they have never apologised for anything is incorrect.Japan's stance isn't "We will apologize when the US apologize for the atomic bombs". Japan's stance is "Huh? We didn't do anything wrong. Rape of Nanking? Unit 731? Never heard of that".
Oh you've done research? That's good! In the last thread I was really wondering where in the world people who claimed Japan was about to surrender were receiving their information, but turns out they were mostly just googling and Wikipediaing. Can you tell me what you've actually read to draw your strong conclusions?
It was my undergrad major. I'm currently writing a thesis on Japanese-Australians during WWII, if you must know.
Maybe because japan refuses to show a little bit remorse? Its always "yeah there were brothels were soldiers could rape women from conquered areas.... But who cares?" Maybe this sentiment would change when japan would start to act a little bit like germany?
I was actually referring to the post he was replying to. In other words, I am agreeing with you.
My question was rhetorical anyway.
Thanks for posting this.
I guess if you ignore the times they apologised sure. I mean, this thread is literally about the Japanese emperor apologising. They have tried to suppress some aspects of the war and I really despise that - especially for what happened to the Koreans, but to suggest that they have never apologised for anything is incorrect.
It was my undergrad major. I'm currently writing a thesis on Japanese-Australians during WWII, if you must know.
So where does it say that the Emperor of Japan was to be executed then? Potsdam doesn't even say a word about him or executing him.
I wonder if Germany kinda wishes they got hit with a nuke, makes for a good get out of genocide free card.
Or maybe they just need to ramp up their anime production.
Germany fucked up and went straight for the hardcore porn. They needed to foster a sense of innocence and shyness about it first.
shanshan310
Member
So where does it say that the Emperor of Japan was to be executed then? Potsdam doesn't even say a word about him or executing him.
oh lol that was my bad. It's 3am here and I was concurrently watching an interview with Hideki Tojo's great grandson so my head is all over the place. Executed was not the word I was going for.
Speaking of, calling it a night.
It was my undergrad major.
And what sources actually claim what you claimed in this thread? Just to reiterate: "Japan was considering surrender but didn't want Emperor executed; USA nuked Nagasaki to show off.".
Cow Mengde
Banned
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
So we're just making shit up now?
We had a huge thread discussing this proving it wasn't true. People also conveniently ignore the fact that America sent warning to Japanese civilians to get out before the nuked dropped.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Interesting article, I thought Abe did make an apology this year as well.
You know Japan was considering surrender before the bombs anyway right? They just didn't want to agree to an unconditional surrender where the emperor was executed. Especially when you look at Nagasaki, there was really not much reason for that after Hiroshima other than to show off. There's a really weird old stereotype about how it was okay because Japan was going to fight down to the last school girl with a stick. They weren't mindless zombies.
So why exactly did Japan not surrender after the first nuke?
2nd was 3 days later and Japan didn't even surrender for another 6 days after the 2nd?
Afaik are there some historians who say that the US wanted to use the atomic bombs no matter what. Mostly to show off their power to the USSR and the rest of the world.Pretty much. Although I don't know if the Emperor was to be executed so much as the Imperial House of Japan was to be dissolved, as part of the terms of surrender.
From the Salon article:
At least is that what I remember from this recent UK documentary: http://www.channel5.com/shows/hiroshima-the-aftermath/episodes/hiroshima-the-aftermath
Terrorists groups never apologize.
Most countries portrait themselves as the sole victim of any act of war. I'm not Japan do the same.
What a load of garbage.
So the bombings were a committed by a rogue U.S. government now? Maybe during the Cold War and today the USA is guilty of state sponsored terrorism, but these bombings were not.
Bored of Japan playing the victim card over the bombings and equally of uniformed or 'revisionists' people.
Also Japan should not have to keep apologising forever either, but they do need to wise the fuck up and teach history correctly.
So why exactly did Japan not surrender after the first nuke?
2nd was 3 days later and Japan didn't even surrender for 6 days after the 2nd?
They believed the US only had one atomic bomb. Also Japan didn't want an unconditional surrender. They would rather have a land invasion instead of accepting a total loss.
Prinz Eugn
Member
There are a lot of articles circulating on this subject, I advise you all to read as many of them as you can. Here's an interesting one: http://www.salon.com/2015/08/05/ame...ist_history_that_haunts_the_good_war_partner/
That article is coming from a very specific and somewhat questionable direction, I suggest people read the very recent jumbo-sized thread on the topic instead, as other posters have already pointed out.
Afaik are there some historians who say that the US wanted to use the atomic bombs no matter what. Mostly to show off their power to the USSR and the rest of the world.
At least is that what I remember from this recent UK documentary: http://www.channel5.com/shows/hiroshima-the-aftermath/episodes/hiroshima-the-aftermath
Yes. And a lot of Americans weren't ready to hear that, which is one of the reasons why the Smithsonian exhibit mentioned below was being protested 20 years ago.
That article is coming from a very specific and somewhat questionable direction, I suggest people read the very recent jumbo-sized thread on the topic instead, as other posters have already pointed out.
There are other articles that essentially corroborate the direction of the Salon one:
http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...hima-nagasaki-atomic-bomb-anniversary/400448/
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/8/14/hiroshima-and-history-of-bombing-civilians.html
http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/12/hiroshima-struggle-of-narratives/
Megalosaro
Banned
The demolition of the shrines honoring documented war criminals would be a real gesture of remorse. Anything else is just words.
Is not just war criminals. It is all of their war dead ever.
I've been to Yasukuni. There is a lot of propaganda, but doesn't take away from the impact of the last few rooms bring filled with pictures of nearly every Japanese soldier that died in the war
Terrorists groups never apologize.
Most countries portrait themselves as the sole victim of any act of war. I'm not Japan do the same.
Look at this historian we've got over here!
I have never encountered such a defense force for Imperial Japan like the one here on GAF. I imagine this being a videogame forum has a lot to do with it.
has America ever apologised for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Has America apologized for atrocity they've committed ever?
teruterubozu
Member
Has America apologized for atrocity they've committed ever?
The Apology Resolution for the illegal takeover of Hawaii (signed by Bill Clinton)
But like most political "apologies" it doesn't mean shit.
hobblygobbly
Member
The bombings were more than just ending the war. The project of nuclear weapons (Manhattan project) needed to be justified, its costs (money, secrecy, etc) and existence after news came by that the Germans split the atom. Another reason was the situation of the Soviets and needing to show military might on a world stage - Truman was very blunt and forward with the situation of the Soviet Union at the time due to its own aggressive nature and the military/world power it was.
It's naive to think the sole reason of the bombing was to end the war - that is completely disregarding the political climate at the time as well as the situation of justification needed for the creation and testing of nuclear weapons prior to them being dropped. People seem to completely forget about this climate, society and propaganda at the time. Yes in hindsight it did effectively end the war but it's not the only reason it was dropped, weighed in with Operation Downfall's projected casualties (the plan if they didn't use the bombs) plus needing the justification for what they were doing plus the political climate with the soviets made the the use of the bombs a no brainer. It would end the war, create justification for the Manhattan project (such as money) and show incredible, incredibly might towards the Soviets. At that point the U.S caused the Cold War because it made Stalin want to know these secrets too and create their own such weapons and thus the Cold War came about.
It's naive to think the sole reason of the bombing was to end the war - that is completely disregarding the political climate at the time as well as the situation of justification needed for the creation and testing of nuclear weapons prior to them being dropped. People seem to completely forget about this climate, society and propaganda at the time. Yes in hindsight it did effectively end the war but it's not the only reason it was dropped, weighed in with Operation Downfall's projected casualties (the plan if they didn't use the bombs) plus needing the justification for what they were doing plus the political climate with the soviets made the the use of the bombs a no brainer. It would end the war, create justification for the Manhattan project (such as money) and show incredible, incredibly might towards the Soviets. At that point the U.S caused the Cold War because it made Stalin want to know these secrets too and create their own such weapons and thus the Cold War came about.
King Tubby
Member
At that point the U.S caused the cold war because it made Stalin want to know these secrets too and create their own such weapons and thus the Cold War came about.
You want to talk about inevitable, the Cold War was inevitable after WWII regardless of whether atomic bombs were used or not.
Has America apologized for atrocity they've committed ever?
After reading this thread, how dense do you have to be to still condemn America for SAVING hundreds of thousands of lives.
The only logical explanation is that you have not read the thread at all.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
You want to talk about inevitable, the Cold War was inevitable after WWII regardless of whether atomic bombs were used or not.
Umm, no, the whole point of why it's known as a cold war is nuclear aggression (introducing a nobody wins scenario, keeping both parties teetering), otherwise a straight total war would have been far more inevitable.
After reading this thread, how dense do you have to be to still condemn America for SAVING hundreds of thousands of lives.
The only logical explanation is that you have not read the thread at all.
More like they didnt read the thread about the anniversary of the bombing. I think all the nutters people had to put up with in that thread tired everyone out from discussing it.
King Tubby
Member
Umm, no, the whole point of why it's known as a cold war is nuclear aggression (introducing a nobody wins scenario, keeping both parties teetering), otherwise a straight total war would have been far more inevitable.
I know that, my point is that whether nuclear weapons had been dropped on Japan or they had surrendered prior, the Cold War was going to happen. To say that one side caused it over another doesn't seem accurate. In an alternate reality where nuclear arms were never developed, it may have been a conventional World War III instead.
Well, thanks to the proliferation of mass media and the Internet Age, history is no longer an immutable narrative constructed by the victors. Every atrocity gets thrown under the microscope, regardless of which side of the conflict committed the act.
I personally believe this is a good thing.
I personally believe this is a good thing.
User 73706
Banned
I can think of a few reasons.
Are you counting in roentgens?
The Apology Resolution for the illegal takeover of Hawaii (signed by Bill Clinton)
But like most political "apologies" it doesn't mean shit.
Well I mean most countries' apologizes are ultimately political ones. At least they acknowledge Hawaii.
After reading this thread, how dense do you have to be to still condemn America for SAVING hundreds of thousands of lives.
The only logical explanation is that you have not read the thread at all.
About as dense as you if you think my question is specifically about Japan. I mean has America apologized for Vietnam? The war they got into because Bush was positive there were Weapons of Mass Destruction? Testing chemicals on their own troops? Violation of their own citizens' rights? The list can go on quite a bit mate.
Personally I'm not too bothered by their lack of apology to Japan. It was sort of necessary even if they did it mostly to show off/use their science experiments.
When it comes to the issue of historical remorse it is not Japan, but Germany, who is the outlier.
I think I know what you mean but you're going to have to elaborate just a whee bit to make sure. Do you mean most nations show no remorse and Germany, through its consistent expressions of remorse, is the outlier?
Well I mean most countries' apologizes are ultimately political ones. At least they acknowledge Hawaii.
About as dense as you if you think my question is specifically about Japan. I mean has America apologized for Vietnam? The war they got into because Bush was positive there were Weapons of Mass Destruction? Testing chemicals on their own troops? Violation of their own citizens' rights? The list can go on quite a bit mate.
Personally I'm not too bothered by their lack of apology to Japan. It was sort of necessary even if they did it mostly to show off/use their science experiments.
Bush and Vietnam? Wtf?
Well I mean most countries' apologizes are ultimately political ones. At least they acknowledge Hawaii.
About as dense as you if you think my question is specifically about Japan. I mean has America apologized for Vietnam? The war they got into because Bush was positive there were Weapons of Mass Destruction? Testing chemicals on their own troops? Violation of their own citizens' rights? The list can go on quite a bit mate.
Personally I'm not too bothered by their lack of apology to Japan. It was sort of necessary even if they did it mostly to show off/use their science experiments.
Yeah not to avoid a land invasion or a long peroid of continuous blockade. Nah they were kids with new Christmas toys.
……forgetit
Member
Is anyone really arguing that the atomic bombs weren't a show of power? The fact that two bombs did that much damage to Japan was meant to intimidate them into surrendering, and the crazy thing is it almost didn't work.
Yeah not to avoid a land invasion or a long peroid of continuous blockade. Nah they were kids with new Christmas toys.
Nah, man they did it for the lulz!
That was seriously someones post from the last thread.
Snacks the sober sea lion
Member
Japan wasn't stupid, they knew it was lost. I hope everyone knows that by now, I didn't learn the proper background until I was in college. They never had any intention of sacrificing all of Japan, they would never do that. Some wanted to risk the surrender, others wanted to have a "decisive battle" (that they had little intention of winning) and force the United States into a conditional surrender. Undoubtedly it would have been pretty fucking horrific, but I feel like it's difficult (impossible?) for this "bomb good or bad" argument not to be distilled down into the internet's hobby of Atrocity Olympics. Except that one atrocity didn't happen, so it seems a little more ridiculous to try to compare them.
Nothing is as simple as "nukes saved lives," and there was nothing "merciful" about the nukes if you've read stories of what happened afterwards.
Nothing is as simple as "nukes saved lives," and there was nothing "merciful" about the nukes if you've read stories of what happened afterwards.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.