Support NeoGAF

[Meffer]

has America ever apologised for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Edit: I guess not.

 

[HK-47]

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.

People didnt really know that the bombs would have long lasting effects as clearly outline in Operation Downfall, where the allied invasion troops were supposed to move to take cities that were nuked 48 hours after they dropped.

 

[Principate]

People didnt really know that the bombs would have long lasting effects as clearly outline in Operation Downfall, where the allied invasion troops were supposed to move to take cities that were nuked 48 hours after they dropped.

Which is worrying in itself. You released a new relatively untested bomb on live subjects.

It doesn't exactly absolve anything though we all know it's war, and all sides did some horrifying shit.

 

[Seductivpancakes]

People didnt really know that the bombs would have long lasting effects as clearly outline in Operation Downfall, where the allied invasion troops were supposed to move to take cities that were nuked 48 hours after they dropped.

Would have sucked if Japan didn't surrender after both cities were nuked, and America had to go ahead with the ground invasion, forcing both sides to suffer from radiation poisoning.

 

[funkypie]

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.

so learning something in college automatically makes you correct/expert? We have heard all this before; the fact is, japan had already lost the war, it wasn't their decision how they would surrender, they were told to surrender and they didn't.

So the allies should have had some major battle and get their noses blooded to satisfy japanese conditions of their own surrender? ridiculous. If they knew they were beat and ready to surrender, then they should have.

 

[Snacks the sober sea lion]

so learning something in college automatically makes you correct/expert? We have heard all this before; the fact is, japan had already lost the war, it wasn't their decision how they would surrender, they were told to surrender and they didn't.

So the allies should have had some major battle and get their noses blooded to satisfy japanese conditions of their own surrender? ridiculous. If they knew they were beat and ready to surrender, then they should have.

Huh? I didn't say any of those things. I was saying I hope it is more widely-available knowledge by now, because I didn't get to learn it until college. Not remotely saying that learning it in college makes it correct, I'm saying that it would be fortunate if everyone now has access to that information rather than hearing very little until they're in college and have already had to form an opinion on the subject. I explicitly said "background," nothing regarding the actual decision regarding the bombs. I made no insinuation that I was right, only that I didn't get to learn anything about the political situation in Japan until I was already 20, whereas all previous information I had seen portrayed Japan as an unrelenting, unfeeling war machine.
I guess that's too much information to portray in one sentence, though.

Nor did I suggest that the Allies should have done anything like that. I didn't suggest anyone do anything. I'm saying that Japan had legitimate reasons to fear an unconditional surrender, regardless of how much you think they "should have" surrendered, and that whether the nuke was the "right" decision or not frequently comes down to comparing one real atrocity to one theoretical atrocity. And if anyone is going to do so, they should at least not automatically apply a pretense of nuclear bombs being "merciful."

 

[Shadow_Lord]

This thread again. Bit late for the gif

 

[Angry Grimace]

I've been watching some of the TV shows about the war here in Japan and it is bizarre. Not a single mention of the Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos or Allied POWs who were killed during the war. It is all about how Japan suffered. There was one show where a half American girl talked to a Japanese man and asked him if his views had changed and he said he still hated the Americans for what they did during the war, bringing her to tears. I was astounded at the audacity. I felt like shouting at him what about all those millions of people who died at the hands of the Japanese military you stupid fuck.

Pretty much.

 

[vas_a_morir]

I've been watching some of the TV shows about the war here in Japan and it is bizarre. Not a single mention of the Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos or Allied POWs who were killed during the war. It is all about how Japan suffered. There was one show where a half American girl talked to a Japanese man and asked him if his views had changed and he said he still hated the Americans for what they did during the war, bringing her to tears. I was astounded at the audacity. I felt like shouting at him what about all those millions of people who died at the hands of the Japanese military you stupid fuck.

Your first mistake: watching Japanese TV. (j/k)

I think you'll find a more nuanced and fair portrayal of war in the Akira Ikegami "Let's think about War" specials. A lot of time he confronts people with things about the Japanese in WW2 that might be a surprise to many younger Japanese. Usually with American panelist Pakkun in tow. (That guy wears a Harvard tie and speaks native-level fluent Japanese, I wish he would just use his normal name. He does go out of his way not to intimidate, though, so he's good for this kind of special.)

I'm sure it's hard to forgive the enemy when you've been a soldier. I don't blame this guy for feeling how he feels because I've never been in his shoes, but I think when you hold on to resentment over perceived transgressions, you do yourself a great disservice. There is power in forgiveness, as you no longer allow yourself to be victimized again and again by the memory. I knew an old Marine who was a really nice guy, but he told me he'll always hate the Japs for what they did. Once again, I can't blame the guy because he endured the battle of Okinawa and saw his comrades killed. I hope other soldiers were able to find some peace after the War, but I imagine it's a hard thing to honestly do.

BTW, was it Shelly, perhaps? She's kind of the token bi-racial panelist in these kinds of shows.

 

[Xenus]

Bush and Vietnam? Wtf?

Yeah someone might want to reread their history books here. And we totally had this discussion for about 20 pages a week or two ago.

 

[Sumio Mondo]

I'm consistently surprised by the amount of uninformed posters here who just blatanly ignore the facts about imperial Japan and the necessity of those bombs.

But hey, everyone loves a reason to bash America.

We didn't need to nuke Germany to beat them in WW2?

 

[Draxal]

We didn't need to nuke Germany to beat them in WW2?

Um, I think you would want to look at the casualty count in the Eastern Front.

 

[Savitar]

Talk on War.

Talk on War never changes.

 

[PHOENIXZERO]

We didn't need to nuke Germany to beat them in WW2?

That was the original plan for Little Boy and Fat Man IIRC...

 

[ThatCrazyGuy]

We didn't need to nuke Germany to beat them in WW2?

It was meant for them.

 

[Sumio Mondo]

That was the original plan for Little Boy and Fat Man IIRC...

"Us" being Europe (UK). I'm not American, that's on them guy's.

EDIT: Then again, looking at the way some of the people are talking in here, it was ALL the US of A who did all of the work during WW2 and all of the other Allies did jack shit...

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

I've been watching some of the TV shows about the war here in Japan and it is bizarre. Not a single mention of the Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos or Allied POWs who were killed during the war. It is all about how Japan suffered. There was one show where a half American girl talked to a Japanese man and asked him if his views had changed and he said he still hated the Americans for what they did during the war, bringing her to tears. I was astounded at the audacity. I felt like shouting at him what about all those millions of people who died at the hands of the Japanese military you stupid fuck.

Troubling

 

[vas_a_morir]

"Us" being Europe (UK). I'm not American, that's on them guy's.

UK and the US were in both theaters, TBF.

 

[Team Alucard]

We didn't need to nuke Germany to beat them in WW2?

Because 30 million Russians gave their lives to defeat the Nazis.

U.S. involvement in WWII is heavily over-glorified and romanticized, but the Eastern Front was where the war was won, and it was a bloodbath the likes of which had never been seen.

Likewise, there is an argument to be made that it wasn't even the bomb that made Japan surrender, but rather the Soviet Union declaring war on them.

 

[Sumio Mondo]

^It was the combined forces of the Allies. None of this "we did all of this by ourselves" crap. The Russians sacrificed the most though, no doubt.

UK and the US were in both theaters, TBF.

UK's project was being worked on in tandem with the America's, sure, but the UK wanted to keep their project separate from the US, despite the handshakes and pleasantries about it. The most help the US got with it was one chemist from the UK consulting on the project, that's it.

 

[Valkerionseven]

The US apologized to Native Americans and native Hawaiians.

Still insanely disadvantaged in modern though. Verbal apologies and all are fine yet very little else done other than -shrug- sorry about that.

Either way Akihito has been on the remorse side of the fence publically for years now. He's been pretty openly opposite Abe's peeps message for a good while.

 

[Draxal]

Because 30 million Russians gave their lives to defeat the Nazis.

U.S. involvement in WWII is heavily over-glorified and romanticized, but the Eastern Front was where the war was won, and it was a bloodbath the likes of which had never been seen.

Likewise, there is an argument to be made that it wasn't even the bomb that made Japan surrender, but rather the Soviet Union declaring war on them.

Overstated militarily and completely understated economically. Look at the raw economic numbers for WW2, and you'll why the allies were guaranteed to win out in the end.

 

[Chariot]

Because 30 million Russians gave their lives to defeat the Nazis.

U.S. involvement in WWII is heavily over-glorified and romanticized, but the Eastern Front was where the war was won, and it was a bloodbath the likes of which had never been seen.

Likewise, there is an argument to be made that it wasn't even the bomb that made Japan surrender, but rather the Soviet Union declaring war on them.

Let's not downplay the arrival of an strong and furthermore rather undamaged army and economy in mainland Europe. Everyone was hanging in the ropes, the Reich just a lot less than France and Britain. You can of course argue that the war would've been won without the USA (I would argue against that), but there is no doubt that their active war contribution was a heavy impact that broke the Reich definitly and without saving.

 

[Sumio Mondo]

Let's not downplay the arrival of an strong and furthermore rather undamaged army and economy in mainland Europe. Everyone was hanging in the ropes, the Reich just a lot less than France and Britain. You can of course argue that the war would've been won without the USA (I would argue against that), but there is no doubt that their active war contribution was a heavy impact that broke the Reich definitly and without saving.

It was a messy war. I believe we would have won eventually against them and despite my earlier comments, I do think the war was won sooner thanks to the combined efforts of the Russians and the US helping out tremendously. In the end though, the Russians suffered the greatest casualties on the Allies side and frankly didn't receive enough thanks/help or sympathy for it, sadly.

 

[PopeReal]

The amount of deaths would have been significantly higher had America chose invasion over the bombs. We are talking mass suicide on a scale never seen. Not to mention the fighting casualities on both sides.

Also Japan resused to surrender even after the first bomb. It took a second one for them to do it.

 

[Redd]

It was a messy war. I believe we would have won eventually against them and despite my earlier comments, I do think the war was won sooner thanks to the combined efforts of the Russians and the US helping out tremendously. In the end though, the Russians suffered the greatest casualties on the Allies side and frankly didn't receive enough thanks/help or sympathy for it, sadly.

FFS there's a reason. They were allied with the Nazis until Germany invaded the Soviet Union.

 

[Anjelus_]

Let's not downplay the arrival of an strong and furthermore rather undamaged army and economy in mainland Europe. Everyone was hanging in the ropes, the Reich just a lot less than France and Britain. You can of course argue that the war would've been won without the USA (I would argue against that), but there is no doubt that their active war contribution was a heavy impact that broke the Reich definitly and without saving.

I think it's unfortunate you focused on that because it's the one aspect of America's WW2 contribution that can quite easily be downplayed. The Normandy invasion occurred in the same exact month that the USSR launched Operation Bagration and completely, indisputably, broke the German army. The war, which had already been a foregone conclusion by then, was COMPLETELY foregone after that, and it was going to happen whether we invaded Normandy or not.

There is a slight possibility the Germans could have used the units they threw away in the Bulge to stop the Soviets in '45. Maybe. But more likely the war would have been prolonged another few months and then ended in the same way.

The U.S.' most influential contribution against Germany, more than Africa or Italy, more than lend lease, was strategic bombing. No contest.

That said, it was vitally important for world history that we invaded Normandy and liberated Western Europe and were in a position to stop the USSR from going past Berlin, which they surely would have had we not been there.

 

[Team Alucard]

Also Japan resused to surrender even after the first bomb. It took a second one for them to do it.

*and* the Soviet Union annihilating Japan's most powerful army in a matter of a week.

 

[CorvoSol]

Wasnt this a thread about Japan's crimes? Not America's?

 

[funkypie]

*and* the Soviet Union annihilating Japan's most powerful army in a matter of a week.

That's the second time you've mentioned the ussr in connection to Japan surrendering. It is a revisionist argument based on what ifs, used mainly to argue that the nuking was evil and unnecessary, usually favoured by Japanese historians.

Wasnt this a thread about Japan's crimes? Not America's?

It was, but within a few posts you had "what about Americas crimes"

 

[Sumio Mondo]

FFS there's a reason. They were allied with the Nazis until Germany invaded the Soviet Union.

Uh...Yeah, I know that. They still suffered terribly and became our greatest ally during the war. They got shit done and I don't hear them harping on about themselves that much considering how much they lost during the war.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Wasnt this a thread about Japan's crimes? Not America's?

Actually it was a thread about Japan's emperor expressing remorse until people tuned it into a thread about Japan's war crimes (again)

I think some people get off on it

 

[Toxi]

Actually it was a thread about Japan's emperor expressing remorse until people tuned it into a thread about Japan's war crimes (again)

I think some people get off on it

Japan's emperor expressing remorse for Japan's war crimes apparently has nothing to do with Japan's war crimes.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Japan's emperor expressing remorse for Japan's war crimes apparently has nothing to do with Japan's war crimes.

Don't be cute. The direction the thread took is obviously different from the original topic

 

[Toxi]

Don't be cute. The direction the thread took is obviously different from the original topic

Yes, that's because the first post was about the atomic bombs.

Not because people decided to talk about Imperial Japan's war crimes in a thread about the Japan's Emperor apologizing for Imperial Japan's war crimes in stark contrast to their Prime Minister.

 

[BannedEpisode]

None of the big players in WW2 came out without blood on their hands.

Germany, Japan, and the United States all committed horrible atrocities. At this point, it is just a circular argument where we measure them and try to say that one was worse than the other or that one was more justified.

 

[Piecake]

Wasnt this a thread about Japan's crimes? Not America's?

It should have been, or it could even been about current East Asian relations and their history, but whataboutism is apparently quite popular here. Instead of discussing the actions of other countries in their own context, some people just love to point out, but what about America? Didnt they do some awful shit?

I find it quite tiring, and I am sure these people feel that they are quite worldly, but constantly bringing up shit America did in threads about other nations and other contexts just reeks of Euro-American-centricism

 

[Toxi]

None of the big players in WW2 came out without blood on their hands.

Germany, Japan, and the United States all committed horrible atrocities. At this point, it is just a circular argument where we measure them and try to say that one was worse than the other or that one was more justified.

I think it's pretty reasonable to say Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan weren't justified in the slightest, being genocidal aggressors in the bloodiest war in human history.

 

[IAmRandom31]

has America ever apologised for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

If we didn't do that and force the surrender the world would be remembering the bloodiest battle in human history. Right there with Russia ( sorry soviet union! ) and Germany. The planned invasion of Japan was going to be an all out invasion and possibly costing many millions upon millions of lives.

Just read up about Operation Downfall and the estimated casualties and god knows how many civilian casualties as well. Who knows what the world would look like today if that all went forward. If Japan won they would have literally axed nearly our entire navy, leaving the mainland open for invasion and crippling our military. The costs of rebuilding alone would have been astronomical and would have taken far more years then the world at the time would of allowed.

Never know really how it all would have changed.

 

[CorvoSol]

Mostly I am surprised to hear Japan still has a living Emperor.

 

[Jenov]

Don't be cute. The direction the thread took is obviously different from the original topic

"B-BUT WHAT ABOUT AMERICA????" is a constant theme when it comes to any discussion about other countries. It's annoying and predictable.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

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.

It doesnt help if one apologizes and then later visits the shrine of "war heroes".
It doesnt help if someone tries to play it down ala "It wasnt that bad. It was war. And look what the american did to us."
It doesnt help if "they" always see themselves in a victim role.

I know what you mean, but as long as politicians "dont believe" it was really that bad, nothing happens.
It also isnt important, whether China or Korea use "the Japan card" for whatever reason.
I think if Abe would build a museum about the atrocoties they commited during WW2 (like the thousands of museums we have here in Germany), deeply apologizes and not just because of reactions from China or Japan, but because they really think it was wrong, it would be a huge step towards acknowledging they did shitty things.

Still insanely disadvantaged in modern though. Verbal apologies and all are fine yet very little else done other than -shrug- sorry about that.

Either way Akihito has been on the remorse side of the fence publically for years now. He's been pretty openly opposite Abe's peeps message for a good while.

Couldnt that be, because Abe, as a politician, has to say what the people want to hear? I mean judging from a japanese friend, the young generation arent really voting at all and dont care about politics and I guess the old people would never vote for Abe if he would be "weak".

 

[Piecake]

To get this topic back on track, I found an article that highlights some less well-known events. So you won't see the Rape of Nanjing, Unit 731, Forcing Korean women into sexual slavery, The Baatan Death March. etc. Hell, it doesnt even mention any incidents in China or Korea, which should get your brain thinking "holy fucking shit, what the hell did they do there?"

It goes on to list/rank atrocities (which I think is rather stupid, so ignore that), but it does a good job of highlighting some awful awful shit that most of us are probably not aware of. I will just pick out a few:

The Death Railway: June 1942–October 1943

As their cargo ships were vulnerable to Allied raids, the Japanese sought an alternative supply line to maintain their forces in Burma. This culminated in the construction of a 415-kilometer (300 mi) railway between Burma and Thailand. The railway used 60,000 Allied POWs and 200,000 Asian conscripts for slave labor. During the year-long construction, thousands died from the grueling working conditions and inhumane treatment. A total of 13,000 POWS along with approximately 80,000–100,000 Asian laborers died constructing the railway. The plight of the surviving workers did not end with the railway’s completion. While the Japanese relocated some of the prisoners, they continued to keep a contingent to maintain and repair the railway in the face of Allied attacks.

The Massacre Of Manila: February–March 1945

Early in 1945, General Yamashita planned for his men to evacuate Manila and fight in the countryside. However, two Japanese admirals ignored his order and committed their men to a final stand inside the city. When the Americans arrived, the Japanese forces realized that they faced certain death and vented their rage on the hapless civilians trapped inside their lines. For weeks, the Japanese raped, pillaged, and murdered. Aside from the bayonets and beheadings, they machine-gunned captives and set fire to buildings with people trapped inside. The Americans ceased artillery strikes so the Japanese could surrender, but the Japanese instead continued their rampage. After the dust settled, all Japanese defenders of the city had died, taking with them 100,000 civilian casualties. The incident left Manila as one of the Allies’ most damaged capital cities, second only to Warsaw.

Sook Ching Massacre: February–March 1942

Following the Fall of Singapore, the Japanese wanted to mop up all remaining resistance, especially among the Chinese living in the region. To accomplish this, the notorious Japanese secret police Kempetai initiated Operation Sook Ching (“purge through cleansing”) in February 1942. Singapore was the first to be purged. After interning and interrogating the city’s entire Chinese population, the Kempetai herded those they deemed as dangerous into military vehicles. They then transported them to the city’s outskirts and executed them all. This purging operation soon found its way into other parts of Malaya as well. The manpower shortage and rush made the Kempetai especially merciless toward those in rural areas. They eliminated entire villages on mere suspicion of subversive activity. Although we have no official casualty figures, estimates range from 5,000–6,000 (Japanese sources) to a high of 30,000–100,000 (Singaporean and Chinese sources).

Palawan Massacre: December 14, 1944

In another case of POW massacre, the Japanese stationed in Palawan Island, Philippines tried to kill all their American prisoners after wrongly assuming Allied forces had invaded. After driving the prisoners into makeshift air raid shelters, the Japanese burned them alive. Those who fled the burning structures were bayoneted, shot, or bludgeoned to death. A few dozen managed to make it as far as the shoreline and hide there; the Japanese caught, tortured, and executed almost all of them. Of the 150 prisoners, less than a dozen survived to tell the tale, the lucky few somehow finding the strength to swim across a bay to safety. News of this grisly massacre prompted Allied forces to embark on a series of raids to liberate prisons and camps held by the Japanese across the archipelago.

Alexandra Hospital Massacre: February 14–15, 1942

Just a day before the British surrendered Singapore, Japanese soldiers stormed Alexandra Military Hospital and slaughtered its occupants, including the medical staff and patients. Even those undergoing surgery were not spared. Following the massacre, the Japanese forced those left to clean up the mess and then herded them into cramped rooms. When morning came, the Japanese rounded up the 200 survivors (some died during the night) and bayoneted them in the courtyard. Only five survived the second massacre—by hiding in a storm drain. General Yamashita, upon learning the incident, had the offending soldiers apprehended and executed.

http://listverse.com/2014/05/06/10-japanese-atrocities-from-world-war-ii/

But yes, all sides committed atrocities, more false equivalency crap, blah blah

 

[DiipuSurotu]

Mostly I am surprised to hear Japan still has a living Emperor.

He serves no purpose. The British royal family at least have people loving or hating them. The Japanese imperial family? No one cares.

 

[Bracewell]

It doesnt help if one apologizes and then later visits the shrine of "war heroes".
It doesnt help if someone tries to play it down ala "It wasnt that bad. It was war. And look what the american did to us."
It doesnt help if "they" always see themselves in a victim role.

I know what you mean, but as long as politicians "dont believe" it was really that bad, nothing happens.
It also isnt important, whether China or Korea use "the Japan card" for whatever reason.
I think if Abe would build a museum about the atrocoties they commited during WW2 (like the thousands of museums we have here in Germany), deeply apologizes and not just because of reactions from China or Japan, but because they really think it was wrong, it would be a huge step towards acknowledging they did shitty things.

It doesn't help what? The apology is a political gesture, there will never be any substance behind apologies from heads of state, other than an acknowledgement that war crimes were committed. You want them to stop visiting the memorials of their fallen soldiers? Why?

http://listverse.com/2014/05/06/10-japanese-atrocities-from-world-war-ii/

But yes, all sides committed atrocities, more false equivalency crap, blah blah

We nuked civilians, who were just as complicit in those crimes as you or I.

 

[Piecake]

It doesn't help what? The apology is a political gesture, there will never be any substance behind apologies from heads of state, other than an acknowledgement that war crimes were committed. You want them to stop visiting the memorials of their fallen soldiers? Why?

1. "Imagine if the Westboro Baptist Church happened to own Arlington." From Noboru Akimoto:

I've been watching your back and forth on Yasukuni with some interest, and I generally agree with the commentators that say the issue is more with the Yushukan than with the shrine itself. [JF note: Yushukan is the "historical" museum near the shrine, with a very tendentious view of Japan being forced into the war by Allied encirclement.]

I do think a part that's not been mentioned is that Yasukuni Jinja [Shrine], because of the separation of religion and state of the post-war constitution, is NOT a part of the Japanese government, nor does any of the Imperial family have control over its actions.

We know from the Tomita Memorandum that the Showa Emperor [aka Hirohito] was furious about the chief priest's decision to include the Class A 14 into the shrine in 1979, but that as a matter of politics, neither the Emperor nor the government can actually compel Yasukuni, a private religious institution, from acknowledging the 14 Class A criminals nor force it to disinter their spirits.

As a Japanese individual and Shintoist, I would like to see the priests separate the class A war criminals from the others, but I also understand that as a practical, constitutional matter, having the government force the issue would be a step in the wrong direction.

If we had to have some sort of strange analogy, I would ask American readers to imagine if the Westboro Baptist Church happened to own Arlington.

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...inal-more-on-the-yasukuni-controversy/283004/

So yes, I don't think it is shocking that people and governments in East Asia get upset that Japanese politicians yearly visit a shrine that houses terrible war criminals and exposes a idiotic and false historical view that Japan was 'forced' into the War and probably denies any of the war atrocities that Japan has committed, or at least does not mention them (though I am not sure on the last bit).

Yasukuni Shrine operates a war museum of the history of Japan (the Yūshūkan), which some observers[who?] have criticized as presenting a revisionist interpretation. A documentary-style video shown to museum visitors portrays Japan's conquest of East Asia during the pre-World War II period as an effort to save the region from the imperial advances of the colonial Western powers called the "Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere". Displays portray Japan as a victim of foreign influence, especially Western undermining of trade.[citation needed] The museum fails to portray any atrocities committed by the Japanese Imperial Army. On the invasion of Nanking, the museum omits any mention of the massacre.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contr...Yasukuni_Shrine#Y.C5.ABsh.C5.ABkan_War_Museum

We nuked civilians, who were just as complicit in those crimes as you or I.

With the purpose of ending the war and saving lives, not to be sadistically cruel like the examples that I listed above or the major major events that werent even mentioned. I don't know about you, but I think purpose and the fact that dropping the bombs lead to the surrender of Japan, which avoided an invasion of Japan, which would have resulted in far more civilian and soldier deaths than the atomic bombs makes it less morally reprehensible than the examples that I listed.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

It doesn't help what? The apology is a political gesture, there will never be any substance behind apologies from heads of state, other than an acknowledgement that war crimes were committed. You want them to stop visiting the memorials of their fallen soldiers? Why?

The problem is, that the Yasukuni shrine still has the 14 or 15 war criminals engraved on it and that is why its so controversial.
They could easily remove those names, but dont do that for whatever reason.

This, of course, sparks outrage.

With "it doesnt help" I mean the historical reappraisal about the crimes they did.

 

[vas_a_morir]

It doesnt help if one apologizes and then later visits the shrine of "war heroes".
It doesnt help if someone tries to play it down ala "It wasnt that bad. It was war. And look what the american did to us."
It doesnt help if "they" always see themselves in a victim role.

I know what you mean, but as long as politicians "dont believe" it was really that bad, nothing happens.
It also isnt important, whether China or Korea use "the Japan card" for whatever reason.
I think if Abe would build a museum about the atrocoties they commited during WW2 (like the thousands of museums we have here in Germany), deeply apologizes and not just because of reactions from China or Japan, but because they really think it was wrong, it would be a huge step towards acknowledging they did shitty things.

Well, the real sticking point isn't whether or not it happened, but rather to what extent. Japan overwhelmingly admits that killings and rapes happened. The problem is the Chinese govt demands that they accept responsibility for ludicrously high numbers that are most assuredly inflated for the purpose of propaganda. The truth is that photographic evidence of the Rape of Nanking is very limited. In fact, the vast majority of it has been argued by some historians to be of questionable origin and repute. I'm pretty pro-Allies when it comes to WW2, so it was a tough pill to swallow for me. However, the evidence presented of the photo manipulation and how it was present in virtually the totality of photographic evidence supporting the Chinese estimates was pretty convincing. Who knows.


The answer is likely somewhere in-between. I personally think it should have no bearing on the debate whether or not to remilitarize Japan, but as you know, some LDF politicians obviously feel like confronting the truth about the horrors of the Imperial Army would deter approval for their military goals. That was a different time and a different government, and Japan is in a totally different position than it was back then, so I think it's irrelevant in that discussion. However, outright denial of Japanese WW2 atrocities is not unheard-of, and it's pretty nefarious.

 

[AllenShrz]

He serves no purpose. The British royal family at least have people loving or hating them. The Japanese imperial family? No one cares.

Oh really? Please tell us more about this "No one cares", because as someone who lives in Japan, I don't see what you claim.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

Well, the real sticking point isn't whether or not it happened, but rather to what extent. Japan overwhelmingly admits that killings and rapes happened. The problem is the Chinese govt demands that they accept responsibility for ludicrously high numbers that are most assuredly inflated for the purpose of propaganda. The truth is that photographic evidence of the Rape of Nanking is very limited. In fact, the vast majority of it has been argued by some historians to be of questionable origin and repute. I'm pretty pro-Allies when it comes to WW2, so it was a tough pill to swallow for me. However, the evidence presented of the photo manipulation and how it was present in virtually the totality of photographic evidence supporting the Chinese estimates was pretty convincing. Who knows.


The answer is likely somewhere in-between. I personally think it should have no bearing on the debate whether or not to remilitarize Japan, but as you know, some LDF politicians obviously feel like confronting the truth about the horrors of the Imperial Army would deter approval for their military goals. That was a different time and a different government, and Japan is in a totally different position than it was back then, so I think it's irrelevant in that discussion. However, outright denial of Japanese WW2 atrocities is not unheard-of, and it's pretty nefarious.

I know what you mean. I also dont have a clue how high the numbers are. I just wonder why they cant really reevaluate their war crimes. I mean if one politician is saying "Forced prostitution? They were comfort women and no one forced them."
I mean as far as I can see they even have commissions that kinda deny the existence.
It is just sad to see such a country still trying to "save face" and even, that inside the country, you have people who deny that.
I remember there was some discussion between Hayao Miyazaki, who actually admits to the shit the government did during WW2 and some bestselling japanese novel author, who denies everything. Afaik even Murakami criticises the whitewashing of Japans war crimes.