| Science Forum Index » Military - Naval Forum » "Pearl Harbor" by Gingritch... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Frogwatch... |
 Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
A novel relating the events from 1934 up to the attack on Pearl Harbor
concerning the attitudes of the Japanese and US and British before the
war. It goes thru the "Panay Incident" and the atrocities in
Nanking. The Japanese characters attempt to justify their actions but
unconvincingly by saying "European Powers acted imperialistic and this
gives Japan the right to". This does not seem to me to provide any
justification even amongst the Japanese for atrocities they knew were
being committed. A main Japanese character excuses the atrocities in
Nanking by blaming the army while saying the navy is far more
professional and would not get out of control as they did in Nanking.
Even after reading thru this, I do not see how even poorly educated
troops could engage in mass rapes and contests to behead as many
civilians as possible without some knowledge they were doing wrong. I
do not see how the mass atrocities could have happened without the
consent of the military authorities and even the Emperor himself.
It does bring up the idea of "destiny" of a nation as expressed by the
Japanese in the book and has been expressed recently by many Chinese.
I have heard a lot of discussion by Chinese that they are "destined"
to be a great power by virtue of their ancient history. Such ideas of
destiny seem to be foolish to me whether applied to the USA or to
Japan or to China. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| David E. Powell... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
[quote]A novel relating the events from 1934 up to the attack on Pearl Harbor
concerning the attitudes of the Japanese and US and British before the
war. It goes thru the "Panay Incident" and the atrocities in
Nanking. The Japanese characters attempt to justify their actions but
unconvincingly by saying "European Powers acted imperialistic and this
gives Japan the right to". This does not seem to me to provide any
justification even amongst the Japanese for atrocities they knew were
being committed. A main Japanese character excuses the atrocities in
Nanking by blaming the army while saying the navy is far more
professional and would not get out of control as they did in Nanking.
Even after reading thru this, I do not see how even poorly educated
troops could engage in mass rapes and contests to behead as many
civilians as possible without some knowledge they were doing wrong. I
do not see how the mass atrocities could have happened without the
consent of the military authorities and even the Emperor himself.
It does bring up the idea of "destiny" of a nation as expressed by the
Japanese in the book and has been expressed recently by many Chinese.
I have heard a lot of discussion by Chinese that they are "destined"
to be a great power by virtue of their ancient history. Such ideas of
destiny seem to be foolish to me whether applied to the USA or to
Japan or to China.
[/quote]
Hirohito had to have known about at least some of it, it wasn't
exactly uncommon knowledge in Japan that bad stuff was going on in
China. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| deemsbill at (no spam) aol.com... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:59 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
[quote]A novel relating the events from 1934 up to the attack on Pearl Harbor
concerning the attitudes of the Japanese and US and British before the
war. It goes thru the "Panay Incident" and the atrocities in
Nanking. The Japanese characters attempt to justify their actions but
unconvincingly by saying "European Powers acted imperialistic and this
gives Japan the right to". This does not seem to me to provide any
justification even amongst the Japanese for atrocities they knew were
being committed. A main Japanese character excuses the atrocities in
Nanking by blaming the army while saying the navy is far more
professional and would not get out of control as they did in Nanking.
Even after reading thru this, I do not see how even poorly educated
troops could engage in mass rapes and contests to behead as many
civilians as possible without some knowledge they were doing wrong. I
do not see how the mass atrocities could have happened without the
consent of the military authorities and even the Emperor himself.
It does bring up the idea of "destiny" of a nation as expressed by the
Japanese in the book and has been expressed recently by many Chinese.
I have heard a lot of discussion by Chinese that they are "destined"
to be a great power by virtue of their ancient history. Such ideas of
destiny seem to be foolish to me whether applied to the USA or to
Japan or to China.
[/quote]
According to 'Soldiers of the Sun' by Meirion and Susie Harries,
the Japanese lacked an overall moral compass as we understand it in
the West. While the vast majority of westerners view mass murder and
indiscriminate killing as innately bad/evil, the Japanese don't
(didn't?). Orders were seen as more important than anything
else.....this defense was used at the post-war war crimes trials. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Frogwatch... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:30 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 7:24 pm, "Keith Willshaw"
<ke... at (no spam) nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[quote]deemsb... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message
news:8938869f-7860-4bab-8919-ba6ead49445f at (no spam) j19g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
According to 'Soldiers of the Sun' by Meirion and Susie Harries,
the Japanese lacked an overall moral compass as we understand it in
the West. While the vast majority of westerners view mass murder and
indiscriminate killing as innately bad/evil, the Japanese don't
(didn't?). Orders were seen as more important than anything
else.....this defense was used at the post-war war crimes trials.
None of this is confined to the Japanese. The standard defense
of the German War Criminals was 'I was only obeying orders'
and the Soviets were hardly cuddly philanthropists.
There are few civilizations which held the view that mass killing
of the enemy was anything other than a good idea.
The irony about Japan was that in WW1 they treated their POW's
very well indeed. They built an entire mock German village for
the POW's they took at TsingTao. Guards there were punished
severely for being disrespectful to the in mates many of whom
opted to stay in Japan after the war. The atrocities of WW2
were a result of a positive campaign to brutalise the military
instigated by the military leadership in the 1920's
Keith
Keith
[/quote]
Gingritch implies that this brutal attitude developed in the mid to
late 30s and I have read this elsewhere. If true, this is weird that
a nations values could change seemingly overnight. After the war, did
they change again or are the Japanese still bloodthirsty racists
putting on a "HelloKitty" face? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| deemsbill at (no spam) aol.com... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:39 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 9:30 pm, Frogwatch <dboh... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 5, 7:24 pm, "Keith Willshaw"
ke... at (no spam) nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
deemsb... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message
news:8938869f-7860-4bab-8919-ba6ead49445f at (no spam) j19g2000vbi.googlegroups.com....
On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
According to 'Soldiers of the Sun' by Meirion and Susie Harries,
the Japanese lacked an overall moral compass as we understand it in
the West. While the vast majority of westerners view mass murder and
indiscriminate killing as innately bad/evil, the Japanese don't
(didn't?). Orders were seen as more important than anything
else.....this defense was used at the post-war war crimes trials.
None of this is confined to the Japanese. The standard defense
of the German War Criminals was 'I was only obeying orders'
and the Soviets were hardly cuddly philanthropists.
There are few civilizations which held the view that mass killing
of the enemy was anything other than a good idea.
The irony about Japan was that in WW1 they treated their POW's
very well indeed. They built an entire mock German village for
the POW's they took at TsingTao. Guards there were punished
severely for being disrespectful to the in mates many of whom
opted to stay in Japan after the war. The atrocities of WW2
were a result of a positive campaign to brutalise the military
instigated by the military leadership in the 1920's
Keith
Keith
Gingritch implies that this brutal attitude developed in the mid to
late 30s and I have read this elsewhere. If true, this is weird that
a nations values could change seemingly overnight. After the war, did
they change again or are the Japanese still bloodthirsty racists
putting on a "HelloKitty" face?-
[/quote]
They're (by and large) racists. I think the bloodthirsty kind of
got kicked out of them. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ray O'Hara... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"David E. Powell" <David_Powell3006 at (no spam) msn.com> wrote in message
news:48537165-9382-4b11-8f58-bbfb252b78f0 at (no spam) k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
[quote]A novel relating the events from 1934 up to the attack on Pearl Harbor
concerning the attitudes of the Japanese and US and British before the
war. It goes thru the "Panay Incident" and the atrocities in
Nanking. The Japanese characters attempt to justify their actions but
unconvincingly by saying "European Powers acted imperialistic and this
gives Japan the right to". This does not seem to me to provide any
justification even amongst the Japanese for atrocities they knew were
being committed. A main Japanese character excuses the atrocities in
Nanking by blaming the army while saying the navy is far more
professional and would not get out of control as they did in Nanking.
Even after reading thru this, I do not see how even poorly educated
troops could engage in mass rapes and contests to behead as many
civilians as possible without some knowledge they were doing wrong. I
do not see how the mass atrocities could have happened without the
consent of the military authorities and even the Emperor himself.
It does bring up the idea of "destiny" of a nation as expressed by the
Japanese in the book and has been expressed recently by many Chinese.
I have heard a lot of discussion by Chinese that they are "destined"
to be a great power by virtue of their ancient history. Such ideas of
destiny seem to be foolish to me whether applied to the USA or to
Japan or to China.
[/quote]
Hirohito had to have known about at least some of it, it wasn't
exactly uncommon knowledge in Japan that bad stuff was going on in
China.
===========================================================================
The IJA was a law unto itself in those days.Adm Yamamoto stayed aboard the
Nagato because he was safe from assassination by army radicals.
the whole Nomonhan Khalkin Gol Incident was caused by the Kwangtung Army
going rogue.
Men the like the crazed Colonel Tsuji had influence well beyond their rank. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Keith Willshaw... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<deemsbill at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message
news:8938869f-7860-4bab-8919-ba6ead49445f at (no spam) j19g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
[quote]According to 'Soldiers of the Sun' by Meirion and Susie Harries,
the Japanese lacked an overall moral compass as we understand it in
the West. While the vast majority of westerners view mass murder and
indiscriminate killing as innately bad/evil, the Japanese don't
(didn't?). Orders were seen as more important than anything
else.....this defense was used at the post-war war crimes trials.
[/quote]
None of this is confined to the Japanese. The standard defense
of the German War Criminals was 'I was only obeying orders'
and the Soviets were hardly cuddly philanthropists.
There are few civilizations which held the view that mass killing
of the enemy was anything other than a good idea.
The irony about Japan was that in WW1 they treated their POW's
very well indeed. They built an entire mock German village for
the POW's they took at TsingTao. Guards there were punished
severely for being disrespectful to the in mates many of whom
opted to stay in Japan after the war. The atrocities of WW2
were a result of a positive campaign to brutalise the military
instigated by the military leadership in the 1920's
Keith
Keith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Fred J. McCall... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Keith Willshaw" <keith at (no spam) nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:
:<deemsbill at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message
:news:8938869f-7860-4bab-8919-ba6ead49445f at (no spam) j19g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
:On Nov 5, 12:14 pm, Frogwatch <ohara... at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote:
:
:
:> According to 'Soldiers of the Sun' by Meirion and Susie Harries,
:> the Japanese lacked an overall moral compass as we understand it in
:> the West. While the vast majority of westerners view mass murder and
:> indiscriminate killing as innately bad/evil, the Japanese don't
:> (didn't?). Orders were seen as more important than anything
:> else.....this defense was used at the post-war war crimes trials.
:
:None of this is confined to the Japanese. The standard defense
 f the German War Criminals was 'I was only obeying orders'
:and the Soviets were hardly cuddly philanthropists.
:
Neither were we. Neither was the UK.
:
:There are few civilizations which held the view that mass killing
f the enemy was anything other than a good idea.
:
The only reason there weren't Brits and Americans in the docks at the
various war crimes trials is because we won.
:
:The irony about Japan was that in WW1 they treated their POW's
:very well indeed.
:
Only Western white POWs. They treated other Asians horribly.
--
You are
What you do
When it counts. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Keith Willshaw... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Frogwatch" <dbohara at (no spam) mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:cba7da85-f416-43ae-a6f0-47be1c5cacd0 at (no spam) a31g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
[quote]The irony about Japan was that in WW1 they treated their POW's
very well indeed. They built an entire mock German village for
the POW's they took at TsingTao. Guards there were punished
severely for being disrespectful to the in mates many of whom
opted to stay in Japan after the war. The atrocities of WW2
were a result of a positive campaign to brutalise the military
instigated by the military leadership in the 1920's
Keith
Gingritch implies that this brutal attitude developed in the mid to
late 30s and I have read this elsewhere. If true, this is weird that
a nations values could change seemingly overnight. After the war, did
they change again or are the Japanese still bloodthirsty racists
putting on a "HelloKitty" face?
[/quote]
The west bears a degree of responsibillty for the events in Japan
in the lates 1920's and 1930's. The government of Japan had
been a good ally throughout WW1 and they felt betrayed by the
terms of the post war agreement. As for racism the Japanese
wanted a declaration about racial equality to be included in
the treaty of Versailles. This was rejected by all the western nations.
Britain was forced to withdraw from its treaty with Japan in 1922
by American diplomatic and economic pressure and Japan was
specifically excluded from American markets and the passing
of the Japanese Exclusion Act by congress in 1924 reinforced the
sense of grievance amongst Japanese.
This was a racist law which halted "undesirable" immigration groups
with specific racial origins including Japan, China, the Philippines, Laos,
Siam , Cambodia, Singapore, Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Burma,
India, Ceylon (Sri Lanka) and Malaysia. Any existing immigrants of such
orgins being non-white were not eligible for naturalization.
The Taisho democracy came to an end in 1925 when the conservative right
managed to push through the Peace Preservation Law. The timing was
no accident.
Keith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
