Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dean ...
- the emperor keeps his status and could not be tried for war crimes.
The last one was the stickler. The Americans, who did not understand the Japanese government, were convinced that the emperor was responisble for the war. He was not, but the Japanese did not even want him tried. As it was, he was (if memory serves) investigated and quickly cleared, and that was a great relief to the Japanese. ...
Dean. |
To say that the Emperor was completely without guilt for war crimes and for starting the war to begin with ... this is a difficult case to make. Technically, his consent and unspoken support was a requirement. Having said that, it should be understood that the Emperor wasn't likely to have been given a choice. Much like the King/Queen of England, he was a monarch with very little real power.
There is substantial historical evidence that would appear to link Emperor Hirohito to the Comfort Women attrocities (some sources show that he signed off on this proposed policy of forced sexual slavery.) His consent can also be demonstrated for several other warcrimes. Naturally, since Japan doesn't acknowledge that they ever committed any warcrimes, this becomes a murky matter. The primary reason that the Emperor WAS cleared was for the benefit of the Japanese people ... because the Allies knew that they'd go balistic if the Emperor HAD been convicted of warcrimes.