Hiroshima debate?

Isn't this a revisionist thing?

The debate about apologizing to the Aborigines in Australia has been going on for a long time. Despite the PM's refusal to apologize, schools in Oz no longer teach a history that glosses over or ignores the worst parts of our history (Terra Nullus, genocide, Stolen generation, etc)

Personally, I am not convinced (yet) by the value of political apologies - I think the real value comes from acknowledging that your history exists and educating your people about what really happened. From that, you are more likely to build a collective will to not allow these kinds of atrocities from occurring again and take action to make some restitution to the people effected. (provided of course the will of the govt is behind it)

If the Japanese govt apologizes but refuses to accurately reflect its own history, then I think the apology may have well been made in the woods with no one else around. But if this is the first step to addressing the inaccuracies in their own past, and learning from it - then maybe, just maybe, this is a step in the right direction.

Now, here's a question - has German philosophy and culture advanced because of their acknowledgement of their modern history (both good and bad)? If so, has Japanese culture been stunted as a result of its own refusal to do so? - this might deserve to be topic on its own(?)
 
It amuses me that NO one is asking the Italians to apologise for what there armies did all over Europe. They enslaved many a nation and even fed them to lions.
 
LeEnfield said:
It amuses me that NO one is asking the Italians to apologise for what there armies did all over Europe. They enslaved many a nation and even fed them to lions.
Click to expand...



:lol: hehehehehehhe, yes they deserve a couple nukes. Just kidding.
 
LeEnfield said:
It amuses me that NO one is asking the Italians to apologise for what there armies did all over Europe. They enslaved many a nation and even fed them to lions.
Click to expand...

lol - but wasn't that just for entertainment!
 
It's mind boggling how many diplomatic headaches Japan could alleviate by just fessing up to their warcrimes and pointedly teaching their children that "we did some terrible things", etc.
 
Could I ask a question? If the Japanese didn't surrender by the invasion date, what would make it imperative to invade?

I've seen several reasons, and none seem very convincing.
 
What do you think you are going to do, just sit there and wait for them to build even more fortifications, if there forces do not surrender then they have more time to attack you again. Just sitting there waiting for them to make up their minds is not an option.
 
There were battles going on as the bombs dropped and after and would have gone on for years. Japanese submarines were active until told to surrender by the Emperor. Japan was, as far as the military was concerned, still at war and would not have surrendered nor would the fighting have ended.
 
LeEnfield said..............

"just sit there and wait for them to build even more fortifications"


I dont think Maj. Gen. Curtis LeMay or the men of the Twentieth Air Force would say they were just sitting there and doing nothing.

They were very busy devastating Japan.

Monthly tonnage dropped on Japan had increased from 13,800 tons in March to 42,700 tons in July, and was planned to have continued to increase to around 115,000 tons per month.

Within 10 days, of the fire bombing, LeMay wiped out 32 square miles of Japanese cities, dozens of industrial targets and hundreds of feeder plants.

Admiral Nimitz ordered Lemay to drop thousands of mines which virtually shut down all shipping. The mine laying left the Japanese in chaos, as the results were so effective Japan was actually starving.

Fuel was critically low.

The country was on the verge of collapse.

Total casualties on the American side, in the whole of the bombing raids, 576 fliers killed and 2400 missing in action.

The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, after interviewing hundreds of Japanese civilian and military leaders after Japan surrendered, reported:

"Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."
 
Ashes...... if that was so. then why did they not surrender after the first Atom bomb had been dropped. After the second one had been dropped and the Emperor had decided to sue for peace, there where moves afoot to depose the Emperor by the Officer Class so that they could keep the war going. Japan may have been on their knees but but here was still a lot of fight left in them. Had the invasion gone ahead then we would have been fighting every man, woman and child in Japan and it could have turned into one of the bloodiest battles ever seen
 
I know that the World and all enemy forces would have hated to see Women and children armed with sharpened bamboo poles mowed down with machine gun fire and napalm.
 
Missileer said:
I know that the World and all enemy forces would have hated to see Women and children armed with sharpened bamboo poles mowed down with machine gun fire and napalm.
Click to expand...

That´s too harsh.
 
I agree wholeheartedly but that was to be the "last resort" for Japan if the allies had invaded. They practiced everyday.
 
Missileer said:
I agree wholeheartedly but that was to be the "last resort" for Japan if the allies had invaded. They practiced everyday.
Click to expand...

Really? They were practicing that kinda stuff? Could you give a link to read a bit about it...
 
Corocotta said:
Really? They were practicing that kinda stuff? Could you give a link to read a bit about it...
Click to expand...

I was looking for the book written by a 13 year old Japanese girl about how the people were drilled every day with sharpened bamboo spears for a suicide stand. I think she was on Nagasaki when the bomb hit. I'll look for it on the web. It is the best eyewittness account I read.

http://killeenroos.com/5/bomb/bombjap.htm

In the spring of 1945, civilians were given instructions on how to kill American soldiers if they invaded. Stab them in the stomach with bamboo spears, people were told. Use kitchen knives, or whatever weapons are at hand. Women tied up their kimono sleeves with thin sashes and
practiced skewering straw dummies with bamboo spears. "Savage Americans!" they were told to shout as they did so.

On every block, households were told to step up activities through their "tonarigumi," or neighborhood associations, practicing civil defense and keeping watch for any disloyal activities. Everyone had to wear military-style name tags sewn to the chest of their blouse or kimono. In June, the government ordered the mobilization of all Japanese men under age 60 as "volunteers." Their weapons: spears, bows and arrows, iron pipes. Cabinet ministers who reviewed the "troops" were reportedly shocked by their primitive equipment.

http://www.chicagoboyz.net/archives/003395.html

This section, on Japan's defensive preparations, was an eye-opener, even for me, and I have been reading about this stuff all my life.

About 20 years ago I saw a film taken by an American recon aircraft, flying low over Japan and gathering intel to help in planning the coming invasion. The body of an Allied prisoner was staked out in a school courtyard while the kids practiced with bamboo spears.

Nothing surprises me since then.

James

Posted by: James R. Rummel on August 10, 2005 11:06 PM Permalink
 
Missiler.....It would appear that Corocotta does not believe a word we say, he can't go back in time to see for him self so he appears just to ignore it and carry on his way just believing in what he wants to
 
LeEnfield said:
Missiler.....It would appear that Corocotta does not believe a word we say, he can't go back in time to see for him self so he appears just to ignore it and carry on his way just believing in what he wants to
Click to expand...

Nothing farther from reality. Actually I was quite susprised with the info Missileer shared with me, that´s why I asked for a link to read it my self. This is what a forum is all about. By the way, from my point of view is understable that japanesse wanted to fight to dead an invasion of their country, there are plenty of examples in history of this kind of behavior. But anyway, it would have been terrible to kill disarmed kids and women...so I am happy that finally it did not happen.

Thanks for the link Missiler.
 
Corocotta said:
LeEnfield said:
Missiler.....It would appear that Corocotta does not believe a word we say, he can't go back in time to see for him self so he appears just to ignore it and carry on his way just believing in what he wants to
Click to expand...

Nothing farther from reality. Actually I was quite susprised with the info Missileer shared with me, that´s why I asked for a link to read it my self. This is what a forum is all about. By the way, from my point of view is understable that japanesse wanted to fight to dead an invasion of their country, there are plenty of examples in history of this kind of behavior. But anyway, it would have been terrible to kill disarmed kids and women...so I am happy that finally it did not happen.

Thanks for the link Missiler.
Click to expand...

There are a few titled "thank God for the Bomb" which is misleading because the idea expressed was that it was good that ten million civilions did not have to die.
 
LeEnfield said.....

"Had the invasion gone ahead then we would have been fighting every man, woman and child in Japan and it could have turned into one of the bloodiest battles ever seen"

Thats correct.......
So back to my question again.

Why was it imperitive to invade sooner rather then later, and risk that fighting?

The country was on the verge of mass starvation and the infrastructure to wage war was rapidly collapsing, a few more months of 115,000 tons of bombs a month, and the country would hardly have the strength to defend itself.

It woulden't matter how much how many wanted to fight if they were so malnurished they could hardly stand up.

When General Hap Arnold came to the Marianas he told the men of the Twentieth Air Force [perhaps being slightly optomistic ] that a continuation of their operations would enable U.S. Army infantrymen to walk ashore in Japan with their rifles slung.

Even if thats an exaggeration, it would have been much easier going in later instead of earlier.

Perhaps there's a compelling reason out there, but I haven't seen it yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top