Atrocities Argument Carried From Another Thread...

[BTs_GhostSniper]

  How about how the Nazis are shown to be the pure evil of WWII, yet the Japanese were far worse when it came to rape, murder, torture, and genocide?  But nobody ever talks about the Japanese. [/size]

I'd like to hear how you can justify saying that the abuses by the Japanese were worse than those by the Nazis.

During the German invasion of the Soviet Union, behind each of the 3 Army Groups were Einsatzgruppen Squads from the SS. The things the Einsatzgruppen did to people would make a death Austwitz/Birkeneau sound like a relief. The Einsatzgruppen killed well over a million Jews, and tens of thousands of Soviet Political "enemies".

Everyone understands how nasty concentration camps, death marches ( late in the war ), and the various other means of extermination were, but some people fail to realize just what happened in Soviet Russia.

Nothing that the Japanese did was that bad, or at least not on nearly as big of a scale.

Okay, history lesson time.

The Japanese committed greater atrocities against the Chinese before and during World War II then the Nazis did to ALL OF EUROPE.  During the winter period of December 1937 to February 1938 alone, at Nanjing, China, the Japanese army massacred over 300,000 civilians and POWs, and raped at least 20,000 women.  It is believed that over 30 MILLION people were murdered by the ruthless Japanese in China and other Asian countries that Japan invaded.  Nazi Germany was a joke compared to the Japanese.  Nazi Germany actually ranks around 4th or 5th in the History of Genocide and Mass Murder.  Joseph Stalin murdered 20 MILLION of his own people!  Of course that does not lessen what the Nazis did, but I'm just saying that the Japanese were far worse, and they have yet to really be held accountable for their crimes against humanity.  The War Crimes trials in Japan after World War II were a joke.  And today, Japan continues to cover up the truth.  It just sickens me.

Here are some good web sites to visit on the subject (warning, there are some graphic pictures of Japanese atrocities at these sites):

http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/

http://www.kimsoft.com/kr-japan.htm

http://vikingphoenix.com/public/JapanIncorporated/1895-1945/jpwcrmz.htm

http://ideaworx.com/slatewiper/slatelinks.htm

[Mr.Mellow]

Not to mention germ warfare and such, and all sorts of nasty experiments they did on humans. We let them off easy because, you know, we did drop two atomic bombs on them.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Not to mention germ warfare and such, and all sorts of nasty experiments they did on humans. We let them off easy because, you know, we did drop two atomic bombs on them.

That's another one that I find kinda funny.  The two atomic bombs.  Do you know that we did far more damage and killed far more people in some of the bomb raids in Germany and other parts of Japan than the two atomic bombs did combined?  That's right.  One in particular, a low-level incendiary attack against Tokyo 5 months before the atomic bombs were dropped pretty much leveled that city and killed more than 100,000 people...in a single night!

But, back to the topic at hand...Yes, the Japanese were very much as sick as the Nazis when it came to doing horrible experiments on humans.

[BTs-FahQ2]

Heh, GS is right about the Japanese (please avoid racial slurs) -Lone and their war crimes.  As some of you know I work at a mainly chinese corporation and when you speak of japanese, they actually wince.  It is from continued disdain for what occured during the war.

The reason we let them off so easily was the whole Russia factor.  We figured that if we let Japan stay in it's current ruined state, they were prime picking for Russia.  It was pre domino theory at it's finest.  We knew the communist were gaining hold in china (which we supported), so if it fell (which it did) we could continue to have a foothold and an ally in asia with japan (which worked out).  There is also cultural reasons why we rebuilt japan differently then we did europe which allowed them to skip some of the war crimes.  Basically the will of the people was still pretty much with the emporer and it's leaders.  Part of the whole shinto thing.  Basically we counldn't let the emporer lose face or it would of been just death death death for everyone, with or without nuclear bombs. 

ty for your cooperation

[bronto]

didn't the japanese used to practice bayonetting on live chinese people?

[Mr.Mellow]

Can't forget the fire-bombing of Dresden! Nothing like inextinguishable fires burning up German civilians to teach those Nazis a lesson. The fact is, just about every country in the war did some pretty horrible things (some more than others obviously). Let's just all agree that the leaders in Germany and Japan ordering the crimes were sick, twisted individuals. Debating who was worse just makes the other seem less evil, and we can't have that! 

[Typhy]

You're right. I was thinking of the period from 1939 to 1945, in which I still believe that the nazi atrocities were far wose. Most of what the Japanese did ( particularly in China ), was prior to '39.

I hear people talk about how horrible using atomic bombs on Japan was. Fact is, we saved civilian lives by doing that. Bombing campaings, followed by an invasion of mainland Japan would've resulted in far more Japanese casualties.

Just a note, it is estimated that MORE civilians were raped following the Russian assault on Berlin.

Nazi Germany was a joke compared to the Japanese

I sure wouldn't go that far. 12-14 million people were killed in the Holocaust ( and that number does NOT include Soviet POWs murdered by the Germans and Austwitz in 1944 ).

China was the "Russia of the Pacific Theater". Yes, the Japanese did murder more civilians there than the Germand did, but the numbers are comparable. If you exclude China and Russia, the Nazis murdered far more people in Europe than the Japanese did in Asia.

["Sixhits"]

My girlfriend is Korean and two of my best pals are Korean as well. One of them told me, and this is hersay but appropriate to the topic, that Korea tore down all buildings built by the Japanese after the war. The Japanese did some monsterous things to Korea and the very presence of their constructions were that offensive.

Moving on...

But I think there are two reasons why the Nazi's have been ranked higher on the scales off evil, at least in the west. One is because we as a people can relate to them: there but for the grace of god go us. They were white, "civilized", modern, a democracy (Hitler was elected and moved to consolidate power after being so), had a cultural and religious out look similar to our own and yet they systematically and industrially murdered millions of their own citizens and those of their neighbors and started the worst war in modern memory. The second reason has to do with the first: the Nazi's industrialized, if you will, "mechanized" murder. The horror of being raped, being bayoneted, being bombed... somehow the concept of being forced into a camp where you know that you and those around you will be murdered, en mass, one-two-three like an assembly line of death... that horror hits harder than any other most of us can imagine. Because who could ever imagine it, let alone do it?

As for nukes v conventional bombing. We did both. Sure, our motives were different in doing so but let's be clear: we too have the albatros of having stood by while our fellows murdered innoncents. We rationalize those killings because we have to, otherwise we cannot live with the memory. But we should always remember that death is death and blood does not wash from our hands just because our greater purpose was noble.

[*DAMN Elandrion]

is it really important who exactly murdered the most people? Be it Hitler, Stalin, the japanese, Pol Pot or any other mass murderer: we can all agree that their feats were horrible, and should not be allowed to be repeated. We don't to compare highscores.

[Toxic::Joka]

And today, Japan continues to cover up the truth.  It just sickens me.

Care to enlighten more on this? In what way do they "cover up the truth"?
Thx.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

And today, Japan continues to cover up the truth.  It just sickens me.

Care to enlighten more on this? In what way do they "cover up the truth"?
Thx.

They refuse to acknowledge or apologize for many of their war crimes against China and other countries before and during WWII.  Hell, they practically say the Rape of Nanjing never even happened.  And this goes all the way down to their normal everyday civilian populace.  Also, military officials who try to speak out on what happened in the past get punished for doing so.  I'd call that covering up the truth.

[*DAMN Bondo]

I hear people talk about how horrible using atomic bombs on Japan was. Fact is, we saved civilian lives by doing that. Bombing campaings, followed by an invasion of mainland Japan would've resulted in far more Japanese casualties.

Not really. It is guessed that the Japanese, due to our blockade, would not have been able to keep the war up many more months and that a land invasion wouldn't be necessary. The atomic bomb use was as much a display of power to the Soviets as a way of ending the war against the Japanese. I think Americans come up with a lot of excuses to ease their conscience of having the two single greatest acts of terrorism in the history of the world on their hands.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

I hear people talk about how horrible using atomic bombs on Japan was. Fact is, we saved civilian lives by doing that. Bombing campaings, followed by an invasion of mainland Japan would've resulted in far more Japanese casualties.

Not really. It is guessed that the Japanese, due to our blockade, would not have been able to keep the war up many more months and that a land invasion wouldn't be necessary. The atomic bomb use was as much a display of power to the Soviets as a way of ending the war against the Japanese. I think Americans come up with a lot of excuses to ease their conscience of having the two single greatest acts of terrorism in the history of the world on their hands.

What Bondo just said is Revisionist History at its finest.  Congratulations, you get the Revisionist Historian of the Day Award.  Where shall I mail your box of shit to?

[Mr.Mellow]

Actually, Revisionist History tells us that we couldn't have won the war against the Japanese without the use of atomic weapons. k thnx bye

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Actually, Revisionist History tells us that we couldn't have won the war against the Japanese without the use of atomic weapons. k thnx bye

Another History Lesson for you Rivisionists...

If we had not used the Atomic Bombs, Japan would not have surrendered.  Period.

It would have taken an invasion of the Japanese home islands to have ended World War II.  Period.

Millions of people would have died in that scenario.  Period.

Anything else is garbage.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

[spike]

That's a pretty definitive statement. I have to say, I distrust it deeply, I don't care about your BA in history, I just can't handle such definitive statements from a car salesman, or from anyone from that matter. How do you really know? You certainly weren't alive then.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

That's a pretty definitive statement. I have to say, I distrust it deeply, I don't care about your BA in history, I just can't handle such definitive statements from a car salesman, or from anyone from that matter. How do you really know? You certainly weren't alive then.

No, I wasn't alive then.  Neither were most of the people writing the shit they do today trying to revise the history of WWII.  But most of my family fought in World War II.  From one grandfather who was a fighter pilot in the MTO, to my other grandfather who was a Marine in the Pacific, to great uncles who fought in every theatre of the war.  I got much of my knowledge of World War II from the people who know the most about it...the people who fought in it.  In addition to first-hand accounts, I have studied thousands of government documents and done research on so many facets of WWII and I know the truth (the emphasis of my degree was on World War II, by the way).  And now, 60 years later, everyone wants to rewrite history.  Sorry, you'll get no mercy from me when it comes to revising history.  I'll call you out every time.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

["Sixhits"]

I hate it when Ghost is right, but he is. We can slice and dice it, but without those overwhelming displays of certain doom for all the Japanese before the eyes of the Emperor, coupled with a sudden bout of sympathy for his people, Japan wouldn't have surrendered. Remember, people were so fucked up over having surrender that hundreds, if not thousands took their own lives rather than live with the shame.

It's also true that the nukes were a demonstration for Stalin. "Hey big S, have a look at our new toys." The effect on the Russians was part of the equation, but the fact that Truman, and Ghost could likely correct me on this, was told that the battle for Japan would cost upwards of a million American lives and potentially the civilian population of Japan... that and the US homefront was sorta of the opinion that the War was over, what with Hitler dead and Germany defeated...

And I've never had any sympathy for appoligists who say we were wrong for nukinng them. In the context of the greater good what we did was right. Was it moral? No. but it was better than the alternatives.

On a related note, a buddy of mine recently finished two years teaching English in Japan to kindergarteners. Interestingly, they never talk about the war unless to rage against American brutality. Ain't that the pot calling the kettle black?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

It's also true that the nukes were a demonstration for Stalin. "Hey big S, have a look at our new toys." The effect on the Russians was part of the equation, but the fact that Truman, and Ghost could likely correct me on this, was told that the battle for Japan would cost upwards of a million American lives and potentially the civilian population of Japan... that and the US homefront was sorta of the opinion that the War was over, what with Hitler dead and Germany defeated...

That's very true.

[*DAMN Bondo]

GS, distance and perspective can be very helpful in history, you should know that. My distance having not lived through the red scare lets me analyze the cold war without the emotional fear that Americans were indocrinated with. My distance allows me to see that the objective history shows that the Soviets really showed very little aggressive threat to the US as the US drummed it up to be. The US was the aggressor in the Cold War, that is historically inarguable. The Soviets sent money and aid to countries in support of politics they liked...so did the Americans. The Soviets did not send troops outside their immediate vicinity to fight any real action. The Americans were all over the place. The Soviets were from day one within range of American nuclear weaponry...we had nukes in Europe, in Turkey, etc. Yet they only got nukes near us in what led to the Cuban Missle Crisis. We were creating a threat to them and they were reacting, it wasn't us reacting to a threat. This isn't historical revisionism, it is just historical objectivism.

It is not revision to say Japan would have folded from the embargo...it is unknown. You cannot say they would have or that they wouldn't have. We can't know what would have happened had we not dropped the bombs. However, to say what we did is the only way is highly unlikely. We could have dropped the bomb on a non-populated region as a show of force...or a less-populated region, the choice of target was unnecessarily immoral.