Subarashii Sekai Superbly Seductive
The Wolf-Boy & The Girl in The Red Hood Sweetly Feral
Rory Mercury Cosplay Godly & Gothic
One Piece: Burning Blood Trailers Fiery Hot
Ero-Manga Sensei Anime Announced
What do native Okinawans (a.k.a. the Ryukyuans) think about the matter? All I know is that mainland Japanese want them out.
Sankaku Complex Forums » General
-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
Hmm...didn't intend for people to care about my post. :P
Sorry but I'm not going to read/reply to all of them, cause I just don't care enough. You're all welcome to your opinions.As a conciliation prize, I'll clarify some things.
I am not comparing America's crimes to crimes committed by other countries. When I say it's their worst crime, I mean only concerning US history, not world history. What I'm saying is, they lost the moral high ground.
I'm well aware that using the bombs saved a lot of lives that would've been lost to continued fighting. They had a warranted excuse to use it. Still...
Posted 5 years ago # -
Tachikomatic Days said:
"Before the United States entered the war against Japan in December 1941, Americans were already familiar with stories of Japanese atrocities in China. Reports of rape, looting,
bombing of civilian targets, and murder of surrendered Chinese soldiers and civilians by
Japanese soldiers were often featured in the popular press and helped to turn public
opinion against Japan.(Drea, 37)"Drea, Edward. "Research Japanese War Crimes". Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group. <http://www.archives.gov/iwg/japanese-war-crimes/introductory-essays.pdf>.
"Faced with the either-or logic of (giving up its Empire or war), Japan's leaders decided to go to war with the United States. (Recshauer, 262)."
"Secretary of State Cordell Hull, the dominant voice in shaping American Fast Eastern policy...submitted to the Japanese a ten-point program requiring the withdrawal of all Japanese armed forces from Indo-China and China. Behind this stand was a calmness and a sense of ampleness of time that ultimately rested on the belief that Japan would not dare to attack the United States. The Japanese took Hull's programs as a rejection. Possessed by the vision of an East Asia dominated by Japan and trapped in a timetable of their own making, they attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. (Reischauer, 263)"
It speaks volumes. The fact that you don't see what's wrong with your own logic. You've become so accustomed to your current Americanism, the current state in which you all view your role, you can't see what's right in front of you. The world does not revolve around the US. I'm looking at what you've posted, and almost all of it is supporting what I've been saying all along. You're looking at what you've posted and you're seeing it as a rebuttal.
K, it seems you're not aware, we are talking about the time period before WWII came to a close. When did the US become a super power? That's right, AFTER WWII concluded. Before then, you were not a super power, so you need to stop thinking as if you were. The world is not your play ground. What policy was the US following before WWII? I'll give you a clue, they had a single blemish in that policy before WWII, and they entirely threw it out of the window after.
Isolationism.
The US was diving into a business that was not it's own. The 10 point plan given to Japan to give up it's newly acquired empire is ridiculous. The US had no authority to do so. They were not the strongest nation in the world. They did not have the strongest military in the world. They had no say in what went on in the Pacific. As you pointed out, the US was trying to make Japan give up it's Empire. I'm seeing that as perfect proof that the US was the one that initiated the war with Japan, which, again, is our only point in this discussion, since the US was trying to set a policy for Japan. The US was interfering where it had no right to interfere. More to the point, it was interfering into a war. Wow, seriously, do you think that trying to force someone's hand the opposite way they want it to go during a war might involve you in a war? No shit Sherlock, of course it will.
Concerning this particular line, "Behind this stand was a calmness and a sense of ampleness of time that ultimately rested on the belief that Japan would not dare to attack the United States." I'm seeing it as typical US arrogance. It's exactly as I said earlier with the "I'm not touching you" thing. The US seriously expected to be able to get away with it and not get themselves involved? No matter how you look at it, that's short sightedness, ignorance and arrogance on the side of the US government. Whether they expected to be attacked or not, it does not change the fact that the actions of the US, not the actions of Japan, forced the US into the war. Furthermore, that quote only mentions the US didn't expect Japan to attack the US. It does not say anything about the US joining in the war themselves even if not attacked.
Now, concerning public opinion, even if the American public disliked Japanese policy and generally had a desire to see the Japanese lose their war, their desire wasn't strong enough to warrant entering the war. Why do I say this? Because they weren't in the war yet. After Pearl Harbour, the US entered the war. It seems to me that disliking a policy suddenly became a much higher priority. Before it was just something to talk about but not get involved with, but public opinion radically shifted after Pearl Harbour into one that said "Attack, attack, attack." Before Pearl Harbour the US public wasn't willing to give up the lives of their sons, after they were. You can quote any source on public opinion before and after Pearl Harbour, but the fact of the matter remains, the US was not involved directly in the war before Pearl Harbour, whereas they were after.
Now, about that "choice" given to Japan. You've got to kidding me. That's like giving the Nazi's, while they were entirely dominating and hadn't suffered a single defeat, a choice to give up their Empire or suffer a loss of oil. Oh wait, they did suffer a major loss of oil after they attacked their major supplier of oil, the USSR. How can anyone view that as a choice? I mean, look at the facts. You've got a Japan here that hasn't suffered a single major loss. They're absolutely dominating in East Asia. They're fighting against countries with populations much larger than their own, including China and the USSR. Yes, let's not forget that Japan was also fighting against the USSR in the North. (Random fact, Japan and the USSR never signed a peace treaty after WWII, so technically the war never ended. Now that the USSR no longer exists, it means that technically WWII never can end.) They're fighting against multiple countries at the same time, their soldiers are facing god knows how many opponent soldiers at once and they're still winning. They're getting a sense that they are a superior race compared to the rest. And you expect them to give that up? The reason I didn't talk about the "choice" give to them early is because I didn't think I need to. There was no choice. Their answer seems obvious. Again, whether the US was too ignorant and arrogant to realize this is none of our concern.
So, restating my singular point again, the US pushed themselves into a war they easily could have avoided. Whether they did so knowingly or not I can't attest to, yet that's irrelevant. Were they aware that they would be attacked? I don't know. I do know that their actions caused them to be attacked. They US had the choice, an actual choice unlike what was given to Japan, to stay out of the war. They chose not to. The blame for the US getting involved in WWII lies singularly with the US.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"They're getting a sense that they are a superior race compared to the rest. And you expect them to give that up?"
You just proved our point: the bombs had to be dropped.
It wasn't a nice thing to do, but it was the "best" way to finish it.
Posted 5 years ago # -
---- said:
That's a really scary statement.
I can imagine another country using that logic and doing the exact same thing to the US.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Yucchi said:
That's a really scary statement.
I can imagine another country using that logic and doing the exact same thing to the US.
Apart from America has a lot more bombs.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Archer112 said:
Apart from America has a lot more bombs.
That may change, apparently China create missiles with better precision and penetrable than the US..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100805/ap_on_re_as/as_china_us_carrier_killer
Posted 5 years ago # -
RawrFear said:
K, it seems you're not aware, we are talking about the time period before WWII came to a close. When did the US become a super power? That's right, AFTER WWII concluded. Before then, you were not a super power...
During the pre-war (let's say mid '30) I'd say US military was in the same tier as, let's say, argentina and Brazil.
But don't forget at that time US was still #1 in industrial output. USSR was close 2nd (Stalin's breakneck industrialization projects), Germany & Japan 3rd, and British + commonwealth and its antique cottage industry in distant 4th.
Posted 5 years ago # -
GTR said:
During the pre-war (let's say mid '30) I'd say US military was in the same tier as, let's say, argentina and Brazil.
But don't forget at that time US was still #1 in industrial output. USSR was close 2nd (Stalin's breakneck industrialization projects), Germany & Japan 3rd, and British + commonwealth and its antique cottage industry in distant 4th)
But we invented industry.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Archer112 said:
But we invented industry.
and it failed to catch up and was out innovated by US and germany.
Japan in Taisho and early showa era were great copycats.
USSR on the other hand focused more on large scale industrial projects and not consumer goods.
Posted 5 years ago # -
GTR said:
and it failed to catch up and was out innovated by US and germany.
Japan in Taisho and early showa era were great copycats.
USSR on the other hand focused more on large scale industrial projects and not consumer goods.
We also invented the first useful guns and the TV.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Archer112 said:
We also invented the first useful guns and the TV.
And again, had them made better by other countries.
Posted 5 years ago # -
indekkusutaku said:
And again, had them made better by other countries.
Did I mention we also invented the radio and were the first country to use electricity for telecommunications.
Posted 5 years ago # -
LuciferOniichan said:
That may change, apparently China create missiles with better precision and penetrable than the US..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100805/ap_on_re_as/as_china_us_carrier_killer
China already has the world's largest standing army, and has just overtaken Japan as the 2nd largest economy in the world(although Japan's standard of living is still greater). Economist predict that in 15-30 years, China would reach up or surpass the overall GDP of US. Let's not forget that superpowers have their lifespan, just as the British empire did.
Posted 5 years ago # -
here's the US Navy's answer...
Posted 5 years ago # -
You guys know that no one's going to bomb anyone. There are treaties in place to ensure that.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Reizo said:
You guys know that no one's going to bomb anyone. There are treaties in place to ensure that.Treaties don't mean shit if theres enough greed or your pissed off enough.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The train was an English invention too.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Kei-chan1 said:
Treaties don't mean shit if theres enough greed or your pissed off enough.
To some countries treaties are toilet paper :P
Posted 5 years ago # -
All the inventions you keep bringing up were made better by other counties, I'm not saying Britain is bad it's just no longer the head of the world, it's not even close.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.