|
Posts:
888
From:
South Texas, where the snow never falls.
Registered:
1/12/09
|
|
(31 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Jul 9, 2009 6:21 PM
|
> > Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany
> condemned?
> >
> > Japan did not systematically march 6 million
> men
> > women and children into gas chambers in order
> to
> > exterminate them.
>
> On the other hand the Japanese experimented with
> biological weapons on innocent civilians and murdered
> quite a few. Possibly more than the Nazis just not
> in the same manor. The question is is the basic
> premise of this thread correct? Was Japan absolved?
On the other hand you may care to think this one over.
"Possibly more than the Nazis just not
> in the same manor"
And you best hurry. My posts don't last long among the collection of threatened kids in here.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,803
Registered:
10/30/07
|
|
(32 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Jul 10, 2009 6:10 AM
|
> On the other hand you may care to think this one
> over.
Why
> And you best hurry. My posts don't last long among
> the collection of threatened kids in here.
Maybe if there was some relevant content....
|
|
|
Posts:
6,921
From:
Billings MT.
Registered:
2/11/03
|
|
(33 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Jul 10, 2009 7:10 AM
|
This portion is a misconception:
Personally I find it appaling that the USA did not prosecute Japan's crimes. Especially the activities of Unit 731, Imperial Japan's bio and chem warfare research unit, which tested bio and chemical weapons on civillians and POWs. An also performed things like vivisection while the human subject was alive, and the Rape of Nanjing of course.
There were a number of war crimes trials held in the Far East, and NOT just the one at Tokyo. There were some at Shanghai, at Nanking, at Honk Kong, and in Burma as well. But they don't now, and didn’t then get the press the Nazis did.
In the case of those the US "excused" (the emperor and the leading 731 men) it was simply more expedient to keep Hirohito in a subservient position to MacArthur, and have him renounce his "diety standing". In the case of the chemical/bio-weapons men, we knew full well that the Soviets had captured not only those left in Manchuria, but the labs as well. We didn't want to fall too far behind the "new enemy" we could see developing on the horizon. Especially in this field, which might very easily counter our slight edge with the "atomics".
Not a particularily "alturist", or honorable approach, but practicle in the time-frame. There were however (I believe) many more Japanese executed post-war for criminal behavior than there were Nazis. "Hollywood" however didn't make a blockbuster movie about those trials though.
Simply because the trials went on and on and America itself had lost interest in Japan by the time they were done. The fact that the many, many trials are not well known, doesn't mean they didn't happen.
See:
http://worldwar2database.com/html/warcrimes.htm
wherein one will find; "...The men put on trial in 1947 and 1948 were the first of 20,000 (Japanese) civilian and military former leaders who had either killed prisoners or had participated in the vague crime of instigating the war. While many would endure prison sentences of varying lengths, 900 were executed in trials around Asia." (this was about the same time-frame in which Stalin was closing off Berlin; remember? A new threat rather than an old one!)
Then goto:
http://www.naa.gov.au/fsheets/FS61.html
"Between 30 November 1945 and 9 April 1951, 924 enemy nationals were tried for war crimes in 296 trials conducted by Australian military courts. The enabling legislation – the War Crimes Act 1945 – was passed by both houses of the Australian parliament on the same day (4 October 1945). Of those found guilty by these trials, 148 were sentenced to death and executed. An additional 496 were given prison sentences. Trials were conducted in eight venues – Labuan, Wewak, Morotai, Rabaul, Darwin, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Manus Island."
Then:
http://cnd.org/njmassacre/nj.html
Where one will find that; "War crime trials were held at ten different locations in China." The fact we in the west don't, or didn't notice those trials is irrelevant, claiming they didn’t happen is ludicrous.
and don't forget to goto:
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/WCC/warcrimfe.htm#HIGHER
Then let us not forget that the first "war crimes" trial in the Far East was held by the US on Guam, before the war was even concluded. Consequently, I myself have found that NOT counting he various trials in various countries of the Far East, the Tokyo the International Military Tribunal for the Far East alone, lasted longer, produced more testimony, was heard by more judges from more nations, and convicted more men than the Nuremberg Trials of the Nazis. They just did not make a big time movie starring the likes of Spencer Tracy, Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift, Richard Widmark, Maximillian Schell, Marlene Dietrich, and Judy Garland about it. Then the names were "odd" sounding, and certainly could not hold the interest of the "west". And let's not forget the very first U.S. trials of B- and C-class war criminals in the Pacific began on Guam even before the end of World War II in February of 1945.
Asian countries themselves convicted far more Japanese criminals, estimated at five thousand, executing as many as 980 and sentencing more than half to life in prison, than the "official" Tokyo Trials. As they had done in Germany, the Allies set up three broad categories for the Tokyo trials. "Class A" charges alleging "crimes against peace" were to be brought against Japan's top leaders who had planned and directed the war. Class B and C charges, which could be leveled at Japanese of any rank, covered "conventional war crimes" and "crimes against humanity," respectively. More than 2,200 trial courts combined, tried about 20,000 civilian and military leaders who had either killed prisoners or had participated in the vague crime of instigating the war in various locations. These included all three "Classes" of the charges. In Nanjing China, four captured Japanese Army officers, including Tani Hisao, a lieutenant-general who personally participated in acts of murder and rape were tried for crimes relating to the Nanjing massacre. All four are sentenced to death and executed.
The British also held "independent" trials in the Far East, the first British trial of War Criminals occurred in Singapore in late January 1946. ALFSEA (Allied Land Forces, South East Asia) estimated that up to 3,200 could be brought to trial in the end, but only about 1,000 were actually tried. The British carried out war crimes trials of Japanese nationals in a total of twenty cities in five regions, namely Singapore, Malaya, North Borneo, Burma, and Hong Kong. In Malaya, North Borneo, and Burma, the trials dealt with those accused of war crimes that were committed in those areas. Since cases related to POWs were also tried in Singapore and Hong Kong, these trials dealt with crimes in various areas including Japan, mainland China, Taiwan, and on the high seas. At the conclusion of the British Trials, 280 were sentenced to death, 53 to life imprisonment, and 477 to various prison terms by those trials alone.
In Tokyo the International Military Tribunal for the Far East convicted over 4,000 Japanese officials and military personnel. Of the 28 "class-A" defendants brought to trial only two, Matsui and Hirota Koki (the Japanese foreign minister at the time of the Rape of Nanjing), are convicted for the Nanjing atrocities. Both are sentenced to death and executed. Two (Yosuke Matsuoka and Osami Nagano) of the twenty-eight defendants died of natural causes during the trial. One defendant (Shumei Okawa) had a mental breakdown on the first day of trial, was sent to a psychiatric ward and was released in 1948 a free man (miraculous recovery!). The remaining twenty-five (25) were all found guilty, many of multiple counts. Seven (7) were sentenced to death by hanging, sixteen (16) to life imprisonment, and two (2) to lesser terms. All seven sentenced to death were found to be guilty of inciting or otherwise implicated in mass-scale atrocities, among other counts. Three of the sixteen sentenced to life imprisonment died between 1949 and 1950 in prison.
Thirty of the members of Unit 731 were brought to trial by an Allied War Crimes Tribunal in Yokohama, Japan, on March 11, 1948 (contrary to the belief of some). Charges included vivisection and wrongful removal of body parts; 23 were found guilty of various charges. Five of the guilty were sentenced to death. The "top man", Shiro Ishii, a physician and army officer surrendered to the Americans, and was never brought to trial. While it is deplorable that he "got away with it", in the geo-political climate of the moment it is understandable. The US knew that a number of his associates had fled to Soviet occupied Manchuria, twenty-eight (I think) and we did NOT know what was going on there. Afraid of the Soviets gaining control of Biological and Chemical Weapons knowledge the Japanese had discovered and perfected, America granted immunity to Ishii (and a few others) in exchange for his aid in developing our own versions. Those who fled to the Soviet were tried and executed, but we did not know that at the time.
Oh, and let's not forget the trials in the Philippines which convicted and excecuted Yamashita and a couple of his contemporaries (I think) before the Tokyo Trials began. The Emperor and his family were "given a pass" of sorts, in that the control of Japan was necessary and he made that possible. His loss of diety-status was shocking to the Japanese general populace. The upper echelon of Unit 731 was "spared" so as to make sure the new enemy (USSR) didn't get a head-start on bio and chemical warfare over the US. They had over-run the labratories, captured the documents, and many of the workers in the labs. Not an "altruistic" position, but surely pragmatic at the time.
--
Happy Trails,
Clint
|
|
|
Posts:
2,904
Registered:
9/11/08
|
|
(34 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Jul 21, 2009 9:38 PM
|
|
Germany cause all the problems and Japan was just following their ally.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,803
Registered:
10/30/07
|
|
(35 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Jul 22, 2009 6:01 AM
|
> Germany cause all the problems and Japan was just
> following their ally.
Not really. Consider Japan attacked China well in advance of Germany's attack on Poland.
|
|
|
Posts:
3
From:
north mariana islands
Registered:
5/21/06
|
|
(36 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Aug 5, 2009 3:18 PM
|
During a ceremony of the 60th anniversary of the U.S. nuclear bombing mission held on Tinian to remember the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima (a solemn occasion), an old sailor assigned to the USS Arizona, and a survivor of its sinking, told me that the two atomic weapons America deployed on these Japanese cities were equipped with detonators manufactured in Germany.
The detonators were intended for delivery by German submarine from Germany to Japan for use against America however, at the time of the submarine's voyage Germany unconditionally surrendered and the German submarine altered course and submitted it's surrender to us off our east coast.
Along with the cargo, the German u-boat had on board several Japanese diplomats which committed suicide rather than surrender themselves to their enemy.
America did not have atomic detonators ready to use so these German built detonators were put to use. As for their destination Japan, they completed their intended course by way of U.S. AAF B-29 Superfortresses
|
|
|
Posts:
1,803
Registered:
10/30/07
|
|
(37 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Aug 13, 2009 11:22 AM
|
|
I've heard variation on this before. I don't find them very plausible.
|
|
|
Posts:
14
From:
Texas
Registered:
2/11/09
|
|
(38 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Aug 15, 2009 6:54 AM
|
Not sure that's true.
Some Japanese generals were tried for war crimes and executed. The commander who planned Pearl Harbor had already been shot down and killed. Their government was revamped and the country was occupied for some years.
The US was afraid that removing the Emperor would keep the Japanese from surrendering, even after being bombed. Remember, at that time, most of the people still considered him divine.
The war in Europe got a lot more publicity in movies and such, but German-Americans weren't put into camps. Impossible, as they're our largest ethnicity. (Maybe it was just easier to put our actors into the roles of Germans.)
Don't know how old you are, but judging from my parents' generation and regardless of "official" attitudes, the US people seemed to have more lingering bad feelings for Japan than Germany, possibly because of Pearl Harbor, possibly because the Japanese culture was more foreign.
I can't speak to the issue of forgiving Japanese reparations. Not sure about what the Germans paid, either. I know none of the Allies ever paid us and that of all the countries who borrowed, only the Icelanders repaid their debt.
I recall studying how the oppressive reparations demanded by France from Germany after WW I contributed to the extreme Depression in Germany and helped Hitler's rise to power. That seemed to influence the way the US approached the repayment of monies owed after WW II.
There was one other interesting difference: The Germans seem to have had their guilt stuffed down their throats while even today, the Japanese deny any of their atrocities. They're not included in textbooks, not mentioned anywhere at all.
I read that the women forced into prostitution for the Japanese soldiers only recently received reparations and that one Japanese author who was brave enough to write a book on Japanese atrocities in China and in POW camps was soundly pilloried.
And of course, there are the Swiss banks who seem to have been more in bed with Nazis than previously realized, and which still refuse to disperse funds to Holocaust survivors which were deposited there by parents and other relatives, the banks demanding death certificates and wills and other official documents (which the Nazis obviously didn't provide). Museums and collectors around the world are still holding art looted from Jews and other victims of the Nazis.
For their part, the Russians looted German museums, among other things. They just recently admitted ... after years of denial ... that they have the Trojan artifacts and jewels unearthed by Heinrich Schleimann.
The US Cavalry breeding farm took the world famous Arabian stud from the acclaimed Polish stud farm.
Some Generals had Mercedes, silver and such shipped home.
A pair of lower level officers dug us and stole some of the Habsburg jewels while their home was comandeered for an army headquarters.
A few years back in a small Texas town, some ancient and irreplacable religious objects from a church were discoverd in a safe deposit box when the owner died. He had looted them during the war and hidden them all these years.
His relatives tried to have them appraised to sell them and got caught.
So is it spoils of war or plain old stealing?
|
|
|
Posts:
14
From:
Texas
Registered:
2/11/09
|
|
(39 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Aug 15, 2009 7:40 AM
|
Japan invaded China and committed many atrocities, horrible medical experiments, etc., which we hear little about.
While we abhor the Holocaust and concentration camps, there aren't stories from German POW camps which equal the horrors of tales from Japanese POW camps.
Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Germany didn't.
Japanese-Americans were put into camps in California. German-Americans weren't.
So why the apparent difference regarding the two countries? Can't give a reason which satisfies me except that after McArthur revamped Japan, the US thought it advisable to make sure we had an anti-Communist ally close to China, so relations were smoothed over, just as we smoothed over things with Germany because of the Soviets.
When I was a child, however, I had the distinct impression from my elders that despite official government actions, the man on the street continued to hate and mistrust the Japanese more and longer than the Germans.
The Berlin Airlift seemed to have marked the beginning of the change in attitudes toward Germany, and the later Berlin Wall seemed to have made the change permanent.
Maybe we'd all be far more angry about the Japanese refusal to admit their true history if we had more contact.
Personally, I've found the Germans my age and younger to be quite friendly, but the older ones my parents ran into were sometimes still very bitter and resentful.
I've not been to Japan, but the Japanese tourists I've seen in Europe fall into two categories: Men with families in tow were polite. Businessmen in groups without women were the rudest people I've ever seen! Made even the occasionally rude French look chivalrous.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
From:
California
Registered:
8/21/09
|
|
(40 of 40)
Re: Why was Japan absolved and Germany condemned?
Aug 21, 2009 4:40 AM
|
|
Maybe you could check out Shmoop for some answers. I found it to be an exhaustive site on reference material and opinions about WW II. It views the war through a number of perspectives – social, ideological, political, and scientific. Plus there is a detailed time line of events and links to other more specialized sites. Check it out for yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
