IJN Battleship Yamato

[stockli]

LOL

Filth

[Krusty]

Drediock, my comments are based on a common perception that the Japanese as a culture are reluctant to admit they were in the wrong for any atrocities that occured during the war. There's a cultural sense of racial superiority and bias against "outsiders" -- and like I said, I could be wrong but this promo clip just feels like more of the same.

[Soulyss]

What? no wave motion cannon?  I think I'll pass....

[Simaril]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Yea I guess NONE of them fought honorably for their country

During war atrocities are commited by all sides.
Only the loosing side ever really tends to get highlighted

Just curious.

How many on the Yamato committed the atrocities of which you speak?

Fair questiona all -- but ignoring the differences between nations' treatment of prisoners and subjects is more "open minded" than honest. And outright lies love the opportunity to hide behind the banner of fairness.

Would any honest student of history argue that the allies had a Buchenwald or and Auschwitz? When "open minded" revisionists claim each country was the same, maybe citing the (absolutley unjust) Japanese american detention camps, it's like spitting in the eyes of those who went to the ovens. There is no comparison, none at all.

And that's true for the brutality of Japan's leadership cadre during the war. Read Prisoners of the Japanese. Read about the 200,000 women enslaved by the Japanese military to be forced unpaid prostitutes. . Read about the numerous front line allied prisoners found tied to trees and used for live bayonet practice. Look at hard data -- like dramtically lower survival rates for prisoners of Japan as compared with those of Germany -- and try to argue that we were all the same.


And I challenge you to find anything as chiling as this: An officer's diary captured in the Guadalcanal campaign described an incident in which a US airman was tied to a table, and used by the regimental surgeon for anatomy instruction -- while still alive. Worst of all, the officer's only comment in his diary was "It was most instructive."


Yeah, some allied soldiers committed atrocities. But there was NEVER an institutionalized brutality, unthinking callousness to torture and abuse, in the allied armies like there was in both the Japanese and German armies. (Though the German brutalities were focused on specific "racial" groups.)

But I can't imagine beliving that the only difference was that the allies won. That idea is a lie, and those who believe it are deceived.

[storch]

Originally posted by Krusty
Drediock, my comments are based on a common perception that the Japanese as a culture are reluctant to admit they were in the wrong for any atrocities that occured during the war. There's a cultural sense of racial superiority and bias against "outsiders" -- and like I said, I could be wrong but this promo clip just feels like more of the same.

I'd enjoy the film and even moreso if it were presented from the japanese perspective.  the war in the pacific was no quarter asked or given by all combatants.  war is brutal by nature.  why should the japanese or the germans or anyone else need to feel inferior for acts they had collectively committed?  were not the responsible leaders hanged and then tried?  or was it the other way 'round I don't recall?  atrocities are what ever the victors say are atrocities.  in some cultures what you and I consider to be atrocious is acceptable.  how do you feel about our national hero chuck yeager being a chute shooter?  in my opinion it was a smart thing to do.  kill your opponent, shorten the war, but it's barbaric and in today's military it would be a prosecutable offense.

the japanese should be proud of their history and they should celebrate it as well.

now I wish the germans would get over their swastika ban.

[Kermit de frog]

The ban is there for a reason Storch.  Remember that.

[quintv]

Originally posted by Simaril
Fair questiona all -- but ignoring the differences between nations' treatment of prisoners and subjects is more "open minded" than honest. And outright lies love the opportunity to hide behind the banner of fairness.

Would any honest student of history argue that the allies had a Buchenwald or and Auschwitz? When "open minded" revisionists claim each country was the same, maybe citing the (absolutley unjust) Japanese american detention camps, it's like spitting in the eyes of those who went to the ovens. There is no comparison, none at all.

And that's true for the brutality of Japan's leadership cadre during the war. Read Prisoners of the Japanese. Read about the 200,000 women enslaved by the Japanese military to be forced unpaid prostitutes. . Read about the numerous front line allied prisoners found tied to trees and used for live bayonet practice. Look at hard data -- like dramtically lower survival rates for prisoners of Japan as compared with those of Germany -- and try to argue that we were all the same.


And I challenge you to find anything as chiling as this: An officer's diary captured in the Guadalcanal campaign described an incident in which a US airman was tied to a table, and used by the regimental surgeon for anatomy instruction -- while still alive. Worst of all, the officer's only comment in his diary was "It was most instructive."


Yeah, some allied soldiers committed atrocities. But there was NEVER an institutionalized brutality, unthinking callousness to torture and abuse, in the allied armies like there was in both the Japanese and German armies. (Though the German brutalities were focused on specific "racial" groups.)

But I can't imagine beliving that the only difference was that the allies won. That idea is a lie, and those who believe it are deceived.

Amen.

There is no moral equivalency, none at all.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Kermit de frog
The ban is there for a reason Storch.  Remember that.

Unfortunately for all the wrong reasons.

[quintv]

Originally posted by Viking
Unfortunately for all the wrong reasons.

Illuminate us.

[Yoshimbo]

w00t! the Yamato!

[TracerX]

The Japanese have every right to have pride in their military history, just as much as we do.  They are no more Imperialistic hooligans than we are.  It has been 60+years since the end of WW2, and the generations that live there now have no connection to the criminal offences that you want to continue to hold over their heads.  They are not to be held responsible for the war crimes any more than I am to be held responsible for slavery or percecutions of my ancestors whatever they may be.  I would argue that no society has changed as much as a whole as Japan has following the end of WW2.  I have spent time in Japan, talked to the people, including actual veterans of the war, and they are no different from you and I.  Every one that I spoke to are incredibly greatfull for the assistance and kindness they recieved from the Americans, following the war.  They are much further down the path of reconciliation than we are if we continue to hold such opinions of the Japanese people.  Let them construct their history in the way they choose to remember it.  We have done the same with our history.

[Simaril]

But Tracer, this isnt an "either/or" -- there's no logical reason that a people can't both admire their heroes and condemn their criminals. That's the way Germany has approached things, and IMHO its an honest way to do it.

"Constructing history" implies that there is no such thing as truth. That is also a lie, if that's what the construction crew means. In our history community, there are many interpretations of data, many theories of why things were done.  And if someone proposes a theory that cannot stand up to scrutiny, it's rejected. If its wrongly rejected, it doesnt go away...and usually it proves its worth given tume. (If nothing else, old fogies die off leaving the field to the young guns.)



I'd never blame an entire people for anything. The sortie of the Yamamoto was "A Glorious Way to Die" (great book btw), a heroic effort. The men who died, did so doing their duty for their country. The men who ordered the sortie, some believe, were motivated not by military considerations but by a prideful desire to not see the flagship sunk at her moorings. Understandable, but was it worth the sacrifice of so many who would have otherwise lived?

That's another question.

Anyone who "blames" modern Japanese for the crimes of the past is ignorant. But, it can be equally dangerous to ignore the parts of the past that are unpleasant -- especially if that includes denial that they ever happened. There's a reason it's illegal to deny the holocaust in Germany, a country that initiaed two world wars within 25 years....


And that's why some thoughtful people get concerned at the way Japan has chosen to present its past to itself.

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Krusty
Drediock, my comments are based on a common perception that the Japanese as a culture are reluctant to admit they were in the wrong for any atrocities that occured during the war. There's a cultural sense of racial superiority and bias against "outsiders" -- and like I said, I could be wrong but this promo clip just feels like more of the same.

The reason on a whole, they are reluctant to admit they started the war is that they believe that they were forced into the war by our policies at the time such as the embargo on steel and other natural resources that were vital to the Japanese.


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Was that a Hellcat the video shows dropping a torpedo?

ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Fencer51
It was so tilted toward the poor Japanese and their brave fight against the nasty Americans that I had to quit watching it the first time it was on.

I guess then you'd never be able to sit through Das Boot.  


ack-ack