Pearl Harbor

[vee]

Yup, He was Catholic, Japanese, and a doctor and he recounts what things were like before, during and after the nuke fell.  Everyone should read taht book. 

[vee]

There is also a famous fragment of a statue of Our Lady that was in the cathedral and survived the bomb.  It is not unscathed but its wood so ya.

 

[Ice_nine]

13 hours ago, dominicansoul said:

CatherineM was right, This generation is afraid of words and "offensive" feelings and being politically correct.  The enemies will come and just throw these trigger words at them and they will bend over with their backsides in the air and let the enemy at them. 

Oh just stahp it. That's a standard grab-bag argument that's not relevant here. No one on Phatmass ever asks for trigger warnings or any of that carp.

I'll have you know I'm an expert in gorilla warfare with over 300 confirmed kills so I'm not afraid of words.

I'm just a contrarian who has a particular distaste for nationalism.

[Peace]

On 12/8/2015, 1:47:20, Anomaly said:

What if it was expected that millions of civilians and military would die in an invasion and Japan's infrastructure throughput the country would be destroyed, effectively crippling all of Japan for generations with accompanying disease, starvation, and privations for tens of millions.    Keep in mind, Japan has already lost over 1,500,000 military and almost 500,000 civilians by conservative estimates.  

And they still pursued a war.  

Then pursue other options. One cannot purposely kill innocent people. It would better that one  should die than to purposely kill innocents. The ends do not justify the means.

[vee]

49 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

 

I'll have you know I'm an expert in gorilla warfare with over 300 confirmed kills so I'm not afraid of words.

 

[Luigi]

2 hours ago, Peace said:

Then pursue other options. One cannot purposely kill innocent people. It would better that one  should die than to purposely kill innocents. The ends do not justify the means.

Well, thank you for that definitive statement of right and wrong, especially in light of the fact that no pope or other theological menial had the fortitude to say it at the time. 

2 hours ago, Peace said:

Then pursue other options. One cannot purposely kill innocent people. It would better that one  should die than to purposely kill innocents. The ends do not justify the means.

BTW, have you posted this to the German government of 70 years ago? And the Japanese government of 70 years ago? The governments that did, in fact, kill something like 6,000,000 innocents? And that killed 10 random civilians for every German soldier that was targeted by the Underground?  And that did, in fact, make innocent conquered women into sex slaves? 

Question: If we had been able to drop one or two nuclear bombs on German civilians before the Shoa, would that make it any less morally wrong because it (would have) saved the lives of the Shoa victims?   

Edited December 11, 2015 by Luigi

[NadaTeTurbe]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre_denial 

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/18/opinion/la-oe-guttentag-japan-nanking-20130118

http://www.phdn.org/negation/gravediggers/gom-2002-nanking_japanese_denial.html (good website about negationnist, btw). 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-11/japan-wwii-massacre-survivor-apology/6689610

There's denial of the Nanking massacre, and the people who deny it are at the power. If Germany had holocaust negationnist in the governement, it would be a big scandal. 

So, to be more precise : we're still waiting for a strong apology for the massacre of Nanking, for the negationnist in the government to be fired, for the Nippon Kaigi to be condemned, and for the Yasukuni Shrine to be closed or at least that political leader will NOT visit it.

[Peace]

7 hours ago, Luigi said:

Well, thank you for that definitive statement of right and wrong, especially in light of the fact that no pope or other theological menial had the fortitude to say it at the time. 

BTW, have you posted this to the German government of 70 years ago? And the Japanese government of 70 years ago? The governments that did, in fact, kill something like 6,000,000 innocents? And that killed 10 random civilians for every German soldier that was targeted by the Underground?  And that did, in fact, make innocent conquered women into sex slaves? 

Question: If we had been able to drop one or two nuclear bombs on German civilians before the Shoa, would that make it any less morally wrong because it (would have) saved the lives of the Shoa victims?   

What exactly are you saying? That one wrong justifies another wrong?

As far as my "definitive statement or right and wrong" - review the Catechism:

2314 "Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation."¹¹⁰ A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons - to commit such crimes.

[Peace]

5 hours ago, NadaTeTurbe said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre_denial 

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/18/opinion/la-oe-guttentag-japan-nanking-20130118

http://www.phdn.org/negation/gravediggers/gom-2002-nanking_japanese_denial.html (good website about negationnist, btw). 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-11/japan-wwii-massacre-survivor-apology/6689610

There's denial of the Nanking massacre, and the people who deny it are at the power. If Germany had holocaust negationnist in the governement, it would be a big scandal. 

So, to be more precise : we're still waiting for a strong apology for the massacre of Nanking, for the negationnist in the government to be fired, for the Nippon Kaigi to be condemned, and for the Yasukuni Shrine to be closed or at least that political leader will NOT visit it.

Are you Korean or Chinese? I did not know that. I can certainly understand how you could be angry about the Yasukuni Shrine issue, which is complicated. I am not exactly happy when people in the southern part of the US fly the confederate flag, so I can understand why they would take offense when a Japanese politication visits that shrine. I am not sure exactly how the Japanese religion works, but I do not think that a Shrine is only a secular memorial to them (like our 9/11 memorial, for example). I think that to them a shrine is somewhat of an equivalent of a church. I think they beleive that they house gods or souls or something of that sort, so I can also understand why they would be reluctant to tear such a thing down.

As for people who deny the massacres - I agree that they are wrong and should be removed. But I think there is a political process involved with that. I would not be surprised to find some blatant racists and so forth among the US members of Congress. We can't exactly get rid of them just for their beliefs. They were elected locally by persons who do not find their views problematic. In a democracy of millions of people those things happen.

I would guess that your average Japanese person, rather than affirming or negating that those massacres happened, are rather apathetic about it. Not a whole lot of Japanese are still alive today who were directly involved in that. I would guess that their view of it is kind of like how most white Americans view slavery. It happened a long time ago, and they were not directly responsible for it, so apologizing for it is not something that is exactly at the top of their priority list . . . that is somewhat understandable to me.

Edited December 11, 2015 by Peace

[NadaTeTurbe]

I'm not korean or chinese. My best friend is. A few years ago, we took part of a local project about immigration. Since we're both grand-daughters of migrants, we had to ask our grandparents their stories and to write it. Her grandmother lived in Manchuria when Japan invaded it - she told us her story, but also the story of her own parents, and it was heart-breaking. I don't think that any members of this family have ever forgiven Japan (Japan as a country, not the japanese, since their first son married a Japanese girl - but it was sensitive and there was some conflits about it). 

I'm also very frustrated about how the Pacific War is taught in schools. I could write a long rant about it, but since it's my last day of school for this year and I'm tired, I will be short. Juste one exemple. The date of World War II are 1939-1945. But it's not WOrld War II who was from 1939-1945, it's "European War II" ! If you want to speak about World War II, then you have to begin at 1937, the beginning of the Pacific War. (end of the rant  )

 

Also, I don't think that the average japanese person are apathetic about it. You can't be apathetic about History - because it's also your history, the history of your family. World War two ended in 1945 - it was yesterday.  I read an article this morning - it was about a Japanese man. During the Pacific War, he was recruted to be a kamikaze, but his plane broke before. So now he is a peace activist. He spoke about World War II. How he was worried that the young generation honored the memory of the kamikaze, how the action of the current government about the memory of World War II were horrible, etc... He explained that currently, there's a polarization of Japanese society around these subjects. A big part of Japan is pacifist, against war, sorry for WW2. However, another part, is nationalist (and racist), pro-war (the current president wants an army for Japan when the constitution says Japan should not have army or fight war), and have admiration for Japan during WW2 - and want to re-write history. 

Edited December 11, 2015 by NadaTeTurbe

[Peace]

49 minutes ago, NadaTeTurbe said:

I'm not korean or chinese. My best friend is. A few years ago, we took part of a local project about immigration. Since we're both grand-daughters of migrants, we had to ask our grandparents their stories and to write it. Her grandmother lived in Manchuria when Japan invaded it - she told us her story, but also the story of her own parents, and it was heart-breaking. I don't think that any members of this family have ever forgiven Japan (Japan as a country, not the japanese, since their first son married a Japanese girl - but it was sensitive and there was some conflits about it). 

Yeah. I have some Chinese friends and they have issues with it too. It is understandable.

49 minutes ago, NadaTeTurbe said:

I'm also very frustrated about how the Pacific War is taught in schools. I could write a long rant about it, but since it's my last day of school for this year and I'm tired, I will be short. Juste one exemple. The date of World War II are 1939-1945. But it's not WOrld War II who was from 1939-1945, it's "European War II" ! If you want to speak about World War II, then you have to begin at 1937, the beginning of the Pacific War. (end of the rant  )

 All history is biased I think. It is written from the perspective of the author. A book on the Protestant Reformation is going to come out differently if written by a Calvinist or a devout Catholic. I understand how some folks would be upset about how Japan portrays its history. Do you think that French books are neutral when it comes to the colonization of Vietnam, or that US textbooks are neutral when it comes to slavery or the wars that we have engaged in? The home team cooks the books. It ain't right but that is definitely the way it is. There is a natural human tendency to portray your own people as heroes and deflect attention away from the bad things that you have done. I am sure that Japan is guilty of that.

49 minutes ago, NadaTeTurbe said:

Also, I don't think that the average japanese person are apathetic about it. You can't be apathetic about History - because it's also your history, the history of your family. World War two ended in 1945 - it was yesterday.  I read an article this morning - it was about a Japanese man. During the Pacific War, he was recruted to be a kamikaze, but his plane broke before. So now he is a peace activist. He spoke about World War II. How he was worried that the young generation honored the memory of the kamikaze, how the action of the current government about the memory of World War II were horrible, etc... He explained that currently, there's a polarization of Japanese society around these subjects. A big part of Japan is pacifist, against war, sorry for WW2. However, another part, is nationalist (and racist), pro-war (the current president wants an army for Japan when the constitution says Japan should not have army or fight war), and have admiration for Japan during WW2 - and want to re-write history. 

Maybe. That is one person's perspective on it. I lived in Japan for over 5 years. It is definitely different than the USA, for example, concerning the role that politics and things of that nature play in life of the every day person. Like here in the US, if you go to a bar or out with some friends, we will very frequently get into heated political/historical conversations about which policies are right, what politicians we like and dislike, and so forth. It is very common to us.

At least in my experience - those type of heated conversations rarely happen at Japanese bars or dinner tables. I think the idea of democracy and political participation is rather new to them - it is not built into their culture and is something that was forced upon them at the end of WW2. Of course, they have some interest in various politicians and issues, but the fervor and the role that it plays in their life is much, much less than in the USA, in my experience. My impression was that, for the most part, they view the government as something that they cannot really influence by their political participation. I don't think that most of them think that their votes are something that can be used to effect any significant change, and are therefore rather apathetic about the whole thing. I think that the average person there views the government as system that is in place and that is beyond their control. . . I think it goes back to their culture, which was traditionally feudal. You had the Emperor or your regional Lord and you just kind of shut up and did what you were told. . . I think to a certain extent that feeling still pervades their thought.

[NadaTeTurbe]

34 minutes ago, Peace said:

All history is biased I think. It is written from the perspective of the author. A book on the Protestant Reformation is going to come out differently if written by a Calvinist or a devout Catholic. I understand how some folks would be upset about how Japan portrays its history. Do you think that French books are neutral when it comes to the colonization of Vietnam, or that US textbooks are neutral when it comes to slavery or the wars that we have engaged in? The home team cooks the books. It ain't right but that is definitely the way it is. There is a natural human tendency to portray your own people as heroes and deflect attention away from the bad things that you have done. I am sure that Japan is guilty of that.

You're right, but it doesn't make me happy  I'm an history students, after all. And as a French... We don't speak about Vietnam's colonization (not in my memories from high school), but our history books are horribly biased - no torture in Algeria ! Everybody was a resistant during the war ! and it frustrated me to no end in high school. In 2004, they even wanted to vote a law to force teacher to teach a "positive light on colonization"  

Thank you for your insight. It's very interesting. It's really similar to Russia - people just live their life without really thinking that any change can happen, and if you look at Russia history, you understand why "speaking against the government" is not in their DNA... It's really fascinating how a people's past can influence their present, their way of thinking, etc... I can not remember if it was about China or Japan, but Fernand Braudel, a great historian, wrote about how the methods of agriculture in Asian countries influenced how they saw hierarchy, and how it influenced their political organization.