PDA

View Full Version : General Tojo Hideki's granddaughter insists that Japan fought a war of self-defence



Maciamo
Jun 8, 2005, 16:52
Tojo a scapegoat, granddaughter charges (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20050608a2.htm)

This article is about the granddaughter of General Tojo Hideki, Japan's war-time Prime Minister, convicted as class-A war criminals and hanged by the Americans in 1945. As the highest ranking politician and military, he was the ultimate responsible for most of Japan's war crimes (if we omit the emperor), and therefore at least the equivalent of Adolf Hitler as head of state of their respective countries (although the Supreme Commanderof Japan was emperor Hirohito, so the responsibility is shared).


The Tojo family had kept silent for a long time. But not any longer.
...
"Japan didn't fight wars of aggression. Only China now says so," Yuko, president of the Tokyo-based nonprofit organization Environment Solution Institute, claimed during an interview with The Japan Times.


Only China says so ? My understanding was that only (some people in) Japan say so, while the rest of the world knows perfectly well that Japan invaded the whole of East Asia and also started war with the United States and its allies, not the other way round.


She argued that Japan fought a war of self-defense against the United States and other Western powers.

In invading China, Japan only tried to defend interests it won after World War I just as many Western powers were doing in China, she argued.

"You have to start from the Opium War (in the mid-19th century) when you think about this topic," she said.

Again an ignorant ***** that doesn't have the slightest idea about history or wants to distort it to her (country's) profit.

First of all, What does the Opium War between Britain and China in the mid-19th century have to do with Japan attacking the US in the mid-20th century ?

Secondly, it is preposterous to justify Japan's invasion of most of China (already the world's most populous country at the time) to protect a few tiny concessions in such cities as Beijing, Tianjing or Shanghai. It certainly does not justify the invasion of other Asian countries. Even the argument that Japan came to free Asia from the Western powers (if the Japanese really believed it) does not justify their own colonial attitudes in Okinawa, Taiwan and Korea from the late 19th century.

Furthermore, Japan shared concessions in Chinese cities along with Britain, Germany, France, Russia and the US on a similar level. It is very hypocritical to say they were protecting these concessions when they in fact stole other countries concessions and went on to conquer not just the whole of these cities but most of China. It is doubly hypocritical to say that Japan was liberating China from Western power as it benefited from the situations created by Britain after the Opium War by gaining concessions itself !

Jun 8, 2005, 18:31
It is funny that Chinese are taught to hate Hideki Tojo (http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/cabinet/40_e.html) who started the war against the United States in 1941 instead of Fumimaro Konoe (http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/cabinet/34_e.html) who was the prime minister when Guāndōng Army invaded China without approval/order in 1937.

Apollo
Jun 8, 2005, 22:45
Tojo a scapegoat, granddaughter charges (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20050608a2.htm)




I am appalled by Yoko Tojo's utterances. She distorts history, and I would consider her as a brainwashed woman with no realistic sense. I would not be surprised if she hasn't read a history book, but knows history only from what her family has told her since she was a child.

She needs a good spanking with "real" history book just because she claims Tojo was innocent.....This is an insult for many scholars, students, and victims.

So, invasion of East Asia is in her eyes not a war of aggression...??!!
(--I need a drink--) (Please someone give me a drink because I have read something which has appalled me......)

I wouldn't classify the Pacific War as self-defence from Japan's side. However, many scholars agree that the U.S. provoked Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor, but, this is not the same as saying it was self-defence. I can't name one recognised historian claiming it was self defence. Many scholars (post-revisionists) agree that the fault lies BOTH in the U.S AND Japan. (e.g. the economic blockade = Pearl Harbor)....

[Please, give me a strong drink to divert my thoughts away from that woman!]

bossel
Jun 9, 2005, 02:54
It is funny that Chinese are taught to hate Hideki Tojo (http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/cabinet/40_e.html) who started the war against the United States in 1941 instead of Fumimaro Konoe (http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/cabinet/34_e.html) who was the prime minister when Guāndōng Army invaded China without approval/order in 1937.
Well, wasn't Tojo also Chief of Staff of the Guandong Army?

lexico
Jun 10, 2005, 00:20
Fumimaro Konoe (http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/cabinet/34_e.html) who was the prime minister when Guāndōng Army invaded China without approval/order in 1937.Does this refer to what the Wikipedia says on Fumimaro Konoe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumimaro_Konoe) in the following ?
After the Marco Polo Bridge Incident in July 1937 and under pressure from hard-liners, his cabinet agreed to expand operations in China and handed the entire conduct of the conflict in China to the military leaders to progress without government oversight.That does not stand coherent with James L. McClain's account in Japan: A Modern History, W.W. Norton & Company, 2002, Ch. 13, Japan Enters War:
Konoe's cabinet issued official approval to dispatch three additional units to China, July 27, 1937, at the request of the military in the hope of subjugating Jiang Jieshi's army through resolute military action.

August 14, 1937, the Japanese cabinet approved additional reinforcement troops to China; Prime Minister Konoe declared, 'China has arrogantly violated the ritual protocol, and Japan is obliged to take resolute action to chastise the cruel Chinese.'Why is it that certain revisionist historians try to portray Konoe and his cabinet's role in the 2nd Sino-Japanese War as something they cannot be responsible for because they were dictated by the military ? How would that help lessen either Konoe or Tojo's guilt in the International Military Tribunal of the Far East ?

This is genuinely odd and illogical, when China, Korea, Taiwan, and other countries are ready to accept the past and move on into a peaceful future in which past enemy countries can coexist and prosper, that Japan alone goes on to embellish its past seeking absurd justifications for the wrongs, when such distortions can only raise eyebrows ? Why provoke when it can only bring back horrible memories and more shame to Japan ? Don't they realize that a misrepresentation will demand corrections ?

lexico
Jun 10, 2005, 00:44
Well, wasn't Tojo also Chief of Staff of the Guandong Army ?Not only Chief of Staff; according to Wikipedia, Hideki Tojo ( p@ Tōjō Hideki) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hideki_Tojo) also served as the Chief of Kempeitai (, "Law Soldier Regiment") (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kempeitai) which means he was also responsible for ordering the following three acts in violation of International Law.


Human Experiments

Kenpeitai ran prisoner of war, forced labor, and special camps housing several 'human experimentation' units. Kempeitai sent any 'difficult' prisoners to these facilities which included over 3,500 Americans, Chinese, Europeans, Koreans and Russians who were sent to Unit 100 (Changchun) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_100) and Unit 731 (Pingfan nr. Ha'erbin) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731). Where they were identified as 'logs' and who were chosen and transported by the 'Human Materials Procurement Arm'. There were numerous other facilities where medical and environmental experiments were conducted on the victims. Unit 516 (Qiqiha'er) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_516) conducted chemical warfare experiments.

Japan's Germ Warfare Project - Unit 731 (http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-germ.htm)
Bioterrorism and Biological Warfare (http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:HJkLsgaeHdIJ:biology.ucok.edu/PersonalPages/Meeks/Biological%2520Warfare.ppt+hanta+virus+japan+wwII+ human+experiment&hl=en)

- Unit 731 / 3000 Scientists and Staff / 1945
- Experimentation / Manchuria / 10,000 die
- Bubonic Plague / China / 11 Cities Attacked
- Bacterial Bombs
- 1941 Accident: Kills 1700 Japanese Troops
Comfort Women

Provision of "comfort" women ( jugun ianfu nRԈw) to man the "comfort houses" These were bordellos maintained by the IJA for the use of its troops. Originally Japanese volunteers were used but as these became rare or limited to the use of officers many Chinese, Korean and Formosan women were kidnapped and placed in these facilities to be "used" by members of Japan's military. They also regulated the accommodations of the brothels, checked the identities of their customers, and controlled the violence and drunkenness within.

The statement of Japanese chief cabinet secretary about the announcement of research result of comfort women issue
(Issued in Aug 4, 1993 by Youhei Kouno)
Translated by Shinji Kakichi (http://www1.coralnet.or.jp/kakichi/qa-1.ex-1.kouno.html)

The Japanese government have investigated the so called comfort women issue since Dec 1991. The government now issues the research result.

Japanese government admit, as the result of the research, that there were comfort stations for a long time in many places and that there were many comfort women. The comfort stations had been found by request of former Imperial Japanese Army. The Army was involved directly or indirectly in the foundation and the management of the comfort stations, and the transportation of comfort women.

Regarding the recruitment of comfort women, pimps who requested by the army mainly recruited women. However there were many cases that women were drafted against their own will being deceived or forced. Moreover Japanese government have found that there were some cases that officers of the army or military police directly involved in the forced recruitment.

Regarding comfort women's native place, many women, except Japanese, were from the Korean peninsula. The Korean peninsula was at the time under colonial rule of our country. The recruitment, the transportation and the management of the women had been generally done against their will by deceit or force.

Reprisal Operations

were conducted by the IJA and 'auxiliary forces' against rebelling natives and local insurgents, who fought with or without the help of allied forces. During these operations, IJA forces routinely beat and sexually assaulted the local population and carried out many massacres. Others were seized and deported for slavery and forced labor where many subsequently died.


Who and how many were in the Kempeitai ?

According to US Army TM-E 30-480 there were over 36,000 regular kempeitai personnel by the end of the war, this did not include the many native auxiliaries used for pacification purposes. The Kempeitai also used criminals and outlaws as law enforcers with torture commonly used to extract confessions.

The Japanese placed heavy emphasis on physical violence to maintain discipline with even the most minor infractions being dealt with immediately. This organization may have trained Trinh Minh The, a Vietnamese nationalist and military leader. The Kempeitai recruited paramilitary troopers of the Cao Dai faith. It also recruited a large auxiliary consisting of Formosan indigenous peoples and Koreans.

more information: Kempeitai Political Department and Epidemic Prevention Research Laboratory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kempeitai_Political_Department_and_Epidemic_Preven tion_Research_Laboratory)

lexico
Jun 10, 2005, 05:35
The internal logic behind the Tokyo Times news article can be summarized thus:

1. PM Koizumi's official visits to the Yasukuni jinja shrine causes uproars in China, Korea, and Chinese communities around the world.

2. China demands the visits to stop.

3. Japan seeks to separate the 14 class-A war criminals pending Yasukuni and families' consent.

4. The late PM Gen. Tojo Hideki's family have refused to consent to the separation in the past, and refuses now.

5. An easy excuse to stop the separation of the the 14 class-A war criminals from the Yasukuni shrine is obtained.
Some politicians, hoping to avoid diplomatic rows with China, have urged Yasukuni Shrine to enshrine the 14 Class-A war criminals at a different site. But the Tojo family rejected the idea for the sake of the whole nation, not for the sake of Hideki Tojo himself, Yuko said.

After a 1985 official visit to the shrine by then Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone caused an international row, she said, Upper House member Tadashi Itagaki asked seven surviving families of the war criminals to sign a petition that they be separated from the shrine.

The seven war criminals, including Tojo, are those who were executed and were the most symbolic and well-known wartime leaders. Relatives of six of the seven agreed and signed the petition, but an uncle of Yuko, representing the Tojo family, refused to sign, she said.

"If he had signed it, it would have meant that we would admit it was a war of aggression. It was a matter for the whole nation, not a matter for individuals, so he didn't sign it," she said, adding she agree with the uncle's opinion and decision.

She believes the tribunal was a one-sided event where the winner judged the loser at its discretion. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East, initiated by the U.S.-led Allied powers, branded Hideki Tojo one of the main villains and convicted him of waging a war of aggression and committing crimes against peace and crimes against humanity.

The tribunal created and applied "crimes against peace" to judge the loser only after the war ended, although this concept, she maintained, had not been established in the international community.Such a move was expected when the plan LDP official suggests moving war criminals from Yasukuni (http://www.wa-pedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17497) was announced, but is Japan ready for the consequences ?
She said she held her tongue partly due to Tojo's wishes and the continuing taboo against defending or even discussing the man, who was prime minister when Japan launched its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

She changed her mind in 1992, when new records of the words of the Emperor Showa were published that showed his deep trust in Tojo.

She then wrote and published a memoir of her family, bringing them into the public spotlight for the first time in a long time.

The Japan Times: June 8, 2005
(C) All rights reservedTojo Yuko is right about one thing; that Tojo might have been a scapegoat. In addition to his own, numerous war crimes in breach of international law, Human Rights Declaration, and the Geneva Convention, he was indeed only one of a small sample of all the war criminals that went unpunished including those who conducted or supported human experiments, waged bio-chemical warfare, and emperor Hirohito who entrusted Tojo Hideki to carry out all his crimes as Yuko recently found out. To bring up issues with the IMTFE rulings now amounts to bringing back the furies that WWII war crime tribunals barely silenced.

What now, Tojo Yuko ? It appears that you love your grandfather, but we should not confuse love with justice.

edit: Scapegoat, in the proper sense of the word, was used for the sacrificial atonement for sins that the Hebrews out of Egypt offered. The lambs thus offered had to be ritually clean so as to take the place of the sinner; hence to use the biblical imagery of the scapegoat for Tojo Hideki's case is inapropriate. Hence he only paid for a small part of his own crimes that the Tribunal was lucky enough to find evidence on; he was not a scapegoat, he was just a criminal.

lexico
Oct 21, 2005, 22:52
because they do not seem to care to visit the Yasykuni shrine to honor her grandfather, but strangely, she doesn't either. She is also fighting an uphill battle "not to apologise for her grandfather" as he told her not to.

The woman who will never contemplate surrender (http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/the-woman-who-will-never-contemplate-surrender/2005/08/12/1123353492785.html)
Incredibly, she says that when she visits she prays for everyone else memorialised there but not her grandfather, whose spirit she honours at the family plot elsewhere.

She does not trust recent public opinion surveys showing that most people no longer support the Yasukuni Shrine visits by Japan's prime minister. She puts the results down to "survey magic", as though they are somehow rigged.

Nonetheless, she knows first hand how hard it is to motivate ordinary people. It is, after all, 60 years after the end of an inglorious war defeat and the great mass of people are now more interested in economic recovery than upsetting China, a crucial trading partner.

She takes a sidelong glance at the young people around her, eating extravagant pieces of cream cake with strawberries and listening to the jazz soundtrack that is playing. "No, they are not really interested," she says with a crusading "not yet anyway" look on her face.

kokusu
Oct 30, 2005, 00:56
. . . Tojo might have been a scapegoat. In addition to his own, numerous war crimes in breach of international law, Human Rights Declaration, and the Geneva Convention . . .


First, I am sorry to be discussing only one part of this thread at a time. The issue is very complex and I am afraid at this moment I do not have a comprehensive essay prepared to address all issues. As such, I have decided address single issues at a time. This may make my posts seem disconnected or unecessarily focused on minute details. I am sorry if this creates confusion . . .

As to the Human Rights Declaration:

According to the United Nations website http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm , the Human Rights Declaration was not established until December 10th, 1948, three years after the conclusion of World War II.

As to the Geneva Convention:

According to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm , the Geneva Convention was:

"Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva from 21 April to 12 August, 1949 entry into force 21 October 1950"

That is, about four years after World War II.

I bring this up because it is mentioned that Gen. Tojo breached these particular conventions/statutes/laws. Yet, this would not seem possible considering that these very laws were not in place until years after World War II.
This becomes an important detail when one takes into consideration the accusations levelled against Gen. Tojo's granddaughter for have an incorrect understanding of history. It would seem that errors of understanding exist amongst all parties in some way or another.
If that is the case, should we not then avoid demonizing those who disagree with us or present a view oppositional to our own? Should we not try more for understanding and rational discussion rather than make a hasty rush to judgmentalism?

:sorry: Gomen nasai! I am afraid that my statement perhaps does not make as much sense as I had hoped . . .

bossel
Oct 30, 2005, 08:24
As to the Geneva Convention:

That is, about four years after World War II.
Wrong. The original Geneva convention was adopted in 1864.


should we not then avoid demonizing those who disagree with us or present a view oppositional to our own?
Demonising should be avoided, anyway. All were human, victims & perpetrators.

kokusu
Oct 30, 2005, 10:19
I agree, Bossel, that the first Geneva conventions (concerning sick and wounded prisoners of war - i.e. sick and wounded combatants), orginates much earlier as you noted.

When referring to the Geneva Conventions in general rather than specific (first, second, third, fourth), I am used to most people referring to the third and fourth conventions adopted in 1949, and specifically the fourth convention which covers the protection of civilians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

:sorry:

All that to say, I reiterate that such misunderstandings and selective reference to history and its events are often universal pitfalls for all sides of disputes. That being the case, caution, reason, discussion, and such mores should be the guidelines for resolving such disputes, not rash judgementalism and atogonism . . . which of course you recognize, I believe, according to your second statement. To that I am humbly grateful! :relief:

:sorry: :blush: :sorry:

I am sorry, everyone. I perhaps dwelled on the Geneva Convention point too much in my desire to respond. Next time I post I promise to move on to other salient points of this thread . . .

celtician
Nov 21, 2005, 20:49
Japanese always need leaders so in theory there must be one and the emperor or the one just below must be IT. The named criminals!
Don't you think???? The Japanese fetish of naming people (with a vague name for example... "I am Suzuki") is only for the lower classes.

celtician
Dec 13, 2005, 22:42
In Japland there is always a scapegoat..a fallguy but the criminals must be named! eg the recent scandal about unsafe appartment blocks not necesseraly the archictect himself but the all powerful construction companies "in cahoots" with the concrete companies who give huge kickbacks to the government

Hachiko
Dec 17, 2005, 15:02
She's talking out of her arse. She just doesn't want to admit that his granddaddy was in the wrong. :p

Sirius2B
Jun 28, 2007, 10:20
She's talking out of her arse. She just doesn't want to admit that his granddaddy was in the wrong. :p

Happens very often... I remember specifically the daughter of Karl Doenitz (chief of nazi submarines) being a similar case in the 60s and 70s.

But the cases are numerous.

junjunforever
Jun 29, 2007, 03:01
well the problem is, there are many people in Japan who think like her. Some even post around these forums.

And she is a president of an NPO? There should be a universal criticism about her comments.

They claim innocence, without realizing are the laughing stock of the world community.

frostyg02uk
Jun 29, 2007, 03:36
I think forcing a country into a corner will result in aggression but even if that is the excuse she is using i still used the word aggression but then i think every country in the world has used aggression towards another at some point.

caster51
Jun 29, 2007, 15:28
I think forcing a country into a corner will result in aggression but even if that is the excuse she is using i still used the word aggression but then i think every country in the world has used aggression towards another at some point

http://www.jacar.go.jp/english/nichibei/index.html

tojo was the most loyal peson to Emperor
Even Tojo could not stop the War for Emperor
I think she is right..
MacArthur also admitted it.

junjunforever
Jun 30, 2007, 03:15
http://www.jacar.go.jp/english/nichibei/index.html
tojo was the most loyal peson to Emperor
Even Tojo could not stop the War for Emperor
I think she is right..
MacArthur also admitted it.

i'm sorry you are wrong. What she says is wrong.
Tojo being a scapegoat or not is actually no interest to anybody.

What people are furious about is that she claims japan fought the war because they had to. She claims the Imperial Army was the promoter of peace.

Could that be further away from the truth?

The imperialist army fought a war of aggression, discrimination and brought much unnecessary pain to people living not only in Japan, but the entire east and south east asia.

caster51
Jul 1, 2007, 00:08
What people are furious about is that she claims japan fought the war because they had to. She claims the Imperial Army was the promoter of peace

that was a real histoty that Japanese ppl thought at that time in Japanese history

the ppl's thought at that time is a History that cant take over .

GodEmperorLeto
Jul 1, 2007, 17:37
Japan did fight a defensive war against the United States. And yes, our government wanted to get involved in the war, and the oil embargoes and other economic vices we slapped on Japan put them in a tough position.

What they should have done, is ground their massive offensives in China and other areas to a halt and tried to work something out, but since the government was run by the military and saving face is of primary concern, there was no way in hell that was ever going to happen. Even though the attack on Wake, Pearl Harbor, and the Phillipines was a massively co-ordinated offensive strategem, it was designed to take out U.S. striking capability in the Pacific and force us to fight from a disadvantage.

They didn't take into account U.S. industrial capacity. Or the U.S. Marines.

Even if we lost at Midway, the Japanese could have only kept up the war for so long. It was industrially inevitable from the crack of dawn on December 7, 1941. They did fight a defensive war against the U.S.--a defensive war that they started, though.

frostyg02uk
Jul 1, 2007, 17:52
Of course when the Us pushed Japan into a corner like i mentioned before while they decided if they would help or not Japan were forced to react and they thought that by destorying the navy at pearl they could end any envolment that the Us planned before it started. Of course dispite it being a master plan the general underestimated it and took it for a complete victory refusing to go on and bomb mainland america. Once it came to a war of neutrition of course america would win not just because of industrial capabilitys but also due to the fact that the rest of the world had been fighting for many years before america. Shortly after pearl habour Japan were forced to retreat so in an american sense they fought a defensive war but for the places that where invaded years before this it was a war of aggression.

caster51
Jul 1, 2007, 20:16
Mirror for Americans, Japan(1948)
it is intereting
http://www.geocities.jp/gokihoihoi/interesting.htm




http://www.swarthmore.edu/library/peace/DG201-225/dg210mears.htm

Ewok85
Jul 1, 2007, 20:43
Wow! I never knew that Japan was under so much danger from the impending attacks from China, Korea, Burma, the Dutch East Indies, New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore, Bali, Timor, Philippines and Australia. *sarcasm*

And caster, are your trying to argue that two wrongs don't make a right, while on the other hand trying to argue that two wrongs DO make right?

caster51
Jul 1, 2007, 21:21
And caster, are your trying to argue that two wrongs don't make a right, while on the other hand trying to argue that two wrongs DO make right?
I dont think so..
there are many view...
at first, we should disucuss it from opium WAR at least..
it will be not understood because it doesnt understand the reason.


Wow! I never knew that Japan was under so much danger from the impending attacks from China, Korea, Burma, the Dutch East Indies, New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore, Bali, Timor, Philippines and Australia. *sarcasm

Yes because most of them were colonies of ...
Korea was about to be a colony of russain

Dutch made a school for ppls there?

GodEmperorLeto
Jul 3, 2007, 12:30
Of course when the Us pushed Japan into a corner like i mentioned before while they decided if they would help or not Japan were forced to react and they thought that by destorying the navy at pearl they could end any envolment that the Us planned before it started. Of course dispite it being a master plan the general underestimated it and took it for a complete victory refusing to go on and bomb mainland america. Once it came to a war of neutrition of course america would win not just because of industrial capabilitys but also due to the fact that the rest of the world had been fighting for many years before america. Shortly after pearl habour Japan were forced to retreat so in an american sense they fought a defensive war but for the places that where invaded years before this it was a war of aggression.
There is so much historically wrong about this, I don't even no where to begin, so instead, I'm going to sit down, pour myself some scotch, and maybe come back to tackle this later.


Yes because most of them were colonies of ...
Korea was about to be a colony of russain
You have got to be kidding me. Caster, you just argued on another forum how the Japanese were part of the Eight-Nation Alliance and worked together during the Boxer Rebellion in China.

In addition, Japan was on pretty good terms with the U.S. until it signed on with Nazi Germany. That and, if Japan hadn't been slaughtering it's way across China so aggressively, I honestly don't think much of Europe would have cared that much about the Empire of Japan joining the Neo-Colonial club, except for the fact that Neo-colonialism was dying.

The United States ran Shanghai right up until we left and allowed the Japanese to have it, I might add.

If you seriously think that the Dutch in the East Indies and the Americans in the Philippines were all planning on invading Japan, you need to think again. And don't compare Japan to China. When Commodore Perry showed up, your country decided trade and telegraphs were better than getting carved up into spheres of influence, so Japan picked the high road from the beginning. China closed its doors to the outside world, and it took lots of bullets to force those doors open. Admittedly, it wasn't the kindest, gentlest, and most proper thing to do, but after Nanking, I don't think any Japanese critic of Western interference in China really has a leg to stand on.

Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of the claims in that person's book review you posted. Yeah, it was a war between imperial powers. And I think it is a big sad tragedy that it happened in the first place. I think Japan and the United States would have (and should have) made better friends throughout their histories rather than enemies.

Japan intended to kick every non-Asian imperial power out of East Asia. But this wasn't the altruistic crusade to liberate one's neighbors. Rather, it was a campaign with two aims: 1) to retain or increase the powers of the military that de-facto ruled the country by controlling the government, and 2) to create a vast network of mercantalism that would send resources to Japan and create economic dependencies throughout the Western Pacific in order to empower the Japanese economy.

Japan was just as crafty as the Europeans. Empires are empires. Period.

caster51
Jul 3, 2007, 15:13
You have got to be kidding me. Caster, you just argued on another forum how the Japanese were part of the Eight-Nation Alliance and worked together during the Boxer Rebellion in China.
Yes it was.

In addition, Japan was on pretty good terms with the U.S. until it signed on with Nazi Germany. That and, if Japan hadn't been slaughtering it's way across China so aggressively, I honestly don't think much of Europe would have cared that much about the Empire of Japan joining the Neo-Colonial club, except for the fact that Neo-colonialism was dying.
you don know the his speech about Japanese.
after russian war, he said " We do not scare the Japanese itself. however white ppl must stop the unity in china by Japanese hand. It is a threat for the white."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_II%2C_German_Emperor

The United States ran Shanghai right up until we left and allowed the Japanese to have it, I might add.
If you seriously think that the Dutch in the East Indies and the Americans in the Philippines were all planning on invading Japan, you need to think again. And don't compare Japan to China.
that was a settlement of Japanese army that was permitted like today's US base in Japan
most Japanese ppl at that time was beliver of Sun Yat-sen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Yat-sen

When Commodore Perry showed up, your country decided trade and telegraphs were better than getting carved up into spheres of influence, so Japan picked the high road from the beginning. China closed its doors to the outside world, and it took lots of bullets to force those doors open. Admittedly, it wasn't the kindest, gentlest, and most proper thing to do, but after Nanking, I don't think any Japanese critic of Western interference in China really has a leg to stand on.
?????
you should read NY times of articles "china is ours" on Aug 15th 1945.
it is nothing to do with Tojyo
Tojyo became a prime minister in 1941...
MacArthur, Douglas was also admitted it through his experience of korean war in complicated Asia .that was Japanese defence

GodEmperorLeto
Jul 3, 2007, 23:48
Yes it was.
you don know the his speech about Japanese.
after russian war, he said " We do not scare the Japanese itself. however white ppl must stop the unity in china by Japanese hand. It is a threat for the white."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_II%2C_German_Emperor
Yeah, and we fought a war against Wilhelm in which Japan was part of the Allies.

He also said that he wanted the Germans to be remembered in China like the Huns were, which led to the derogatory British term for the Germans during the two world wars. I don't think you can honestly say that Kaiser Wilhelm ever spoke for the sentiments of Europe or the United States. His words were his, and not anyone else's.


that was a settlement of Japanese army that was permitted like today's US base in Japan
The Japanese occupation of Shanghai wasn't condoned by the Chinese government because there was no real Chinese government at the time. The U.S. basically gave Japan Shanghai. It wasn't a military base. It was a colonial possession that was effectively ceded to Japan.


you should read NY times of articles "china is ours" on Aug 15th 1945.
it is nothing to do with Tojyo
Tojyo became a prime minister in 1941...
MacArthur, Douglas was also admitted it through his experience of korean war in complicated Asia .that was Japanese defence
I agree, it has nothing to do with Tojo, and I don't know why you brought him up.

Asian politics are complex, yeah, but no more complex than European politics had been. If you want to read about complex political ties, read about the Hundred Years' War, or the Thirty Years War, or just study the Hapsburgs.

junjunforever
Jul 6, 2007, 00:31
Dutch made a school for ppls there?

No they didnt. but most of the dutch political leaders and historians agree that what the dutch did during colonial periods were horrible.

The criticism today is not so much of what Japan did in the past, but more of what Japan is not admitting in the present. We all love Germany, but they have committed even worse crimes than Japan has. But they have banned Nazism, set up memorials and German nation as a whole agrees the war was wrong.

We dont have german people saying the war was a defensive war, arguing they were there was no way out for the Germans after the dump they were sitting on after WWI, which is more valid of an argument than the Japan's war for peace.

In Japan, many people still do not believe the war was wrong. This is where the criticism is directed.

caster51
Jul 15, 2007, 10:33
In Japan, many people still do not believe the war was wrong. This is where the criticism is directed.

I think today's all Japanese think WAR was wrong.
however ,war is legal in all country's Law except Japan
that is way there is an article 9 in reality...

it does not mean Japan was wrong at all.

caster51
Aug 24, 2007, 23:18
Abe's speech at indian congress
 
安倍首相は22日にインド国会で演説した際、東京裁判で唯一A級戦犯25人の無罪を主張した故パール判事に ついて、「裁判で勇気をみせたパール判事は今でも日本国民から尊敬を集めている」と述べた。23日にパール 判事の長男と会った席でも、「パール判事は日本・インド関係の基礎を築いた1人だ」とたたえた 。

Radhabinod Pal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radhabinod_Pal

Abe said " judge Pal who showed courage at tokyo trial is still collecting respect from the Japanese people." :cool:

This remark might have taken on immense importance if it was before.
no Japanese cares about that any more.....
ppl realized truth?
oops.. only asahi communist newspaper complained that china is more important than india:blush:

and then korean newspaper criticized it
http://japanese.yonhapnews.co.kr/relation/2007/08/24/0400000000AJP20070824002300882.HTML

Confluence of the Two Seas
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/pmv0708/speech-2.html

http://www.geocities.co.jp/Milano-Aoyama/6915/