85 replies to this topic

[Beelz]

... can't people just accept the past for what it is? do i blame the current germans for the halocaust, nope.. they spent YEARS rebuilding the broken relationships with the rest of the EU do i blame the current Japan for their warcrimes, nope. I blame the few right wing idiots trying to justify said crimes and distorting history. also Its not like they stop the people of japan from learning the truth all it takes is 5mins on google to find plenty of ww2 history from the perpective of both sides.

[geenius3ab]

... can't people just accept the past for what it is? do i blame the current germans for the halocaust, nope.. they spent YEARS rebuilding the broken relationships with the rest of the EU do i blame the current Japan for their warcrimes, nope. I blame the few right wing idiots trying to justify said crimes and distorting history. also Its not like they stop the people of japan from learning the truth all it takes is 5mins on google to find plenty of ww2 history from the perpective of both sides.

Well I don't blame Americans or the UK either for supporting Russians who caused a far bigger holocaust then Germans. Russians killed twice as many humans as Germans and their methods were far more inhumane then Germans... And no one talks about it (So absolutely no one paid for the disgusting things that Russia did, and America/UK supported it with an alliance.. Everyone was out for themselves, they were out for money.).

Everyone who fought off their own soil is tainted. I'd say that's the most accurate way to say this. Some more than others, but if one mentions 1 side, then the other side also needs to be addressed. The fact that winners write the history is wrong (As in it's depraved as all hell.).

Just recently a Russian Aircraft violated our air space cause of a "Practice". The fact that Russia can just say "Sorry It was just an accident" without any thing happening to them (You can't trial the pilot or anything, you can't make them pay you any money either.. All they say is "Could you please stop doing that".). The fact that no one points out that this excuse shows that Russia's military is undisciplined, and they fail at following orders (Even though we all know it wasn't an accident and they did it on purpose of psychological warfare, as a threat..)

 

And fyi google isn't an all powerful tool. There's a ton of backdoor stuff that still no one knows, but I guess there is a ton to find out about how grotesque Russia was with the countries they invaded.. Though did you know that there's a lot of torturers from the Russian camps that tortured in ways you could never imagine (Monsters is the correct word.), and Russia calls them martyrs (Even though there's countries that have asked Russia to trial them.).

 

Though I don't understand why you revived this topic with a message that almost asks to be replied to? 

Edited by geenius3ab, 30 July 2014 - 08:39 AM.

[Hollowcantaro]

... can't people just accept the past for what it is? do i blame the current germans for the halocaust, nope.. they spent YEARS rebuilding the broken relationships with the rest of the EU do i blame the current Japan for their warcrimes, nope. I blame the few right wing idiots trying to justify said crimes and distorting history. also Its not like they stop the people of japan from learning the truth all it takes is 5mins on google to find plenty of ww2 history from the perpective of both sides.

>implying the autor does forguet

>implying he didn't make several heavy mistakes and made reference to other countries as belicosi while Japan is pax.

>implying Niponese want to know the truth

I bite the bait weabo. k.

[Mister_X]

i just don't understand the point of this thread.when you make a story you have to define the setting and the author choose this way of presenting the country and people of the world,we don't have the right to question the author about. it "could" reflect the it s nature(the author being a nationalist and i don t deny that maybe the whole point of the story is to make people have faith in the JSDF) but if you think that the author is ignoring historical facts that "may" be just you reading to much between the line because if i imagine a story where WW does nt happen it does nt mean that i am ignoring all the atrocities that happened.it called having an alternate history setting

this is a fictional story don't try to project it directly on the real world.

[Lazgrane]

i just don't understand the point of this thread.when you make a story you have to define the setting and the author choose this way of presenting the country and people of the world,we don't have the right to question the author about. it "could" reflect the it s nature(the author being a nationalist and i don t deny that maybe the whole point of the story is to make people have faith in the JSDF) but if you think that the author is ignoring historical facts that "may" be just you reading to much between the line because if i imagine a story where WW does nt happen it does nt mean that i am ignoring all the atrocities that happened.it called having an alternate history setting

this is a fictional story don't try to project it directly on the real world.

Nah... he just failed to differ fiction from reality

 

This happen pretty frequently. I advise you to ignore ppl like him since it's a waste of time

[mitojee]

 

 

3. There were also war crimes on the allied side.

One can't say that burning down almost half of Tokyo under the pretense of "destroying industry & morale" was justified since it was obvious that as long as the Emperor didn't say "we surrender" the japanese people would fight to the bitter end. Carrier strikes with dive bombers would have done the job of destroying factories without killing 500,000 civilians and making millions homeless.

 

 

The nuke issue has usually sidetracked this point. Say what you will about McNamara, who along with Lemay, organized the planning of these attacks, but he pretty much said it was a war crime. Lemay apparently believed it was a necessary evil while McNamara, in his later years, seems to have felt it was overkill. Either way, the purpose of the firebombing was to straight up (as Mcnamara put it in "The Fog of War")  burn civilians up and terrorize them. "Strategic" bombing of those days was pretty much bombing civilians, especially if you conducted night raids--whatever limited accuracy becomes worthless at that point. Even if doing such things could be considered "justified" and purposeful in ending the war...it's still shitty to kill people like that.

 

There's a good podcast by Dan Carlin called "Hardcore History" where he delves into humanity's major wars and he discusses the issue from a pretty balanced perspective. A close relative of his would have been part of the first US forces attacking Japan, so his relative (and Carlin) are thankful he was spared. Carlin doesn't try to excuse one thing or the other, he reminds us that war itself was atrocious.

 

War is inhumane...the problem is that some take that lesson as a carte blanche, not a warning.

 

One can be thankful for the lives of the people saved from a prolonged war, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a business of slaughtering people in order to mitigate the slaughtering of other people. His podcast on WWI is pretty good too, about how the German military used harsh tactics in Belgium in order to "shorten the war" by crushing resistance with overwhelming force--the problem is the other side used it as propaganda to consolidate support against the brutal "Huns". 

 

In WWII, strategic bombing was supposed to demoralize the populace but in some cases it rallied support for resistance instead. If you back people in to a corner, you don't necessarily know for sure if they will respond by capitulation or fierce resistance. The Japanese populace could have been galvanized the other way by the nuclear bombing: "See, the demons mean to kill us all. Fight to the death."  Fortunately, only some lone hold-outs kept fighting on remote islands, but just because history went one way doesn't mean it was a sure thing.