?si=i68pWsvNeiviOihS
Edit: I just noticed the link doesn’t work because of the 16+ age certificate. Go to Youtube and search for: “Sweeping it under the rug: the truth about the Japanese Holocaust”
I stumbled upon this gem of a youtube documentary. It’s long and it is seriously quite harsh (youtube demonitised it and gave it a 16+ rating).
Basically, the narrator sets out the attrocities committed by the Japanese and the reasoning behind their actions.
He also points out the attrocities committed by the allies. And the similarities behind the reasoning for that behaviour.
One example is the rape of Nanking and the use of nuclear bombs. Is one really worse than the other?
But, for more interesting is the similarity behind the justifications for both actions. Both were carried out to prevent future losses to the own troops and both were bids to install governments which would be pro the country doing the attack.
The narrator ends by pointing out that, Germany being the exception, countries don’t teach history very objectively. They tend to gloss over their own failings and make themselves out to be the good guys.
Which, basically, leads to misinformed kids growing into misinformed adults.
The actual truth hardly ever being black and white. It’s nearly always muddy as hell.
Shouldn’t schools teach the muddy version of history?
There’s some other great questions / debates he raises:
- why do we not refer to Dresden or Hiroshima as the slaughtering of civilians. Or the Hiroshima genocide, for example?
- is it ethical to use research gained by means of horrendous torture and murder (Unit 731’s research… and subsequent pardoning of those involved)?
- was it correct to leave the Japanese royal family out of the Tokyo trials? And if those arguments stick, would they have stuck for Hitler and Mussolini as well?
All in all, a very worthwhile 2 hour investment (barring the advertisement in the begin).
@shavixmir
Germany was bombed flat in WWII, not only Dresden. Two waves of bombers flew over German cities: the first wave dropped bombs which burst above the rooftops and were specifically designed to create a shock wave to blow the roofs off. The second wave of bombers dropped phosphorus (fire) bombs into the now open houses. This strategy was specifically designed to terrorise the German civilian population and demoralise Germans. They were not military targets, they were specifically civilian targets. Only two major German cities were spared this horrendous bombardment: Wiesbaden and Heidelberg. It was a clear violation of the Geneva Convention, to target civilians.
The putative rationale was that if the German people were demoralised, the NAZI government would relent and give up the war effort (it didn't). The real reason was that it was England's revenge for the V2 attacks on London and Coventry, but on a vastly greater scale.
Why do we not refer to the systematic bombing of Germany, or the atomic bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, as "genocide"? Because they were not an attempt to wipe out an entire ethnic community or race. Atrocities committed against non-combatants they were, in any case. Not every case of mass murder is defined as "genocide".
Dig just below the surface of almost any country and you can find something astonishing. King Leopold ran an ivory scheme in the Congo which is estimated to have killed 500,000 Africans per year for 20 years running. Knocks Hitler's total into a cocked hat. Belgium, yup tiny little Belgium, home of waffles, chocolate, and mass murder.
@shavixmir saidClearly the governments that do the bad things control educational curriculums and the censorship varies from government to government and generally these things are more likely to be addressed and recognised the further back they are in history. I don’t think there are many British schools that don’t teach their kids about Dresden in terms of an atrocity.
https://youtu.be/18Xe9HqW8Q4?si=i68pWsvNeiviOihS
Edit: I just noticed the link doesn’t work because of the 16+ age certificate. Go to Youtube and search for: “Sweeping it under the rug: the truth about the Japanese Holocaust”
I stumbled upon this gem of a youtube documentary. It’s long and it is seriously quite harsh (youtube demonitised it and gave it a 16+ ra ...[text shortened]... s well?
All in all, a very worthwhile 2 hour investment (barring the advertisement in the begin).
Even as individuals we tend to excuse or minimise our own trespasses whilst focusing on those committed against us
@moonbus saidThe Germans perfected the firestorm bombing campaigns against London and other major cities in te esry stages of the war. They also developed the tactic of aerial bombing of civilian populations in Guernica during the Spanish civil war.
@shavixmir
Germany was bombed flat in WWII, not only Dresden. Two waves of bombers flew over German cities: the first wave dropped bombs which burst above the rooftops and were specifically designed to create a shock wave to blow the roofs off. The second wave of bombers dropped phosphorus (fire) bombs into the now open houses. This strategy was specifically designed to te ...[text shortened]... a cocked hat. Belgium, yup tiny little Belgium, home of waffles, chocolate, and mass murder.
You’re right none of the examples were genocide but like Dresden they were certainly war crimes, I think they probably got passed over due to their juxtaposition to the Nazi Holocaust of the European Jews.
No one was ready for any German tales of woe, the rape of Berlin by Russian forces was definitely a war crime too but no one raised an eyebrow.
@averagejoe1 saidMilitary targets should have been chosen, instead of cities largely populated by women, children, and the elderly (most of the fighting-age men were off...well, fighting).
@kevcvs57
Given all of the above, does anyone think that we should not have dropped the two bombs for the purpose of ending the conflict?
What the US did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was abominable and cowardly.
@soothfast saidTrue city. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were targeted because of their contribution to the war via manufacturing.
Military targets should have been chosen, instead of cities largely populated by women, children, and the elderly (most of the fighting-age men were off...well, fighting).
What the US did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was abominable and cowardly.
It still is ghastly but, those cities were not chosen willy nilly. Note, they did not target Tokyo
- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 43649
@earl-of-trumps saidMy grandfathers LST sailed through and they went ashore very close after they were dropped. He said the destruction was terrible.
True city. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were targeted because of their contribution to the war via manufacturing.
It still is ghastly but, those cities were not chosen willy nilly. Note, they did not target Tokyo
@soothfast saidBelow is a link to an article describing the events:
Military targets should have been chosen, instead of cities largely populated by women, children, and the elderly (most of the fighting-age men were off...well, fighting).
What the US did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was abominable and cowardly.
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/bombing-nagasaki-august-9-1945
Photos show the level of destruction.
In fairness, Truman warned the Japanese to surrender or face “prompt and utter destruction.” They chose to ignore the warning.
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/trinity-why-it-really-mattered
@moonbus saidThat would be even better than hitting military targets, but only if it really convinced the Japanese to surrender unconditionally (the US would settle for nothing less). Personally I think the chances of this would have been quite slim, but it would have been worth a shot.
Below is a link to an article describing the events:
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/bombing-nagasaki-august-9-1945
Photos show the level of destruction.
There was a lot of confusion after Hiroshima, and Uncle Sam did not give Japan much time to consider its options before dropping an even bigger atomic bomb on Nagasaki. Simply one of the most disgraceful, shameful, and vile acts ever committed by a nation in the history of (in)humanity. The nearly total carpet bombing of German cities when it was clear that the Third Reich was well on its way to imploding is another example.
@earl-of-trumps saidYou didn’t watch the video then?
True city. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were targeted because of their contribution to the war via manufacturing.
It still is ghastly but, those cities were not chosen willy nilly. Note, they did not target Tokyo
Most senior US generals (like Eisenhouwer and Nimitz) were opposed to the using of the nuclear weapons; their reasoning being that Japan was already starting to sue for peace.
Nagasaki and Hiroshima were not industrial cities. And primarily inhabited by the old, the very young and women.
Tokyo was bombed flat (100.000 dead) by conventional means.