Why were the Japanese so cruel in WW2?

[Magnum PEI]

This thread is awesome.
Sure the atom bombs saved lives, and of course there was a thin line between civilians and bleigerents, but who gave America the right to decide who's who? How many American civilians died in WW2? I'd say its pretty cruel to level every major city in two countries while your own population sleeps soundly. Oh yeah, I forgot "they started it". As I understand it, American and Japanese diplomacy had deteriorated to a such a point that by late Nov. 1941 they were all but in a state of war. Why does Japan get all the blame? The fact is there were two rival powers in competition for control of the Pacific Ocean. One was confined to an archipelego with little natural resources, while the other controled a whole continent with a large hinterland that it obtained mostly through conquest and ethnic cleansing in the previous century. Japan gambled and lost- America bombed it to smithereens in order to "end the war quicker" and "save lives", and also to maintain its status quo of dominating the Pacific. Too bad for Japan-it should've started its expansion a century earlier, when that kind of thing was allowed.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI

I'd say its pretty cruel to level every major city in two countries while your own population sleeps soundly.

Yeah, that would be pretty cruel, but that's not what happened.

Every major city in two countries wasn't leveled and the Yanks weren't exactly sleeping soundly while the whole "World War II" thing was going on. A few seconds on Google tells me that more than 10% of the population was directly involved and (while the I haven't researched this extensively) my guess is that the whole lot of them 'mericans had something to do with the effort.

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI

Oh yeah, I forgot "they started it".

They did start it. You can't pish-posh that fact away with quotation marks.

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

quote snipped

I am astonished by the length of your post and how little there was of anything of substance in it.

Instead of insulting everyone in this thread, why don't you refute what you think was wrong?

I don't think any person has that much free time. Furthermore, why should anybody have to put in time to refute opinions passed on as facts when there is little hope of it having any impact?

People just don't know how or just are not willing to make a valid argument. This is the Internet - most posters feel that it is your job to disprove their (non-cited and heavily biased) "facts".

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yeah, that would be pretty cruel, but that's not what happened.

Every major city in two countries wasn't leveled and the Yanks weren't exactly sleeping soundly while the whole "World War II" thing was going on. A few seconds on Google tells me that more than 10% of the population was directly involved and (while the I haven't researched this extensively) my guess is that the whole lot of them 'mericans had something to do with the effort.
.

In WWII, 25% of American GDP was involved in the war effort. One-quarter of the USA economy was dedicated to the fight in a direct way.

When Eisenhower warned of a military industrial complex, American defence spending was about 15% of GDP.

For the Vietnam conflict, about nine percent of American GDP was devoted to the war effort.

Reagan's defence buildup in the 1980's occupied about 6.5% of American GDP.

Through the last decade, American defence spending, in spite of Iraq and Afghanistan, bottomed at about 3.2% of GDP and is currently a little over 4% of GDP. Defence spending under GW Bush II, as a percent of the USA economy, was far less than you saw under Jimmy Carter's administration.

In the first instance, it's called "total war" where entire populations are devoted to the war effort. Pretty much all Americans were subject to rationing of basics like sugar or tires as examples.

The size of the American economy and its consequent ability to service a conflict is so vast these days that even concurrent efforts like Afghanistan and Iraq are virtually invisible economically in the lives of the average American compared to the individual citizen in WWII . . . . . although moral questions might be hotly debated with interest.

Sure the atom bombs saved lives, and of course there was a thin line between civilians and bleigerents, but who gave America the right to decide who's who? How many American civilians died in WW2?

WTF?

They did start it. You can't pish-posh that fact away with quotation marks

It was a different time for sure.

Given the interlinking, inter-dependent nature of the global economy, plus the MAD principle, I would doubt you would ever see its like again.

Wars will continue to be fought indirectly via proxies or directly against proxies but not directly between major powers.

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI

This thread is awesome.
Sure the atom bombs saved lives, and of course there was a thin line between civilians and bleigerents, but who gave America the right to decide who's who? How many American civilians died in WW2? I'd say its pretty cruel to level every major city in two countries while your own population sleeps soundly. Oh yeah, I forgot "they started it". As I understand it, American and Japanese diplomacy had deteriorated to a such a point that by late Nov. 1941 they were all but in a state of war. Why does Japan get all the blame? The fact is there were two rival powers in competition for control of the Pacific Ocean. One was confined to an archipelego with little natural resources, while the other controled a whole continent with a large hinterland that it obtained mostly through conquest and ethnic cleansing in the previous century. Japan gambled and lost- America bombed it to smithereens in order to "end the war quicker" and "save lives", and also to maintain its status quo of dominating the Pacific. Too bad for Japan-it should've started its expansion a century earlier, when that kind of thing was allowed.

Somehow I believe that you learned your history from pamphlets handed out by bearded homeless guys on street corners.

[tjinaz]

After this post i don't think anyone can degrade the American education system if this is what they are teaching in Canada. No matter what happens its America's fault. If the US gets attacked it is because they create the situation for selfish reasons. If other nations bomb cities with the intent to kill and terrorize the population, America is wrong to follow suit. Historical context at the time is that America was NOT the most powerful nation on the earth and was happy staying in its part of the world.

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI
This thread is awesome.
Sure the atom bombs saved lives, and of course there was a thin line between civilians and bleigerents, but who gave America the right to decide who's who? How many American civilians died in WW2? I'd say its pretty cruel to level every major city in two countries while your own population sleeps soundly. Oh yeah, I forgot "they started it". As I understand it, American and Japanese diplomacy had deteriorated to a such a point that by late Nov. 1941 they were all but in a state of war. Why does Japan get all the blame? The fact is there were two rival powers in competition for control of the Pacific Ocean. One was confined to an archipelego with little natural resources, while the other controled a whole continent with a large hinterland that it obtained mostly through conquest and ethnic cleansing in the previous century. Japan gambled and lost- America bombed it to smithereens in order to "end the war quicker" and "save lives", and also to maintain its status quo of dominating the Pacific. Too bad for Japan-it should've started its expansion a century earlier, when that kind of thing was allowed.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

I don't think any person has that much free time. Furthermore, why should anybody have to put in time to refute opinions passed on as facts when there is little hope of it having any impact?

People just don't know how or just are not willing to make a valid argument. This is the Internet - most posters feel that it is your job to disprove their (non-cited and heavily biased) "facts".

The poster basically said everyone was wrong and if they want to know the truth, just talk to him. That is what about a dozen paragraphs summarizes to.

This happens to be one of the more interesting threads that did not end in name calling, until that post.

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

The poster basically said everyone was wrong and if they want to know the truth, just talk to him. That is what about a dozen paragraphs summarizes to.

No he did not.

This happens to be one of the more interesting threads that did not end in name calling, until that post.

To each their own I guess. If reading factoids and historical revisionism is interesting to you then have at it.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

No he did not.
To each their own I guess. If reading factoids and historical revisionism is interesting to you then have at it.

Alright then, for those of us who have bitten the apple of revisionism, what then took place?

What is your point of view? The US started WW2?
The holocaust was military driven and the German civilians had no idea?
The Japanese were attacked by the US and were defending themselves?
The US are war criminals for using atomic bombs?
The Japanese did not have a propensity for committing mass suicide either in battle or in the safety of their homes?

I can clearly answer any of these, from my point of view. The answers in order are no, no, no, no, no.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Alright then, for those of us who have bitten the apple of revisionism, what then took place?

What is your point of view? The US started WW2?
The holocaust was military driven and the German civilians had no idea?
The Japanese were attacked by the US and were defending themselves?
The US are war criminals for using atomic bombs?
The Japanese did not have a propensity for committing mass suicide either in battle or in the safety of their homes?

I can clearly answer any of these, from my point of view. The answers in order are no, no, no, no, no.

I'm not sure how this is sailing over your head like a line drive to right field, but the issue that was raised by the post you seem to have such a problem with is the way that people have been passing off their own opinions on certain matters as if they are factual statements.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm not sure how this is sailing over your head like a line drive to right field, but the issue that was raised by the post you seem to have such a problem with is the way that people have been passing off their own opinions on certain matters as if they are factual statements.

If you don't like it, then post about it. Massive generalizations like you have made are pointless. If something is wrong, quote it. Sailing over my head? I have responded to your points several times now. Point out something that is wrong and state what you think the truth is, in other words contribute to the thread.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

If you don't like it, then post about it. Massive generalizations like you have made are pointless. If something is wrong, quote it. Sailing over my head? I have responded to your points several times now. Point out something that is wrong and state what you think the truth is, in other words contribute to the thread.

Massive generalizations? WTF are you talking about?

BTW, I have a few posts in this thread that make my position quite clear when it comes to people pretending as if there is absolute fact in these matters.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by valo403

people have been passing off their own opinions on certain matters as if they are factual statements.

Interesting, please elaborate.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Interesting, please elaborate.

You want me to elaborate on the concept of people passing off opinion as fact? Seriously?

[Magnum PEI]

Ah. Nobody cares what I think. They just hurl insults, without adressing my poiints.
1. The Pacific Waar wasn't the result of a sndeak attack by the Empire of Japan but a long process that started with America's "annexation" of Hawaii and the Philipinnes.
2.Japan was evil, but America's wickedness is in the same ballpark.
3. America is not the good guys Holywood and the Education system would have you believe. They had no interest in liberating, unless it was necessary for victory.

[theonlywhiteout]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Somehow I believe that you learned your history from pamphlets handed out by bearded homeless guys on street corners.

Better than from Hollywood.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by theonlywhiteout

Better than from Hollywood.

Sorry its actually called textbooks, courses, and books that I can get from most libraries or bookstores.

[theonlywhiteout]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Sorry its actually called textbooks, courses, and books that I can get from most libraries or bookstores.

My comment wasn't necessarily directed towards you

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by valo403

You want me to elaborate on the concept of people passing off opinion as fact? Seriously?

Elaborate on opinion being passed off as fact in this thread, as you claim to have happened. Quit running around and respond to that. It seems so simple, you claim something took place and I asked you for an example. You respond with more questions rather than examples.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI

Ah. Nobody cares what I think. They just hurl insults, without adressing my poiints.
The Pacific Waar wasn't the result of a sndeak attack by the Empire of Japan but a long process that started with America's "annexation" of Hawaii and the Philipinnes.

I'm a little drunk right now but maybe when I wake up someone will have explained what political or territorial rights Japan had to Hawaii or the Philippines....EVER

And here all these years I thought Japan was just pissed off because of an impending embargo's and the fear of the USA's mighty pacific warships.