64 Years ago, Yesterday... (Warning some graphic material)

page: 16
53
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 





I didn't know that! In that case, it was nothing but genocide, and it was a crime up there with the Nazis' genocides, if not as big.


It's not true. Please read previous posts.




An inner cabinet in Tokyo authorized Japan's only officially sanctioned diplomatic initiative. The Japanese dubbed this inner cabinet the Big Six because it comprised just six men: Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki, Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo, Army Minister Korechika Anami, Navy Minister Mitsumasa Yonai, and the chiefs of staff of the Imperial Army (General Yoshijiro Umezu) and Imperial Navy (Admiral Soemu Toyoda). In complete secrecy, the Big Six agreed on an approach to the Soviet Union in June 1945. This was not to ask the Soviets to deliver a "We surrender" note; rather, it aimed to enlist the Soviets as mediators to negotiate an end to the war satisfactory to the Big Six--in other words, a peace on terms satisfactory to the dominant militarists. Their minimal goal was not confined to guaranteed retention of the Imperial Institution; they also insisted on preservation of the old militaristic order in Japan, the one in which they ruled.





The conduit for this initiative was Japan's ambassador in Moscow, Naotake Sato. He communicated with Foreign Minister Togo--and, thanks to code breaking, with American policymakers. Ambassador Sato emerges in the intercepts as a devastating cross-examiner ruthlessly unmasking for history the feebleness of the whole enterprise. Sato immediately told Togo that the Soviets would never bestir themselves on behalf of Japan. The foreign minister could only insist that Sato follow his instructions. Sato demanded to know whether the government and the military supported the overture and what its legal basis was--after all, the official Japanese position, adopted in an Imperial Conference in June 1945 with the emperor's sanction, was a fight to the finish. The ambassador also demanded that Japan state concrete terms to end the war, otherwise the effort could not be taken seriously. Togo responded evasively that the "directing powers" and the government had authorized the effort--he did not and could not claim that the military in general supported it or that the fight-to-the-end policy had been replaced. Indeed, Togo added: "Please bear particularly in mind, however, that we are not seeking the Russians' mediation for anything like an unconditional surrender."





This last comment triggered a fateful exchange. Critics have pointed out correctly that both Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew (the former U.S. ambassador to Japan and the leading expert on that nation within the government) and Secretary of War Henry Stimson advised Truman that a guarantee that the Imperial Institution would not be eliminated could prove essential to obtaining Japan's surrender. The critics further have argued that if only the United States had made such a guarantee, Japan would have surrendered. But when Foreign Minister Togo informed Ambassador Sato that Japan was not looking for anything like unconditional surrender, Sato promptly wired back a cable that the editors of the "Magic" Diplomatic Summary made clear to American policymakers "advocate[s] unconditional surrender provided the Imperial House is preserved." Togo's reply, quoted in the "Magic" Diplomatic Summary of July 22, 1945, was adamant: American policymakers could read for themselves Togo's rejection of Sato's proposal--with not even a hint that a guarantee of the Imperial House would be a step in the right direction. Any rational person following this exchange would conclude that modifying the demand for unconditional surrender to include a promise to preserve the Imperial House would not secure Japan's surrender.





Following prompting by Kido, at the emperor’s bidding and in super secrecy the Big Six initiated tentative steps to secure the Soviet Union as a mediator to procure a negotiated end to the war—not to surrender. The feeble effort went nowhere. The “Big Six” never agreed on what terms might be offered to the Soviet Union to act as mediator, much less on terms to end the war. Nor did the emperor intervene decisively to lay down terms for mediation or for ending the war.


Source




posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 





On 30 June 2007, Japan's defense minister Fumio Kyuma said the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan by the United States during World War II was an inevitable way to end the war. Kyuma said "I now have come to accept in my mind that in order to end the war, it could not be helped (Shikata ga nai) that an atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and that countless numbers of people suffered great tragedy." Kyuma, who is from Nagasaki, said the bombing caused great suffering in the city, but he does not resent the U.S. because it prevented the Soviet Union from entering the war with Japan.[22] Nagasaki mayor Tomihisa Taue protested against Kyuma, and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe apologized over Kyuma's remark to Hiroshima A-bomb survivors.[23] In the wake of the outrage provoked by his statements, Kyuma had to resign on 3 July.[24] However, the comments of Kyuma were almost similar to those made by Emperor Hirohito when, in his first ever press conference given in Tokyo in 1975, he was asked what he thought of the bombing of Hiroshima. Hirohito then answered : "It's very regrettable that nuclear bombs were dropped and I feel sorry for the citizens of Hiroshima but it couldn't be helped (Shikata ga nai) because that happened in wartime."[25]


Source



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


There are more pictures that show great detail at this site. What is really spooky is the "shadows" left on bridges, tanks, etc. Scroll down the pictures and you will see.

Hiroshima



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by desertdreamer
 


Interesting Photos, The shadow parts are kind of eerie...
Did you ever here of the Japanese Raping of Nanking?

Very Graphic:

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

Source 5

Source 6

Source 7

Source 8

Source 9

Please forgive the amount of Sourced Pictures, but I was looking at them and thinking to myself, why wouldn't the U.S. drop two atomic bombs to stop this kind of thing.

[edit on 16-8-2009 by Oatmeal]



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by desertdreamer
 





Did you ever here of the Japanese Raping of Nanking?


Here is some background:




In 1928, the Chinese Nationalist Government moved the capital of China from Peking (Beijing) to Nanking. The city normally held about 250,000 people, but by the mid-1930s its population had swollen to more than 1 million. Many of them were refugees, fleeing from the Japanese armies which had invaded China. On November 11, 1937, after securing control of Shanghai, the Japanese army advanced towards Nanking from different directions. In early December, the Japanese troops were already in the outskirts of Nanking. On December 9, the Japanese troops launched a massive attack upon the city. On the 12th, the defending Chinese troops decided to retreat to the other side of the Yangtze River (Yangzi Jiang). On December 13, the 6th and 16th Divisions of the Japanese Army entered the city?s Zhongshan and Pacific Gates. In the afternoon, two Japanese Navy fleets arrived. In the following six weeks, the occupying forces engaged in an orgy of looting and mass execution which came to be known as the Nanking Massacre. Most experts agree that at least 300,000 Chinese died, and 20,000 women were raped. Some estimate the numbers to be much higher - 340,000 and 80,000 respectively. The Japanese government, to this day, maintains that the death toll is greatly exaggerated, and some politicians have even claimed that the Massacre itself is a fabrication. During the Nanking Massacre, the Japanese committed a litany of atrocities against innocent civilians, including mass execution, raping, looting, and burning. During the Nanking Massacre, the Japanese committed a litany of atrocities against innocent civilians, including mass execution, raping, looting, and burning. It is impossible to keep a detailed account of all of these crimes. However, from the scale and the nature of these crimes as documented by survivors and the diaries of the Japanese militarists, the chilling evidence of this historical tragedy is indisputable.





On December 13th, a large number of refugees tried to escape from the Japanese by trying to cross the Yangtze River. They were trapped on the east bank because no transportation was available; many of them tried to swim across the river. Meanwhile, the Japanese arrived and fired at the people on the shore and in the river. A Japanese soldier reported that the next day he saw an uncountable number of dead bodies of adults and children covering the whole river. He estimated that more than 50,000 people were killed at this tragic incident of the Nanking massacre.





When the Japanese troops first entered the city on the 13th, the streets were crowded with more than 100,000 refugees or injured Chinese soldiers. The Japanese relentlessly fired at these people. The next morning, tanks and artilleries entered the city and killing of people continued. Dead bodies covered the two major streets of the city. The streets became "streets of blood" as a result of the two-day annihilation.





A large number of Chinese soldiers had already been captured in the suburban areas before the Japanese entered the city. The rest of the Chinese soldiers scattered inside the city and changed into civilian clothes. After the "City-Entering Ceremony" on the 17th, the Japanese arrested anybody who was suspected to be a Chinese soldier. A large number of young men who were arrested, together with those who had been captured earlier, were sent outside of the city to be massacred, from several thousand to tens of thousand at a time. In most cases, the captives were shot by machine guns, and those who were still alive were bayoneted individually. In some cases, the Japanese poured gasoline onto the captives and burned them alive. In some cases, poison gas was used.





Numerous atrocities occurred within and around the city, and the victims were largely civilians. Japanese soldiers invented and exercised inhumane and barbaric methods of killing. The brutalities included shooting, stabbing, cutting open the abdomen, excavating the heart, decapitation (beheading), drowning, burning, punching the body and the eyes with an awl, and even castration or punching through the vagina.





An estimated 20,000 women were raped by the Japanese soldiers during the six weeks of the Nanking Massacre, most were brutally killed afterwards. The Japanese soldiers even raped girls less than ten years old, women over seventy years old, pregnant women, and nuns. Rampant raping took place in the streets or at religious worshiping places during the day. Many women were gang raped. Some Japanese even forced fathers to rape their daughters, sons to rape their mothers, etc. Those who resisted were killed immediately.





When the Japanese were approaching Nanking in mid November, a group of concerned foreigners formed an international rescue committee to establish a safety zone in an attempt to protect the refugees. The safety zone was located inside the city and consisted of more than twenty refugee camps, each of which accommodated from 200 to 12,000 people. During the six weeks of the Nanking Massacre, the Japanese frequently entered the safety zone to arrest young men. Every time, several hundred young men were arrested and executed on the site.





The Japanese looted all the storehouses and seized virtually everything from the civilians. The loot included jewelry, coins, domesticated animals, food, clothes, antiques, and even inexpensive items such as cigarettes, eggs, fountain pens, and buttons.





The Japanese organized burning of buildings in the city. After they had set fire to buildings using either gasoline or some other inflammable chemicals, they hid, waited for and killed people who came to extinguish the fire. Numerous people were killed by fire. Nanking, once a beautiful historical city, was burned to ashes by the Japanese.


Aggressive war is pretty evil to me, I am sure glad The U.S.A. dropped those two bombs and ended it.

[edit on 16-8-2009 by Oatmeal]



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


No offense but do you have something against the japanese. Because Iknow many japanese people including my wife and they are the most kind and peaceful people I've ever met. Much more nice and polite and peaceful than us americans. I'm movingto Japan oneday, cant wait to leave the US. 60 or 75 years ago or whatever they werent peaceful but they are now. Everytime in this thread someone attempts to post something about what happened to japanese you respond with something that they japanese did. Whats the deal? This thread isnt about that.

Yes the raping of nanking was a horrible thing. But probably 99 percent of japanese involved in that are dead. Japanese nowadays are good candidates for the most peaceful people on earth Id say. Much more than bloodthirsty america can say.

Start your own thread for that stuff.

And no they shouldnt have droped 2 bombs, it would have killed countless more people, and it would have probably completely killed my wife whole family (who btw NONE of them were involved in war) and then my wife wouldnt have born and she is the light of my life. My soul mate, there is no other girl me. I've been with her since I was a kid. If she was never born I'd be alone forever.

You said your wofe is mexicana in that u2u message to me, I assume that means shes mexican. Howd you like if I said we shoulda bombed mexico at a time when before she was born and kileld them all. You wouldnt have your wife. See how it feels?

Whats the deal?


[edit on 16-8-2009 by jeasahtheseer]



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by desertdreamer
 


Interesting photos, desert. Creepy as hell. The one with the guy standing with a uniform on and everything around him in rubble is freaky. War is hell. I'd know I've been in Iraq.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


No, I had not heard of that until now.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by jeasahtheseer
 


I know, looking at them is pretty spooky. Just think, they are the only ones that have walked through a true nuclear landscape.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by desertdreamer
 


Yeah, man. Thats what I find creepy about it. My wifes grandma whos now dead was there and survived and before my wife left japan when she was ten she described it to my wife, and she told me the stories. Its creepy stuff. Some people deformed and stuff. Building were rubble everywhere. Charred bodies.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by jeasahtheseer
 


Yep, that was some bad stuff. Hopefully history will not repeat itself. Thanks for the links man!



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeasahtheseer

This may sound weird, but I'm a marine myself but I hate war.

[edit on by jeasahtheseer]


Only insane military members love war...

I put 28 years in and I hated every contingency, battle, war we ever fought. Total waste of life, money and time, but there are people in the world that disagree.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Yeah man I'm gonna have to agree. Especially this war man, nothing good is happening on both sides. Its rediclous.,Also this goddamn war took my little sisters life.

War sickens me.

Your right the only people i imagine enjoying it would be psychos and crazies.



[edit on 16-8-2009 by jeasahtheseer]



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jeasahtheseer
 





No offense but do you have something against the japanese. Because Iknow many japanese people including my wife and they are the most kind and peaceful people I've ever met. Much more nice and polite and peaceful than us americans. I'm movingto Japan oneday, cant wait to leave the US. 60 or 75 years ago or whatever they werent peaceful but they are now. Everytime in this thread someone attempts to post something about what happened to japanese you respond with something that they japanese did. Whats the deal? This thread isnt about that.


No, I don't have anything against the Japanese. In regard to people posting things that happened to the Japanese, They should understand that the Japanese basically asked for it. I told you I studied this war. It is a different time now, thank God, but back then the Japanese were ruled by a militaristic regime, bent on waging an aggressive war against innocent people. The OP started this thread stating that 64 years ago yesterday the USA used a weapon of mass destruction on Hiroshima Japan. Three days later on the 9th the USA again bombed the East (Nagasaki), in total killing over 250 thousand innocent men, women and children.
The USA would go down in history as the first ‘modern’ nation on earth to do so.
64 years later, we’ve forgotten. I feel quite sorry for the people who died as a result of the two atomic bombs, as I feel sorry for all the military, civilian and innocent people who died during this bloody conflict. There was a damn good reason we dropped those two bombs, killing 250 thousand innocent men women and children, as the OP states. To end the War. So no, I have nothing but good feelings toward all people, my best friend is half Japanese and half Italian. My wife is from Mexico. I have been studying this war for over 35 years, and it pains me to see or here someone obviously much younger, try and explain history but get it so totally wrong. Excuse me.
平和



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


I put four years in myself-
平和




They shoulda dropped 2 bombs, what a heartless and mean thing to say.


There is the problem. They would not surrender even after the first one...

平和

[edit on 16-8-2009 by Oatmeal]



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


Same here....4 years active duty out in the desert.




posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Oatmeal
 


Ok I understand I'm not mad. I didnt actually put you on ignore either lol. I wouldnt have even said anything but the we should have dropped more bombs thing bothered me, because I wouldnt have my wife most likely if that happened!! Because it probably would have killed her whole family, I think itdid except for her grandparents, the bombs that was dropped soif more were dropped in the same area theyd for sure have died.' I'm sure you can understand where I'm coming from, you are a grown man with a wife who I'm sure you love.

And like I saidI find this interesting too just that comment bothered me.

You are military? I'm marine, I was shot and discharged a while back. Lil sis died from a car bomb outside a cafe in 2005.

Anyways peace. No hard feelings.

Peace


[edit on 16-8-2009 by jeasahtheseer]



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Let me say something on the behalf of Oatmeal.

First, I appreciate the attention, dedication and thought the poster Oatmeal has put into this thread even though I may not agree - but I do respect his/her opinion.

When we, Oatmeal and I use quotes, even from the same places, to back up our beliefs, news posts, wiki etc, I’ve never felt for even a moment Oatmeal has a personal grudge against the Japanese.

Sure, anger at the atrocities of war committed, but, I think Oatmeal is fair enough to admit those atrocities are not just one sided.

Truly, I don’t think this is his/her case it's a mater of of poking fingers at the Japanese, as much as it is doing what he/she can to support their argument in favor of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - which the poster Oatmeal has always made clear, in his/her opinion would save more lives than it devastated.

peace



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by jeasahtheseer
 





And like I saidI find this interesting too just that comment bothered me.


I did not mean to bother you. It is quite interesting material, it was a VERY different time back in the 1940's. Nothing like today. Like I said, 35 years of studying this stuff and I know it like the back of my hand. I still consider you to be on my "Friends" list. That has nothing to do with this, they are two separate things. I'll bet your wife is a beautiful person, and wish you both the very best.
平和



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by jeasahtheseer
 





And like I saidI find this interesting too just that comment bothered me.


I was Field Artillery...stayed way in the back, out of harms way for the most part.
平和

[edit on 16-8-2009 by Oatmeal]





top topics
 
53
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join