I believe we (Americans) view the interactions between the US and Japan during WW2 incorrectly.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Yes, America was establishing bases, but I think it's just plain silly to suggest we would have taken over Japan.

It took a war for us to even consider it.

a reply to: Jeremiah33three

I've been married to a Japanese woman for a couple of decades. People in Japan have actually apologized to me for dragging us into WW2 by attacking Pearl Harbor.

a reply to: Jeremiah33three

Pearl harbor was a sneak attack without any declaration of war. They also started taking over other lands like the Philippines. The Japanese were brutal to their prisoners and committed many vile deeds against the Chinese.

As for the nukes.
The use of nukes eliminated the need for invasion which would have caused more death on both sides.
It also kept the Russians from joining the fight and splitting Japan in half like Germany.

a reply to: VierEyes

Right, I did not intend to suggest that the US would have or could have invaded Japan back then or even later. Rather to suggest that the nature of US imperialism was to a large degree based on supporting trade. Perry and his mission To Tokyo was diplomatic but had as a background his small fleet of warships to demonstrate the Us's military might to back it up. When he returned for answers to the diplomatic arraignments a second time he showed up with an even larger fleet.
Coupling that with the Treaty of Paris which ceded Spain's holdings of the Philippines and Guam and the subsequent Philippine American War in which the US refused to recognize the Philippines right to independence pretty much demonstrated that control was at least as high on the US agenda as was free trade among partner nations.

That drive across the Pacific in at least two cases demonstrated that, In Hawaii and the Philippines. So if not invasion of Japan, at least domination in the world of trade.

a reply to: paraphi

Just because I am from America, and I am being taught that mass murder is only Okay when the Americans do it, does not mean I actually have to fall for it.

You punish the people responsible for the atrocities, killing the innocent and especially attempting to justify killing the innocent is NEVER OKAY.

a reply to: VierEyes

took a war for us to even consider it.

and after we did and the guidelines that MacArthur, set up, turned japan from a backwards a@@ militaristic feudal society, into a free independent advanced technical one. who had their own self rule without being overseen by the allies after 7 years.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: VierEyes

took a war for us to even consider it.

and after we did and the guidelines that MacArthur, set up, turned japan from a backwards a@@ militaristic feudal society, into a free independent advanced technical one. who had their own self rule without being overseen by the allies after 7 years.

Free and independent, yes. The Japanese arrived at the technology on their own.

a reply to: VierEyes

nor do they take into account the many peoples killed during the occupation of the various territories..

my sister in law was born in Changi hospital some day I'd like to pay my respects..

www.visitsingapore.com...

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: Jeremiah33three
Hear me out. No offense to anyone who lost family at Peral Harbor, but it was a military base and the people there were soildiers, right? Soildiers join the military expecting to go to war. In actually from a military family, I know how that is. When Japan attacked, it was attacking a military target during a war. The element of surprise is a valid strategy. From a strategic and moral perspective, was it really that bad of them to do? What does the US do (a bit later)? They destroy two full cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing hundreds of thousands of civilization men, women, and children. Now of course stopping them from supporting another country in that war is good and may have saved many innocent lives around the world, and I'm not denying that. I'm simply stating that in my opinion, the attack on Pearl harbor sucked, but it was not a great evil like its taught in schools. The whole Hiroshima and Nagasaki thing was through. Am I wrong?

Look up the "Rape of Nanking", "The Bataan Death March" and "Unit 731".

the rape of manilla.

originally posted by: sarahvital
the rape of manilla.

Cannibalism on Chichijima.

a reply to: JIMC5499

not heard of that one I thought St stevens collage massacre was bad enough..

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: Jeremiah33three
Hear me out. No offense to anyone who lost family at Peral Harbor, but it was a military base and the people there were soildiers, right? Soildiers join the military expecting to go to war. In actually from a military family, I know how that is. When Japan attacked, it was attacking a military target during a war. The element of surprise is a valid strategy. From a strategic and moral perspective, was it really that bad of them to do? What does the US do (a bit later)? They destroy two full cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing hundreds of thousands of civilization men, women, and children. Now of course stopping them from supporting another country in that war is good and may have saved many innocent lives around the world, and I'm not denying that. I'm simply stating that in my opinion, the attack on Pearl harbor sucked, but it was not a great evil like its taught in schools. The whole Hiroshima and Nagasaki thing was through. Am I wrong?

Look up the "Rape of Nanking", "The Bataan Death March" and "Unit 731".

Exactly, my mind changed totally about Japan and who caused the war in the Pacific when I read more about the "Rape of Nanking" and details about Bataan and unit 731.

They were brutal and horrific to ordinary citizens and absolutely fanatical against prisoners of war. By 1941 the war in the Pacific was already in motion.

There is more than circumstantial evidence that an invasion would have taken half a million allied lives alone and lasted for months if not years and there is no way we would leave Japan free and independent. It would have been partitioned off with a Soviet Russia getting a chunk.

Considering Germany's option they didn't reunify till 45 years later.

Are you sure you would know if your country was at war? A lot of countries seem to be at war with Russia. But I don't recall hearing any declarations of war.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Jeremiah33three
The flaw in your argument is "during a war". No state of war was in existence between the United States and Japan at the time. Legally, the two countries were at peace. That is the point of the indignation that followed the event.

originally posted by: Jeremiah33three
Hear me out. No offense to anyone who lost family at Peral Harbor, but it was a military base and the people there were soildiers, right? Soildiers join the military expecting to go to war. In actually from a military family, I know how that is. When Japan attacked, it was attacking a military target during a war. The element of surprise is a valid strategy. From a strategic and moral perspective, was it really that bad of them to do? What does the US do (a bit later)? They destroy two full cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing hundreds of thousands of civilization men, women, and children. Now of course stopping them from supporting another country in that war is good and may have saved many innocent lives around the world, and I'm not denying that. I'm simply stating that in my opinion, the attack on Pearl harbor sucked, but it was not a great evil like its taught in schools. The whole Hiroshima and Nagasaki thing was through. Am I wrong?

Well first they were sailors...lol

I view nether as a great "evil"

Dropping the bombs saved millions of deaths that would have happened if we invaded and the firebombing of their cities cost more lives than the two nukes by a good margin, so it isn't like nukes in general are the worst.

The US put heavy sanctions and embargos on Japanese as their war started in 1939 and they needed the resources to continue. Bombing PH was to wipe any capabilities the US would have in the Pacific in the hopes it would force America to back off, but of course it didn't work.

originally posted by: musicismagic
The Japanese were for the most part have been brought up to believe.American saved Japan. Some old timers still hate Americans.

I would say very few older people dislike America as the vast majority love us for what we did after the war. We brought Democracy and women suffrage to japan. Didn't enslave them as the Japanese would have done and did in China, Korea and their own people etc.

The Japanese were truly the haves and have nots in a very ruthless society that it is crazy just how evil they were compared to how they are today.

a reply to: Jeremiah33three

I've only read your OP and I'm sure others have pointed this out, but in case they haven't;

Japan and the US were not at war at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbour.
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour was to START a war.
The US bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to STOP a war.

Yes, the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were horrific.
But they have served as a lesson to mankind - we absolutely can not put ourselves in the position where nuclear weapons are seen as the least worst option.
We know what damage they can do now, we have seen the horrors.
Someone would have used a nuclear weapon at some point, the harsh truth is that it was best that someone did back then rather than now considering the size and magnitude of the weapons available today.

a reply to: Caled
Proxy war. The other countries are very careful not to attack Russia directly with explosive weapons, and vice-versa, and so legally speaking (which is what I've been talking about) a state of peace exists between them. In fact the present state of "sanctions being imposed" is precisely what existed prior to Pearl Harbour.

originally posted by: CthruU



2403 innocent souls died at pearl harbour.

Something like 109 thousand innocent souls died in Japan.

The OP has a valid point that patriotic ignorance can't explain away.

( Oh boy, I've done it now. )

so the USA should have just let Pearl Harbor go?
abandoned our Philippine allies?

your 'patriotic ignorance' is my 'learned history'.

a reply to: Freeborn

That's all fair points.