PDA

View Full Version : Tokyo: We Are Coming



Aiko
Thursday, May 6th, 2004, 09:00 PM
Only thirty years before the release of “Lady Snowblood,” several million New Yorkers cheered a vast patriotic parade that streamed up Fifth Avenue for eleven hours in June 1942. The evident highlight was a float depicting a big American eagle swooping down on a herd of yellow rats. As historian John Dower has observed in War Without Mercy, this caricature captured the essential symbolic features of racist characterization of the American stance toward Japanese people – the strong individual versus an undifferentiated pack of vermin denied any acknowledgement of humanity – an embodiment of the iconic image of the yellow hordes of Asia.

Abundant contemporary imagery of rats, insects, monkeys or vipers was publicly invoked as justification for exterminationist rhetoric advocating wholesale slaughter of the Japanese. “Rodent Exterminator” was stenciled on helmets of many Marines during the 1944 invasion of Iwo Jima. The collection of body parts as trophies from dead (and living) Japanese was so commonplace that personnel returning from the Pacific theater were routinely screened for trophy possession prior to embarkation. In 1943 the magazine Leatherneck published a photograph of Japanese corpses with an uppercase headline reading “Good Japs,” while the following year Life published a full-page photograph of an attractive blonde posing with a Japanese skull. Another photograph showed Japanese skulls as ornaments on American military vehicles. Contemporary Japanese reaction was to view such material as indicative of the American character. For their part, officially sanctioned American perspectives endorsed notions that the Japanese were mad or crazy with a perverse wish to die, and deserved the death brought to them by Americans.

nicholas
Friday, May 7th, 2004, 01:31 AM
It's regrettable that the mistakes of the past were made. Perhaps we can only learn from them. One has to be aware that during wartime both sides use propaganda to dehumanize the other.

I wonder though, what is your motivation for posting this?

Nicholas

Evolved
Friday, May 7th, 2004, 02:05 AM
The government harness the pent up racial frustrations and dislike of the blacks, Hispanics, Arabs (and multiculturalism in general) at home and point it toward other races or countries. It is really sad to see self-proclaimed 'free thinking white people' buy into it.

Vlad Cletus
Friday, May 7th, 2004, 02:09 AM
I guess you're informed about what happened in the pre-War time, and WW II. I thought Japanese students weren't told of the atrocities Imperial Japan committed during the War. From Manchuria and Unit 731, to South and SE Asia. From what I've gathered is that what's implemented in Japanese textbooks are a bunch of fabrications concerning the Pacific Theater.

The Racist propaganda is merely a motivation tool of hate, it encourages the Soldiers to be brave, to fight injustice and a "beast" at their maximum capabilities.

Propaganda always slanders the Enemy, you must remember that.

Turificator
Friday, May 7th, 2004, 09:30 AM
TENNO
HEIKA
BANZAI!

http://www.saveriani.bs.it/cem/Rivista/arretrati/1999_08/diapo12.jpg

Newgrange
Friday, May 7th, 2004, 06:58 PM
The June 1942 Parade in New York City is offensive to you ? How about two months earlier in the Philippines. Bataan Death March (http://history.acusd.edu/gen/st/~ehimchak/death_march.html) "The Bataan Death March began at Mariveles on April 10, 1942. Any troops who fell behind were executed. Japanese troops beat soldiers randomly, and denied the POWs food and water for many days. One of their tortures was known as the sun treatment. The Philippines in April is very hot. Therefore, the POWs were forced to sit in the sun without any shade, helmets, or water. Anyone who dared ask for water was executed. On the rare occasion they were given any food, it was only a handful of contaminated rice. When the prisoners were allowed to sleep for a few hours at night, they were packed into enclosures so tight that they could barely move. Those who lived collapsed on the dead bodies of their comrades. For only a brief part of the march would POWs be packed into railroad cars and allowed to ride. Those who did not die in the suffocating boxcars were forced to march about seven more miles until they reached their camp. It took the POWs over a week to reach their destination. (49) Those on Corregidor would suffer the same fate as their fellow soldiers on Bataan did as they too were transferred to Bataan."

Newgrange
Saturday, May 8th, 2004, 02:32 AM
The government harness the pent up racial frustrations and dislike of the blacks, Hispanics, Arabs (and multiculturalism in general) at home and point it toward other races or countries. It is really sad to see self-proclaimed 'free thinking white people' buy into it.Are you writing about 1942 America ? Your projecting present day political correctness terms on a time when I doubt Americans were worried about multiculturalism. In the 1940's Americans were involved in a a very real fight world wide to preserve their lives and freedoms.

prophet
Sunday, May 9th, 2004, 05:41 AM
i am new to this forum and am afarid i may be in the wrong place. is this not a white supremesist site?. if so some of the members seem rather liberal. multiculturalism is what is destroying the white race and stealing it's pride. those who don't see this are truly blind.

Vlad Cletus
Monday, May 10th, 2004, 08:31 AM
The June 1942 Parade in New York City is offensive to you ? How about two months earlier in the Philippines. Bataan Death March "The Bataan Death March began at Mariveles on April 10, 1942. Any troops who fell behind were executed. Japanese troops beat soldiers randomly, and denied the POWs food and water for many days. One of their tortures was known as the sun treatment. The Philippines in April is very hot. Therefore, the POWs were forced to sit in the sun without any shade, helmets, or water. Anyone who dared ask for water was executed. On the rare occasion they were given any food, it was only a handful of contaminated rice. When the prisoners were allowed to sleep for a few hours at night, they were packed into enclosures so tight that they could barely move. Those who lived collapsed on the dead bodies of their comrades. For only a brief part of the march would POWs be packed into railroad cars and allowed to ride. Those who did not die in the suffocating boxcars were forced to march about seven more miles until they reached their camp. It took the POWs over a week to reach their destination. (49) Those on Corregidor would suffer the same fate as their fellow soldiers on Bataan did as they too were transferred to Bataan." Excellent, that's what I should've listed.

Excellent, that's what I should've listed. The Bataan Death March is a perfect example of an atrocity commited in SE Asia.

ogenoct
Monday, May 10th, 2004, 09:16 AM
I agree as well.

Constantin

Dr. Solar Wolff
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 09:26 AM
Are you writing about 1942 America ? Your projecting present day political correctness terms on a time when I doubt Americans were worried about multiculturalism. In the 1940's Americans were involved in a a very real fight world wide to preserve their lives and freedoms.

This is the problem. It is hard to understand those times for us since we didn't live in them. I have seen the concentration camp for the Japanese near Bishop, California. Nobody in my (post war) generation can understand how this was possible in American, yet it was done. My mother, who is dead now, maintained that non-citizen Japanese were kept there but I don't think that was true. My mother tells me a story that might illustrate the point that I am making.

She came to California in the depression and got a job at Douglas Aircraft. Car pooling was the best way to get to work in the war years. While driving to work with other workers, a discussion took place about the Japanese killing our soldiers who were captured. This was a big deal at the time. My mother said that she believed that we (USA) should not kill Japanese soldiers in return. She was kicked out of the car pool for this statement.

Dehumanizing the enemy is the oldest trick of American propaganda. It happened with the Germans in WW1, Japanese in WW2, the North Koreans, the Vietnamese, and now with the Iraqi Resistance.

kinvolk
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 06:11 PM
As I have stated to another one of Aiko's revisionist and self serving posts: If the Japenese were allowed to turn the pacific into a japanese lake. And then run roughshed over the Asian mainland, The world would have hinged on a Japenese/German conflict. And the world might well be Japenese today. And there would be NO free white folk anywhere! The "Yellow peril" was a very real threat. And ALL Govt's dehumanize the enemy thru propaganda. We dehumanize the enemy so we can kill the enemy. You lost Aiko, Get over it!

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Friday, September 3rd, 2004, 04:35 PM
As I have stated to another one of Aiko's revisionist and self serving posts: If the Japenese were allowed to turn the pacific into a japanese lake. And then run roughshed over the Asian mainland, The world would have hinged on a Japenese/German conflict. And the world might well be Japenese today. And there would be NO free white folk anywhere! The "Yellow peril" was a very real threat. And ALL Govt's dehumanize the enemy thru propaganda. We dehumanize the enemy so we can kill the enemy. You lost Aiko, Get over it!Yes, I fully approve of the characaterisation. I see nothing wrong and everything right in motivating our people to the war that need to be fought.

Susisaari
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 06:24 PM
I guess you're informed about what happened in the pre-War time, and WW II. I thought Japanese students weren't told of the atrocities Imperial Japan committed during the War.


How is this relevant?

Do you think it's OK to kill Japanese civilians with nuclear weapons and other bombs just because of what Japanese soldiers had done?

Susisaari
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 06:28 PM
I see nothing wrong and everything right in motivating our people to the war that need to be fought.


Do you think it was right to make white Americans die in the war against Japan to make China safe for Communism?

Remember that Japan attacked Pearl Harbour only because the USA had issued hostile ultimatums to Japan, demanding it to withdraw from China, and imposing an oil embargo. Without these hostile U.S. policies, there would have been no Japanese air strike on Pearl Harbour or any other U.S. military bases.

Susisaari
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 06:35 PM
If the Japenese were allowed to turn the pacific into a japanese lake.


The Japanese never wanted to conquer the Americas, only southeast Asia.



The world would have hinged on a Japenese/German conflict.


No.



And the world might well be Japenese today.


No.

BTW, why do you keep saying "Jape"?



The "Yellow peril" was a very real threat.


No.



And ALL Govt's dehumanize the enemy thru propaganda.


No. E.g. the Finnish government saw the deaths of Russian soldiers in the Winter War as regrettable, because the Russian soldiers who had been forced to join the Red Army were seen as victims of Stalin.



You lost Aiko, Get over it!


Would you say that also to the people who remember the massacre of Dresden?

Fraxinus Excelsior
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:04 PM
Do you think it was right to make white Americans die in the war against Japan to make China safe for Communism?

Remember that Japan attacked Pearl Harbour only because the USA had issued hostile ultimatums to Japan, demanding it to withdraw from China, and imposing an oil embargo. Without these hostile U.S. policies, there would have been no Japanese air strike on Pearl Harbour or any other U.S. military bases.Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the Japs kidnapped White civilian (mostly Australian and Dutch) women for sex slaves, used White soldiers for bayonet practice, used biological warfare in China (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/bw), and the USA treated them with same amount of "respect" they received from the Japs; it was either drop the bomb, or invade through conventional means, and that meant an exponential increase in the loss of life on both sides.


Do you think it was right to make white Americans die in the war against Japan to make China safe for Communism?Actually, the Japanese invasion enabled the communist victory; Gen. Kai-Shek's Nationalist government opposed communism, but due to the invasion, he had to ally himself with them to defeat the Japs. After that deal fell through, he had to fight both the invading Japs and Mao's communists; which, weakened both his military and political powers.

And, that the created the power-vacuum necessary to facilitate the communist victory. Blame the Japs, not the USA.

Remember that Japan attacked Pearl Harbour only because the USA had issued hostile ultimatums to Japan, demanding it to withdraw from China, and imposing an oil embargo. Without these hostile U.S. policies, there would have been no Japanese air strike on Pearl Harbour or any other U.S. military bases.Nope. The Japs decided to attack Pearl Harbor because the USA had placed an oil embargo on Japan when they occupied Vichy French Indo China; after the talks broke down, they attempted to erase the US presence from the Pacific.

Obviously, that plan backfired.

Susisaari
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:16 PM
Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the Japs kidnapped White civilian (mostly Australian and Dutch) women for sex slaves,


Where? When?

Sounds like the WWI propaganda hoax story that German soldiers killed Belgian babies.



used White soldiers for bayonet practice,


Where? When?

Sounds exactly like the WWI propaganda hoax story that German soldiers killed Belgian babies because bayonets were included in that story too.



it was either drop the bomb, or invade through conventional means, and that meant an exponential increase in the loss of life on both sides.


There was no reason to invade because the whole war could have been avoided by not declaring an oil embargo on Japan.



Actually, the Japanese invasion enabled the communist victory; Gen. Kai-Shek's Nationalist government opposed communism, but due to the invasion, he had to ally himself with them to defeat the Japs. After that deal fell through, he had to fight both the invading Japs and Mao's communists; which, weakened both his military and political powers.

And, that the created the power-vacuum necessary to facilitate the communist victory. Blame the Japs, not the USA.


If the Americans had not beaten the Japanese, Mao's communists would not have come to power since the Japanese occupation of China would probably have continued for decades.



The Japs decided to attack Pearl Harbor because the USA had placed an oil embargo on Japan


Just like I said.

Fraxinus Excelsior
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:26 PM
Where? When?

Sounds like the WWI propaganda hoax story that German soldiers killed Belgian babies.Sorry, to burst your bubble, but I'm 100% correct: Jan Ruff-O'Herne (http://1.redcross.org.au/?fuseaction=NEWSROOM.archive&sub=18)

Susisaari
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:29 PM
Sorry, to burst your bubble, but I'm 100% correct: Jan Ruff-O'Herne (http://1.redcross.org.au/?fuseaction=NEWSROOM.archive&sub=18)

"with nine other young women - all of them virgins - she was forcibly removed from the camp and her family, and forced to live in a brothel as a 'military sex slave' for the Japanese Imperial Army"

And the existence of sex slaves in the Japanese Imperial Army is relevant because................?

Fraxinus Excelsior
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:31 PM
"with nine other young women - all of them virgins - she was forcibly removed from the camp and her family, and forced to live in a brothel as a 'military sex slave' for the Japanese Imperial Army"

And the existence of sex slaves in the Japanese Imperial Army is relevant because................?Because you attempted to portray the Japs as saints, and I proved you wrong.

No hard feelings.

Susisaari
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:48 PM
Because you attempted to portray the Japs as saints


Strawman.

Now, back on topic: do you think it was OK to kill hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians?

Ahnenerbe
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 07:52 PM
If the Japenese were allowed to turn the pacific into a japanese lake. And then run roughshed over the Asian mainland, The world would have hinged on a Japenese/German conflict. And the world might well be Japenese today.
No, the world would be German. Or at least ruled by a germanic elite. And Japanese are a great people too. Just note the similitudes: the two militaristic states before WWII, the two technological and economical leaders after WWII, both having in common to be the only great powers with a racially homogeneous population. Proportionnally to their population, Japan and Germany pre-empt America (which successes and efficiency are anyway due to the germanic/nordic elements in its population); not to mention that today's BRD doesn't represent what the real Germany should be. Imagine the current BRD + Luxembourg (=billions of euros of assets) + Liechtenstein (idem), + Austria (10th richest country in the world) + Elsaß-Lothringen (two of the richest departements in current France: is it really random...?) + Ostpreußen, + maybe the germanic part of Switzerland...

Fraxinus Excelsior
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 11:07 PM
Strawman.

Now, back on topic: do you think it was OK to kill hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians?Yes. It preserved the lives of an innumerable amount of American military personnel who would have been killed upon landing on the Japanese home island.

In the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, a combined number of 187,747 were killed; compared to the 350,000 killed in Nanjing. (http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Floor/9597/timeline.html)

The Chinese civilians and the miscellaneous European and Australian civilians are the true victims, not the Japanese.

Here's some links on Japanese war crimes:

http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Floor/9597/index2.html (http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Floor/9597/index2.html)
http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/ (http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/)

Huzar
Saturday, February 19th, 2005, 11:24 PM
Yes. It preserved the lives of an innumerable amount of American military personnel who would have been killed upon landing on the Japanese home island.

I dislike what happened, of course , but it's true : some estimations say something like 600'000 american soldiers to an hypotetical conquest of Japan.

Deling
Sunday, February 20th, 2005, 12:20 AM
"The Chinese civilians and the miscellaneous European and Australian civilians are the true victims, not the Japanese.

Here's some links on Japanese war crimes:"

Well, I feel that it is very idiotic for ALL to discuss moralities of war, and put spotlights of different nations' "war crimes", especially on a Euro-Nationalist forum, where most of the debatteurs deny and neglect several of them.
"War crimes" are acts that, if brought up neutrally, would damage the actions of all European nations, and non-Europeans, and thus should perhaps be forgotten. Japanese are good at forgetting theirs, Europeans can't to anything besides being remembered about it.

And I think it's strange for a WN American to use the 'rape of Nankjing' as some sort of moral argument for nuking Japan. I don't think you care much of these Chinese anyway.

If one put aside all 'war ethics' of old, the ban on chemical weapon after WW1 a.e, America did nothing wrong. Still the fact remain that USA was the only war-waging nation that used weapons of mass-destruction (even if they perhaps didn't knew the effect of the nuclear bombs) in WW2. Morally wrong? Perhaps. But life isn't about morals, so I would be a hypocrite if I were to complain.
But I wouldn't mind Japanese kick the Yanks out of their islands in contemporary time, but that's policy.

Fraxinus Excelsior
Sunday, February 20th, 2005, 04:40 AM
Well, I feel that it is very idiotic for ALL to discuss moralities of war, and put spotlights of different nations' "war crimes", especially on a Euro-Nationalist forum, where most of the debatteurs deny and neglect several of them.I neither deny nor do I neglect any dishonorable acts of war: such as when the Allies bombed Dresden, or one of the incidences in which the Axis executed some non-combatent civilians or POW's.

Dresden wasn't bombed to save lives, and no POW's were executed to save lives; the A-Bombs were indeed dropped to save American lives.
"War crimes" are acts that, if brought up neutrally, would damage the actions of all European nations, and non-Europeans, and thus should perhaps be forgotten. Japanese are good at forgetting theirs, Europeans can't to anything besides being remembered about it.The difference between a war crime and a legitimate act of war is: a legitimate act of war involves trying to keep civilian casualities at a minimum without putting your own people at risk.

The US conducted business in that fashion (in most circumstances), but Japan most certainly did not.
And I think it's strange for a WN American to use the 'rape of Nankjing' as some sort of moral argument for nuking Japan. I don't think you care much of these Chinese anyway. I'm not a "WN", and I actually do care about the Chinese civilians, just as much as I care about the civilians of any nation during any conflict.
If one put aside all 'war ethics' of old, the ban on chemical weapon after WW1 a.e, America did nothing wrong. Still the fact remain that USA was the only war-waging nation that used weapons of mass-destruction (even if they perhaps didn't knew the effect of the nuclear bombs) in WW2. Morally wrong? Perhaps. But life isn't about morals, so I would be a hypocrite if I were to complain. Japan did use biological weaponry (or, WMD's) in WWII. Unit 731 (http://www.aiipowmia.com/731/731caveat.html) (not pleasant, you've been notified)

But I wouldn't mind Japanese kick the Yanks out of their islands in contemporary time, but that's policy. Neither would I; Japan for the Japanese.

Susisaari
Sunday, February 20th, 2005, 10:03 PM
Yes. It preserved the lives of an innumerable amount of American military personnel who would have been killed upon landing on the Japanese home island.


There was no reason to invade because the whole war could have been avoided by not declaring an oil embargo on Japan.

I said that already, but you refused to comment.



In the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, a combined number of 187,747 were killed; compared to the 350,000 killed in Nanjing. (http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Floor/9597/timeline.html)


Do you think it's OK to kill Japanese civilians with nuclear weapons and other bombs just because of what Japanese soldiers had done?

I asked that already, but you refused to answer.