japanese military treatment on p.o.w's// civilians...

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 11 Jul 2003 14:46

kittycat wrote:
demonio wrote:
kittycat wrote:
demonio wrote:They used to call the chinese "Sick man of Asia" due to the yellow appearance of their skin.


arr...you sure about that? I have heard other names but not that... & don't Japs also have 'yellow' skin? They are mostly likely a bit paler....but northern chinese are heaps pale too.


Ive heard a few racist expressions but it's probably inappropriate to discuss here. You have a bit of a point about what you've said above. I suppose it makes as much sense as hitler regarding blonde blue eyed slavs as inferior.


all this inferior, Superior race thing is completely stupid I reckon.


I agree it sucks big time. Imagine someone coming up to you and saying "im better than you because im from this race.. blah blah blah"

You'd laugh at them or slap them silly :)

blood and iron
Member
Posts: 12
Joined: 09 Mar 2003 08:39
Location: tobruk (rats of...)

Post by blood and iron » 13 Jul 2003 06:53

The quote in which i used was given to me by my late grandfather who fought in the worst of conditions in an advance clearing patrol, led by 2/6 comando squadren... After staighting this quote he retrieved his 303 bayonet and presented it to me intailing the following comment... " I could never wish another man see what i have seen".
With that he never mentioned anything else on the war. This man, my grandfather , went through hell and back again and could'nt bare tell me the story.
Therefor i was insearch of mixed view points and feelings on the Japanese, perticularly the treatment inflicted upon the civilians and pow's
So David... no i havnt already made my mind up... the only conclusion i can come to is that there was a war taking place between what looked to be man and " BEAST ".
PTE Hearn

Gille
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 12 Jun 2003 10:08
Location: New Zealand

Post by Gille » 12 Aug 2003 06:21

I don't think Bushido had much to do with Japanese treatment of prisoners.During the interwar years the Japanese military establishment ordered it's officers to brutalise the troops allow bullying and physical assaults on it's men.This was in order to remove any kind of humanity or compassion from the enlisted men.This allowed them to carry out such terrible crimes in China and Korea.Read- The Rape of Nanking to realise just how low they sank.At the end of WW2 most of the Senior officers involved got let off by the Americans as they were needed in the rebuilding of Japan.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23234
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 12 Aug 2003 15:17

Gille -- You said: "Read- The Rape of Nanking to realise just how low they sank.At the end of WW2 most of the Senior officers involved got let off by the Americans as they were needed in the rebuilding of Japan."

Do you have some names of those senior officers who "got let off?"

Xanthro
Member
Posts: 2803
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 00:11
Location: Pasadena, CA

Post by Xanthro » 12 Aug 2003 20:23

Blood and Iron wrote:Through constant brain-washing, the supreme rulers of japan were able to use there army as meir puppets, knowing that these puppets would do ANYTHING they were told.... to the last detail.


That is misleading since the supreme rulers of Japan were the Army.

So, you have the army brainwashing the army.

Hirohito did not control the government, though he is vest with "supreme" power, he can't actually ever use any of it. Being divine, he wasn't allowed to interfer in the mere affairs of mortals.

The Army control Japan from the mid 1920s onward, and the Army engaged in activity that was opposed by both the Throne and the Navy, but the army was in charge.

Xanthro

VirtueDecayed
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: 28 Jun 2003 14:14
Location: United Europe

Post by VirtueDecayed » 12 Aug 2003 20:42

I agree with the Japanese when concerning prisoners. These people are your enemy, they are attacking your country, killing your people, friends, brothers, sisters... you're supposed to treat them well? like guests of honor? I think not..
Those who capture people attacking their country, have every right to treat them as barbaric as they wish.
"All is fair in love and war."

(I do not condone what the japanese did to women and civillians)

Gille
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 12 Jun 2003 10:08
Location: New Zealand

Post by Gille » 12 Aug 2003 21:37

Firstly I suggest you read the Rape of Nanking or The good German,the second book is about a Nazi official in China who tried to save Chinese Civilian's from Japenese death squads.It's been awhile since I read them but I'm sure it mentions that a relation of the Emporer was involved with the leaders of the army.After the war America wanted to rebuild Japan as a bastion against the commmunist Chinese so past crimes were swept under the carpet.The Emporer could not be tainted with any relationship to past wrongs as he was to important a figue to the people.
Unlike the Germans the Japenese have never publicly admitted to war crimes or taught there school children about such crimes. As to you VirtueDecayed let's hope for your sake that your never on the loosing side!

User avatar
AGRAKAN
Member
Posts: 161
Joined: 08 Aug 2003 03:26
Location: Cape Trafalgar, on Santísima Trinidad's board

Post by AGRAKAN » 13 Aug 2003 00:43

I agree with Paul Timms. I've seen that programme too, and the treatment received by the POWs was completely different during the second conflict.

I also shoud say, the training in the Japanese army was considered by their soldiers as hell. So many cluel punishments, that it's relatively obvious that they became saddistic criminals. Also, anything was justified by their devotion to the Emperor.

PS Hello to everyone, it´s my 1st post here.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23234
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 13 Aug 2003 01:33

AGRAKAN -- Welcome to this section of the forum.

VirtueDecayed
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: 28 Jun 2003 14:14
Location: United Europe

Post by VirtueDecayed » 13 Aug 2003 20:42

Does nobody else notice a big swastika on AGRAKAN's post?

User avatar
Balrog
Member
Posts: 1234
Joined: 17 Feb 2003 15:09
Location: USA, North Carolina/Manchukuo/Dominican Republic

Post by Balrog » 31 Aug 2003 01:52

i think the german prisoners of ww1 were the ones captured in the german colony in china"sphere of influence" wei hei wei(something like that)

the japanese apparently had a lot of respect for german culture and its militaritic ways. for whatever reason, the japanese maintained thier respect for the germans inspite of the fact that they did surrender.

Berichter
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 28 May 2004 02:34
Location: Missouri, USA

Post by Berichter » 08 Jun 2004 17:13

What I am curious about is: Was the treatment of PoWs in the camps a deliberate government policy of neglect and abuse or was it the result of both Japanese mindset and a faulty Japanese logistics system? From what I am able to gather, the Bataan Death March in April 1942 was the result of a lack of preparation for the numbers of PoWs that 14th Army had to contend with. I'm trying to puzzle out why the Japanese PoW record during WWII had arose, since the Japanese were famous for their equitable treatment of Germans captured in China during WWI. Or was it simply that the Japanese mindset had changed since WWI?

Cordially,

Berichter

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23234
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 09 Jun 2004 04:31

Berichter -- You asked:
Was the treatment of PoWs in the camps a deliberate government policy of neglect and abuse or was it the result of both Japanese mindset and a faulty Japanese logistics system?

In the case of the Bataan death march, it appears to have been the result of faulty logistical planning and an unwillingness to admit that fact. Instead of the subordinate officers going to General Homma and telling him: "We don't have the trucks or other transportation to move those prisoners according to schedule without having to beat, shoot and bayonet stragglers," the Japanese officers went directly to the beatings, shootings and bayonetings.

Later, the Japanese treatment of POWs was equally callous. I have not seen orders requiring Japanese troops to treat the POWs in an inhumane way. However, I have not seen many instances where a Japanese commissioned officer or non-commissioned officer was put on trial for inhumane treatment of POWs either, and there was no shortage of such treatment. The policy of the Japanese government toward the POWs was at best negligent, and their failure to properly supervise and punish abusive personnel amounted to a ratification of the inhumane treatment in their POW camps.

You also asked:
I'm trying to puzzle out why the Japanese PoW record during WWII had arose, since the Japanese were famous for their equitable treatment of Germans captured in China during WWI. Or was it simply that the Japanese mindset had changed since WWI?

I cannot reconcile the accounts of Japanese treatment of POWs in WWI with accounts from WWII. Something must have changed for the worse in the command, leadership and training of their soldiers to have produced the WWII results.

You can find links to accounts of POWs under Japanese rule at:

viewtopic.php?t=44352

User avatar
iceagle
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 08:20
Location: Nantong-Zhenjiang-Beijing

Post by iceagle » 16 Aug 2004 10:37

VirtueDecayed wrote:I agree with the Japanese when concerning prisoners. These people are your enemy, they are attacking your country, killing your people, friends, brothers, sisters... you're supposed to treat them well? like guests of honor? I think not..
Those who capture people attacking their country, have every right to treat them as barbaric as they wish.
"All is fair in love and war."

(I do not condone what the japanese did to women and civillians)

You must know the history detailedlly.Japan was the invader,it invaded China,Korea ,Southeast Asia and attacked USA and some other countries at first.If one's country is invaded by another country,peopole attack the enemies who killed both soldiers and civilians that can be called a reason for Jap anese to treated POWs very badly???

User avatar
iceagle
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 08:20
Location: Nantong-Zhenjiang-Beijing

Post by iceagle » 16 Aug 2004 10:49

Here some photos that Japanese army killed Chinese civilians

[atrocity photos deleted by Peter H]

Whatever places in China were occupied by Japanese, common civilians
were often killed in many ways.

This is the history.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”