The Rape of Nanking: the forgotten holocaust of world war II
 

have you guys ever read it/heard of it? i just bought the book today, and it's pretty gruesome stuff. i didn't know that the Japanese were so cruel and vicious to the Chinese.

Yep. When I was going through their museum in Hiroshima and they were making a big deal about how terrible it was that the US killed civilians and children, blah, blah, blah ...all I could think about is Nanking and what goes around comes around.

Wasn't there a recent protest about Japanese school teachers excluding that from thier history lessons?

Ya... 2 wrongs make a right ? don't they old timer...... oOo:

[quote="Short Hand":f84d6]
Ya... 2 wrongs make a right ? don't they old timer...... oOo:[/quote:f84d6]

wasnt really a case of dropping bombs to punish them for their crimes, we dropped the bomb to end the war. retribution came through the hangings later on.

I know it wasn't for retribution.. but colonel was thinking about it in that way. "I don't justify dropping a nuke" on a city full of people to neccesary."

[quote="Short Hand":8fdd8]but colonel was thinking about it in that way. [/quote:8fdd8]

Not really. I was thinking more about it being extremely hypocritical to talk about the horror of the 110,000 killed instantly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in such a way as to imply that you were an innocent victim, and not recognize that your own countymen tortured 370,000 to death in one city.

Unit 731 anyone?

[quote=Colonel]Not really. I was thinking more about it being extremely hypocritical to talk about the horror of the 110,000 killed instantly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in such a way as to imply that you were an innocent victim, and not recognize that your own countymen tortured 370,000 to death in one city.[/quote:af0e7]

I agree.

[quote=Colonel]Not really. I was thinking more about it being extremely hypocritical to talk about the horror of the 110,000 killed instantly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in such a way as to imply that you were an innocent victim, and not recognize that your own countymen tortured 370,000 to death in one city.[/quote:fb60e]

[quote:fb60e]they were making a big deal about how terrible it was that the US killed civilians and children, blah, blah, blah ...all I could think about is Nanking and what goes around comes around.[/quote:fb60e]

Hell while we are at it, let us point out the hypocracy in the holocaust and the dresdun and hamburg bombings. BLAH BLAH BLAH what goes around comes around. You meant it in a spiteful way colonel. rolleyes: Or else maybe you should have worded it "much" differently.

[quote="Short Hand":5b166]Or else maybe you should have worded it "much" differently.[/quote:5b166]

You're probably right. Although I'm not sure if the wording was bad or the interpretation was off. When I re-read it, it sounds more like an observation of a fact than a spiteful desire that was fulfilled. I guess it depends on if you're a glass half empty or half full kinda guy. Human nature pretty much is that you see what you want to see, you hear what you want to hear.

They were dicks true...doesn't justify a Nuke. It is like saying that all of our mothers need to sacrifice themselves because of an army they have nothing to do with.

It was either that, or lose double the numbers lost in the nukes in casualties trying to take Japan. They were a relentless enemy, the fact that they refused to surrender even after the first nuke should demonstrate that.

It's pretty easy to talk about it, but it's not as black and white as you clearly think it is, Pyro. You should investigate the possibility of what might have happened had the nukes not been dropped. A lot more lives would have been lost.

1. they didn't surrender at first because the info they go on the first bomb that was dropped was not flowing into the Japenese command. They didn't have a full scope of the damage done.

2. A couple nukes dropped off the coast, or even a nuke dropped in a less populated country side would have been just as effective. If not.......then I guess you go ahead and drop it on a city full of people, mostly children....women....seniors... hell not that bad when you think about it.. rolleyes:

[quote="Short Hand":8e711]1. they didn't surrender at first because the info they go on the first bomb that was dropped was not flowing into the Japenese command. They didn't have a full scope of the damage done.

2. A couple nukes dropped off the coast, or even a nuke dropped in a less populated country side would have been just as effective. If not.......then I guess you go ahead and drop it on a city full of people, mostly children....women....seniors... hell not that bad when you think about it.. rolleyes:[/quote:8e711]

1. That's neither sides fault. An ultimatum of unconditional surrender was given, and no reply was given.

2. Sure, that would have been REALLY effective. HEY, JAPS! YOU GOTTA SURRENDER NOW! WE'VE BLOWN UP ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU!

Now I'm not trying to justify anything here - I'm trying to look at it objectively. It was sad that it happened, but at the same time, It was a decision that had to be made.

Objectively viewing two sides of a debate is something you and Pyro just seem to be unable to do.
For some reason you like to think the worst of people, and you have a weird thing against Americans in general. Anything that could be even slightly considered a mistake comes down to pure evil on the part of the Americans, doesn't it?
(I say this because it seems as though you avoid any conversation unless it involves something that you can use against Americans. You never commented once on the rape of nanking and this is what the goddamn thread is about)

You should try and look at both sides of an argument instead of one before making your mind up.