And in Frank's book, he quotes from a speech MacArthur made to a Congress reluctant to spend large sums of money shipping food to a nation that mere months ago was The Enemy. MacArthur pointed out that as occupiers the Japanese people were the responsibility of the US, and it would be hypocritical for the US to refuse to feed these people while at the same time conducting war crimes trials of Japanese military leaders for abuses committed while THEY were occupiers. Of course Congress voted to send food after that. A great moment for the country.Originally posted by: K1052
Frank makes a compelling argument, backed up by facts, that the Japanese food situation was quite dire in 1945. The atomic bombings probably saved vast numbers of Japanese citizens from starvation by forcing a conclusion to the war. One of the first things MacArthur did was import massive amounts of foodstufs to Japan to avert the disaster.Originally posted by: Mursilis
Probably one of the best books on the subject is "Downfall" by Rich Frank. Amazon has it. Great study of the final days of Imperial Japan. Read it, and you'll understand why the so-called "revisionist" view is indeed revisionist.Originally posted by: Skoorb
I like how it's being coined the revisionist view that is the one that paints a darker picture of it as opposed to the "It was the right thing to do" picture. If anything, that sounds revisionist.enthralled with the revisionist view
I haven't studied this issue much. The vast majority of people in this thread haven't, but I feel fairly safe deferring on matters of strategy to Eisenhower. His credentials are without equal, so if nothing else I'm just dropping a bone of consideration, that maybe people would question a bit more about it instead of rehashing what they were told in grade nine.