The Other Holocaust

[mastertech01]

Sometime back I recall posted on this forum a thread about the anniversary of the United States bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the horror that it wrought upon the Japanese people. The other night I watched a program on the History Channel about the Japanese programs into biological and chemical programs of that time. They had produced enough to kill major populations of the earth and created delivery systems via clay bombs which they had planned to drop from large bombers under development on the US, and from their secret submarine aircraft carriers. Its very appearant that had Japan had simply one more year they likely would have turned the face of this world around. Read through this webpage that I have posted and do some searches on the web and you will see that Japan killed many more, and in horrible mass destructive manners than even US with its atomic bombs. Read about the other Holocaust and ask why THEY have not been responsive to demands from China and our prisoners of war to compensate as the Germans to thier Holocaust against the Jews.

The Other Holocaust

You might develop at a minimum an appreciation of the timing that the war was brought to an end.

 

[chess9]

Excellent point.

As an 8th grader I read a book on the atrocities of WWII. The German were absolutely terrible, but what the Japanese did to the Chinese is equally horrific. They were equally barbaric as the Germans. For instance, the Japanese would march all the men in a village to the second floor of a local house that had a hole cut in the floor. Then they would have the Chinese bend over and chop their heads off while they looked down at the floor below to see their predecessors. This is just a taste of their practices. They raped children, forced prisoners into labor, ad nauseam.

However, I'm not sure the excesses of the Japanese are the best arguments for the U.S. to have dropped the atomic bomb on two populated cities. Frankly, this was not Truman's finest hour IMHO.

-Robert

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: mastertech01
They had produced enough to kill major populations of the earth and created delivery systems via clay bombs which they had planned to drop from large bombers under development on the US, and from their secret submarine aircraft carriers. Its very appearant that had Japan had simply one more year they likely would have turned the face of this world around.

Surely you're not implying that Japan had the ability to deploy these weapons?! I would suggest you read The Prize (by Daniel Yergin) and then come back and explain to us how exactly Japan would have done this.

 

[mastertech01]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: mastertech01
They had produced enough to kill major populations of the earth and created delivery systems via clay bombs which they had planned to drop from large bombers under development on the US, and from their secret submarine aircraft carriers. Its very appearant that had Japan had simply one more year they likely would have turned the face of this world around.

Surely you're not implying that Japan had the ability to deploy these weapons?! I would suggest you read The Prize (by Daniel Yergin) and then come back and explain to us how exactly Japan would have done this.

Did you read the webpages and do some searches? The Japanese had under development a 6 engine long range bomber with capability to fly round trip to the USA. And they had top secret submarines with aircraft launch capability in numbers to strike the west coast. The bombs were already well developed and ready for use. They used biological weapons on the Chinese long before the end of the war. They attempted to get the Soviets to join up with them after the fall of the Germans to take on the Allied forces to give them time to fully develop and build these aircraft and implement thier plans to use biological weapons against the USA.

Of course I am relying on documentary from History Channel and Web sites. I guess they could all be lieing to serve some agenda..

Since you have the book maybe you can tell us why the Japanese could never have been able to deploy what they had developed?

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: mastertech01

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: mastertech01
They had produced enough to kill major populations of the earth and created delivery systems via clay bombs which they had planned to drop from large bombers under development on the US, and from their secret submarine aircraft carriers. Its very appearant that had Japan had simply one more year they likely would have turned the face of this world around.

Surely you're not implying that Japan had the ability to deploy these weapons?! I would suggest you read The Prize (by Daniel Yergin) and then come back and explain to us how exactly Japan would have done this.

Did you read the webpages and do some searches? The Japanese had under development a 6 engine long range bomber with capability to fly round trip to the USA. And they had top secret submarines with aircraft launch capability in numbers to strike the west coast. The bombs were already well developed and ready for use. They used biological weapons on the Chinese long before the end of the war. They attempted to get the Soviets to join up with them after the fall of the Germans to take on the Allied forces to give them time to fully develop and build these aircraft and implement thier plans to use biological weapons against the USA.

Of course I am relying on documentary from History Channel and Web sites. I guess they could all be lieing to serve some agenda..

Since you have the book maybe you can tell us why the Japanese could never have been able to deploy what they had developed?

First a note on the words I used: by "deploy" i meant them actually using the weapons to any effect, not just having them sitting around.

In short: no fuel. "The Prize" is a very nice pulitzer prize winning book about the oil industry from its begginings in 1850s to just before the start of the 1st Gulf War. Of course you're probably aware the importance control of oil played in winning WWII. The book spent quite a bit of time on the Japanese situation during WWII and let me tell you, they would not have had to fuel use those weapons you describe (notice how I never said they didn't have those weapons?). By the time the bombs were dropped Japan was in an incredibly desperate situation. I mean, they were so short of fuel, they couldn't train pilots, they couldn't move ships, they even resorted to cutting down trees and trying to extract oil from them!

Now, I am sorry I don't have any figures (I got the book from the library), but their chances of them using these weapons after a prolonged american aerial war (assuming that's what would have happen if the bombs were not dropped) and naval blockade are negligible.

 

[0roo0roo]

sure the japanese were brutal, but the numbers just don't match the nazi's. theres been more genocide in africa within the last 10 years then the japanese were able to pull off.

 

[chess9]

Roo:

So, you are saying we've had three debacles? You'd be right, and neither the African genocide nor the Chinese genocide apparently matter much to the world. I think MasterTech has put his finger on something most of us would rather not think about-we are very Euro-Centric. Chinese and Africans are less important to us for some reason. Thankfully, Bush intervened in Liberia, though it was only a token response. Would that he took the problems of Africa as seriously as that tin horn dictator in Iraq!

-Robert

 

[Dacalo]

Yea, I know about the atrocities since I am from South Korea.

Most of the Asian countries have deep dislike for Japan, for obvious reasons.

Doing these is one thing, but the Japanese government denying is another. Although Germany have committed some heinous crimes, they are very apologetic and careful. This is not the case with Japan.

They deny and lie.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: chess9
Roo:

So, you are saying we've had three debacles? You'd be right, and neither the African genocide nor the Chinese genocide apparently matter much to the world. I think MasterTech has put his finger on something most of us would rather not think about-we are very Euro-Centric. Chinese and Africans are less important to us for some reason. Thankfully, Bush intervened in Liberia, though it was only a token response. Would that he took the problems of Africa as seriously as that tin horn dictator in Iraq!

-Robert

well yes, self righteous nations esp the EU did nothing to prevent the genocides in africa. what good is pressuring governments after genocide has taken place?

i'm not down playing the rape of nanking, ive been to exhibits in sf and read books about the horrors, and it really should get more space in textbooks, but in terms of human suffering, its only one slice of the pie. there is reason to say that the german holocaust was a little worse, if in only terms of numbers and brutal efficiency.

 

[Spencer278]

The reason Japan was able to get away with all the stuff she did was because china and russia where communist and we needed an allie in the area. Didn't hurt that they were killing people from china which where never well liked in the US and the chiness didn't flew to the states for safety so there stories didn't come over.

 

[ReiAyanami]

so this is why the japanese didn't surrender after the first bomb dropped, they thought they could hold out until they lauch their own ace up their sleeve. guess they weren't expecting another 3 days later.

nonetheless any rouge country with WMD can change the face of the earth literally, thereby signfying the importance of slowing its proliferation and removing the nuttier dictators

 

[SilentZero]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
sure the japanese were brutal, but the numbers just don't match the nazi's. theres been more genocide in africa within the last 10 years then the japanese were able to pull off.

I agree 100%! However lets not forget Pol Pot in Cambodia. He and the Khmer Rouge killed millions of innocent cambodians within a few years. My wife and some of her family survived the killing-fields, and it definately ranks in the top 5 Holocausts in my opinion right up there with Hitler.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: SilentZero

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo sure the japanese were brutal, but the numbers just don't match the nazi's. theres been more genocide in africa within the last 10 years then the japanese were able to pull off.

I agree 100%! However lets not forget Pol Pot in Cambodia. He and the Khmer Rouge killed millions of innocent cambodians within a few years. My wife and some of her family survived the killing-fields, and it definately ranks in the top 5 Holocausts in my opinion right up there with Hitler.

And lets not forget the Turkish slaughtering the Armenians. Britain has been accused of genocide in Ireland and Africa, the US accused of genocide of the Native american tribes... the list goes on and on.
We may say that we will never forget, but we never learn either.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: chess9
Roo:

So, you are saying we've had three debacles? You'd be right, and neither the African genocide nor the Chinese genocide apparently matter much to the world. I think MasterTech has put his finger on something most of us would rather not think about-we are very Euro-Centric. Chinese and Africans are less important to us for some reason. Thankfully, Bush intervened in Liberia, though it was only a token response. Would that he took the problems of Africa as seriously as that tin horn dictator in Iraq!

-Robert

well yes, self righteous nations esp the EU did nothing to prevent the genocides in africa. what good is pressuring governments after genocide has taken place?

i'm not down playing the rape of nanking, ive been to exhibits in sf and read books about the horrors, and it really should get more space in textbooks, but in terms of human suffering, its only one slice of the pie. there is reason to say that the german holocaust was a little worse, if in only terms of numbers and brutal efficiency.

yeah,

that's why Belgian paratroopers were killed during the Rwanda genocide

the self righteous Europeans are far from perfect and did not enough to prevent the african massacres but there were never american boots on the ground to prevent these killings

of course there is no oil in Rwanda

and for the original TOPIC

th US was right in using atomic bombs against Japan during WWII.
an invasion of the japanese mainland would have been a massacre with tens of thousands American deaths

 

[chess9]

Actually, we DON'T have good numbers for any of these genocides. Other than as a quibble, though, does it matter? Is the death of Chinese worse or better than a death of a Bantu? Are 10,000 Jews the equivalent of 10,000 Chinese? The whole notion is preposterous.

-Robert