Is there any actual evidence to prove that the Japanese did commit war crimes?
I claim this board in the name of the Emperor.
>>754495
Why don't you look it up?
Wikipedia is a thing, you know. You're not asking for discussion, you just want someone to spoonfeed you the same answers you'd get from one minute on wikipedia. How can you be so lazy that you can't be bothered to even try?
None of that matters though, because this must be a bait thread. I refuse to believe otherwise.
>>754495
>What is Google, and how can it be used to find things out
Atrocities committed against Allied POWs are pretty well documented, against the Chinese not nearly as much mainly because the Kuomintang was horseshit at everything. Most of what we know comes from foreigners who were in China during the war, including Nazis, Americans, and Western Europeans alike. When even ardent Nazis call you out for barbarity, you done fucked up.
I find it odd that Japanese war crimes deniers say it was a Chinese conspiracy. That's giving Chiang and his party far too much credit, they would never have been able to pull off such a complex level of deception.
Daily reminder Korean comfort women is a lie
Invasion of Korean was justified because the Ryku Kingdom wanted war first and sunk Okinawan merchant ships (read: Chubu incident)
>>754537
Small note: the Chinese fucking hate the Japs.
Every Chinese girlfriend or friend I've had (from mainland China) refuses to talk to a Japanese or even spit in their direction.
After spending time in China, I could see why..... Whenever the topic of WWII comes up documentaries, teachers, government officials all get their dicks out and propaganda the shit out of Japanese war crimes.
In the words of my ex gf: "we're not even yet"
>>754604
Except the Japanese government just admitted to it, apologized for it, and compensated for it last year, you delusional weebcuck.
>>754495
kanji "特攻” in the pic is reverse.
why?
>>754811
maybe its the flag thats waving dumb ass gaijin
All Korean lies
>>754609
I find this ironic especially since she sounds like a race mixer. Why doesnt she hate herself? I mean has she seen how many people were killed in the taiping rebellion? Or by mao?
Spooks, spooks fucking everywhere. As a chinese person myself its pretty pathetic to watch.
>>754495
none. We have ruins of the American war crimes though.
>>754609
I see a lot of cultural tensions easing in the younger generation though. I'm in a Japanese class with a lot of Chinamen and they seem really interested in Japanese culture, and from what I've seen there is a fair amount of curiosity from Japanese I've met about the Chinese.
>>754978
There are tons of weebs in both china snd aming diaspora. Cosmoplitanism is on the rise in china.
>>754978
Not really. I spent a summer at Beijing U. Tons of international students. The Japanese kids were called Xiaoriben to their backs.
>>754495
"war crimes" is such a dumb fucking term
>>754992
It's only dumb to uneducated people who base their legal understanding on their feelings and intuition.
>>754992
Holy shit, I agree. Putting rules on war is just retarded. If you want to war, war effectively war quickly and more importantly win or lose quickly. Do what ever you have to to end a conflict as soon as possible. War is war, there is no point in trying to control it.
>>755009
So you're basically you believe a group of people is justified in doing literally anything at all, no matter how abhorrent, provided they say 'war' first?
>>755044
>provided they say 'war' first?
If there is another willing to fight, yes. Explain to me why you think war should have rules, when it isn't the people warring who suffer, it's the people who don't give a fuck who suffer the most. In the interest of the majority of people involved war needs to be quick and efficient, rules do not allow for this.
>>755044
Not that guy, but I agree. Might makes right.
>>754992
Limits to what is acceptable in war have been around for thousands of years.
>>755068
Because citizens are not at war; nations are at war.
>>755099
And who fills the nations?
>>755081
US was stronger than Spain. Won the war and still paid Spain reparation money.
Might never is right.
>>755107
I pay taxes to a nation because I was born into it, not because I support its endeavors. If I didn't pay the government, I would be thrown in prison.
I don't want to die for a war I don't want. I assume this feeling is mutual for citizens of countries my country is at war with.
>>755148
That is exactly my point, you also have no control on who wages war where. Assume you are American and you don't support their current wars, they are still going to war with or without your consent, and the people in town X feel the same way, they don't care about America, they don't care about their nation, they care about securing food for their children or their loved ones or securing shelter. If war should come then it should come and go as quickly as possible. Long wars displace many more people than a quick one, in most cases.
A good example is the nukes, how much longer would the Pacific War had dragged on for, had the nukes not been used? How different would have the Cold War been if nukes had not been previously used?
>>755169
>how much longer would the Pacific War had dragged on for, had the nukes not been used?
Not much longer. And in fact, the firebombing campaigns killed more civilians than the nukes. The Pacific War is a poor example because it was a losing war from the start. The Americans knew it, the Japanese top brass knew it, the only people who didn't know it were the Japanese citizens. Their government drew the war out, letting their own men be slaughtered over nothing, in hope that the Allies would accept slightly more advantageous peace accords. Imagine how many people wouldn't have been fucking vaporized if they Allies allowed the Japanese war economy to stall, like it was stalling under the embargos before the war. I don't think they would have held out much longer.
>>755081
>Might makes right.
I don't think you understand what that expression means. It refers to the fact that someone powerful can basically make the rules, and other people are powerless to stop them. It does not imply that the actions of someone powerful are necessarily morally acceptable, or that absolutely anything a powerful person/organisation does is 'right' in a normative sense.
>>755261
>It does not imply that the actions of someone powerful are necessarily morally acceptable, or that absolutely anything a powerful person/organisation does is 'right' in a normative sense.
That's literally what it is meaning. The winning side decides what is morally correct i.e. it was morally acceptable to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki as it ended the war, it wouldn't have the same meaning had Japan won the war.
>>755300
It wasn't morally acceptable to firebombing Tokyo point is...
>>755309
>It wasn't morally acceptable to firebombing Tokyo point is...
Why not?
>>755300
>i.e. it was morally acceptable to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki as it ended the war,
I know that's what they tell you in American high schools, but it's certainly not the consensus anywhere else.
And even those who do advocate that position don't just say 'the US is powerful, therefore its actions are morally justified'. That simply isn't something you can say and expect to be taken seriously.
If you honestly subscribe to the view that anything done by someone powerful is morally acceptable, then you're probably not going to get very far trying to discuss morals with other people. Your fundamental concept of morality is probably just too radically different from the mainstream to have any meaningful discussion. What you mean when you say 'moral' is not what other English speakers mean.
>>755318
>I know that's what they tell you in American high schools, but it's certainly not the consensus anywhere else.
Kek, nice projection.
>'the US is powerful, therefore its actions are morally justified'
Of course not, that's literally what it comes down to though.
>If you honestly subscribe to the view that anything done by someone powerful is morally acceptable
You are judging things in history which haven't had enough time to gestate.
>What you mean when you say 'moral' is not what other English speakers mean.
>implying this isn't my exact point
Morals change from place to place, the person who 'wins' set the moral standard. For instance we do not have Aboriginal morals, we have white European morals, because we won Australia. Americans do not have British Morals, they have American morals, Indians do not have English morals they have Indian morals. Morality is not something set in stone, it's constantly changes as the power does.
>>755339
>For instance we do not have Aboriginal morals, we have white European morals, because we won Australia.
If you're Australian then I guarantee you have heard many criticisms of the morality of European colonisation. It is not accepted as moral just because the colonists 'won'.
Even the Australian legal system imposed by the 'winners' has recognised that the seizure of Aboriginal land was not justified, with cases like the Mabo decision as well as the apology by Rudd.
So you have an example where not only is the morality of the winner's position challenged by society generally, it is disputed by the 'winner' itself.
>>755375
>It is not accepted as moral just because the colonists 'won'.
It literally depends on who you ask, whether you ask and Aboriginal or a white person.
>as well as the apology by Rudd.
Do not bring this shit up, and trust me when I tell you it's not because we 'feel bad' it's because Aboriginals are for ever using it against us and we have to provide them endless benefits. Do you have any idea how much of a drain they are on our economics? We have to get them off our backs any way we can. Aboriginals/Islanders get paid to go to highschool/primary/university, even if they are from an affluent family. None of them do, well majority do not.
>So you have an example where not only is the morality of the winner's position challenged by society generally, it is disputed by the 'winner' itself.
Not at all. If a white Australian is saying he doest like what we did to the Aboriginals he or she is fooling themselves to fit into modern PC culture. Saying you wish it never happened is the same as saying you wish you didn't exist, as if Australia wasn't colonized majority of the people living here who were born here wouldn't exist.
tl;dr you bought into people trying to fool themselves
>>755400
>Aboriginals/Islanders get paid to go to highschool/primary/university, even if they are from an affluent family. None of them do, well majority do not.
Another example of the fucked up benefits we give them are payments for owning dogs - their communities are now full FULL of stray dogs not being taken care of but they are still collecting benefits, that's the way it is - they would think its okay, do you?
>>755400
>If a white Australian is saying he doest like what we did to the Aboriginals he or she is fooling themselves to fit into modern PC culture.
And yet practically every Australian would say that. Including Prime Ministers and High Court judges.
It is utterly false that 'everything we did to Aboriginal people was justified' is the dominant view among white Australians. Aside from the fringe element who post on /pol/, listen to 'shock jocks' and sleep naked wrapped in an Australian flag muttering to themselves about 'glassing darkies', pretty much no one would agree with that statement.
>>755400
>Aboriginals are for ever using it against us and we have to provide them endless benefits. Do you have any idea how much of a drain they are on our economics?
The vast majority of welfare spending goes to old people. And, largely owing to crippling poverty and a lack of health services in most Aboriginal communities, there are very few Aboriginal old people.
>>754609
hating another is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die. holding onto anger is liking squeesing a hot coal. remind her of the buddha's wisdom. then sling her a hot dicking
>>754978
They are a very small subset of cosmopolitan Chinese, which is a very small subset of people in China.
>>755068
>>755044
It is in the best interests of all belligerents for citizens and POWs to be treated humanely. Take our very point of discussion for example, the Asian-Pacific would be a much more docile region if it weren't for the very long-lasting effects of war crimes on public opinions on foreign nations. Prosecution of war crimes allows justice between nations, so that equality need not be achieved through other means, principally armed conflict.
>>755148
That's your right, but whether you recognize it or not, we all owe a debt we can never repay to our countries, especially in the West. The amount of literal blood and tears shed for us just to give us the political rights and economic means to shitpost on 4chan is for the most part unimaginable without deep consideration. If you are feeling disenchanted you should study your nation's history.
>>755599
China today is unambiguously more Confucian in ideology than Buddhist.
No. The Chinese made it all up.
All the "atrocities" Japan allegedly did were the testimonies of a few known liars and forced confessions.
All the photos are of chinese labor camps.
>>754964
Yeah you don't have to tell me. To be fair my time in China was out in villages and with farmers, the only major city I visited was guangzhou and that was purely for the international flight in.
She knows all about mao etc, hates them too.... Other Chinese I know are neutral or indifferent on the matter. Funny group I guess.
>>755599
She couldn't give two shits about Buddha or any religion for that matter. Other Chinese I know practice the acts, but don't really "live" the teachings, if you know what I mean.
>>755893
I would like to add onto this that many people forget (somehow) that taxes pay for your roads, running water, sewage, electricity and the means of delivery and countless other services unique to each country.
Nope. There is no evidence.
It is all Chinese and Korean propaganda. There were no war crimes committed by the IJA.
>>756152
Fuck off Korean.
>>755081
Might makes right in this context only if the superior country can enforce its will on the entire world and chooses to completely eradicate its enemies. When you start taking actions that are considered war crimes, you're going to make a whole lot more enemies than the one you're currently fighting. Not to mention you're enemy is going to start fighting the same way too. There's a reason the whole "rules of war" thing came about.
Why Mao Zedong killed dozens millions of Chinese?
Communism kills gadzillions times more than Japanese's does.
Chinese people shall demand paying for their ancesters killed by Maoists to Mao's descendants.
>>756195
It's funny because I'm sure the Japs killed almost as many chinese people as mao did.
They didnt call it the three all campaigns for nothing.
>>756233
Are Japanese armies as strong as the Super Saiyans and killed Chinese stormtrooper nuts by mystical samurai kungfu powers?
Axis war crime deniers have no reason to deny both the holocaust and gook shit because in the holocaust denier's narrative, the holocaust is made up to shame whites and provide sympathy for Jews; the Japanese are mostly free from those sort of attacks on western people (since they're not western).
The holocaust never happened + Nanking nevah happen = you don't even know what you're going on about and you deny war crimes just to deny war crimes.
The holocaust happened + Nanking nevah happen = You're a Japanese nationalist. You may provide iffy evidence to disprove Jap war crimes.
The holocaust never happened + Japs did fucked up shit = You're a holocaust denier. You may provide iffy evidence to disprove da shoah.
The holocaust happened + Japs did fucked up shit = You have a standard idea of axis war crimes and you should consider other ideas albeit with a grain of salt.
>>756233
mao literally killed more than 100 million chinese.
the japanese did nothing NEAR that.
>>756325
they just sorta died either directly in purges due to ignoring his collectivization orders, or due to starving after following his orders dutifully.
china was like north korea, except with a country with more people than ALL OF AMERICA AND EUROPE COMBINED.
a lot of people died dude. they even went around burning 1k year old temples. chinese boy scouts would come back and kill their parents with butcher knives, because the state was to replace the paretns
btw I love the chinese. but they killed a LOT of people, dude.
>>756338
I'm just going off my recollection that the famine killed like 45 million people. The Sino-Japanese war killed around 20-25 million chinese civilians I think.
Also, its not just mao who was fucking retarded
>chiang kai shek
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_Yellow_River_flood
JUST
>>755437
Leave the inner city and you may find heaps of people who believe that.
>>755437
I'm not a white Australian. What Australia did to the abbos was pretty shitty, but whats sadder still is that its used to block ANY sort of improvement to aboriginal lives, from the city to out in the centre. some butthurt interest group will complain and bring invasion day up and inevitably all progress just halts
>>755921
>All the "atrocities" Japan allegedly did were the testimonies of a few known liars and forced confessions.
What about all the Dutch and Australian claims? And the merchant sailors lucky enough to survive IJN submarine attacks on the Indian ocean?
>>754507
We already have emperor Hirohito, we don't need another.
