Posted: 11/18/2010 7:04:20 PM EDT
| Saw this question on WW II History magazine, but on my way out. I am going back to buy the issue and read up, but figured I would ask. What made the Jap soldiers so brutal? Were Vietnamese soldiers that brutal? |
|
That's an oversimplification at absolute best.
The price of a human life in traditional japanese culture wasnt very high. For warriors, the ultimate way to go is in individual combat, and to surrender is an ultimate act of shame, hence the horrid treatment of POWs. The japanese have traditionally (since time out of mind) regarded themselves as direct descendants of the Gods, and have treated other races (such as the Chinese and Koreans, and when the Europeans arrived in the 1500s, them as well) as inferior. Would you feel bad about stepping on an ant hill? That's kind of the attitude that has pervaded the culture since time immemorial. I had all of this explained to me by an old Japanese guy when I was a kid - he was an officer during WWII and I asked him the same kind of question. He said that he regretted some of the things that were done, as it just wasn't right... |
|
The Japanese considered themselves the master race of Asia, if not the world (their allies, the Nazis, would have disputed THAT claim of course).
Historically they looked down on the people of China, Korea, and Southeast Asia. These attitudes alone did not "cause" some of the atrocities that were committed, but they certainly made it a helluva lot easier for them to happen unfortunately. As posted above, they also considered surrender to be the most dishonorable thing a soldier could do, and therefore they looked down on allied soldiers who had surrendered to them and held their lives in very low esteem. |
|
Japanese then and now are some racist motherfuckers.
coupled with war propaganda about how US troops / Marines would eat their babies. coupled with a (slightly) distorted bushido code that said a surrendered enemy was worth nothing, forfeited everything, was subject to any sort of treatment whatsoever. To surrender was seen as dishonorable, unforgiveable. It made them unable to surrender, it made them completely disrespect any who surrendered. By the time the Rape of Nankang and the Bataan Death March were publicized, coupled with our own wartime propoganda and experiences fighting once we went on the offensive in the Pacific, we weren't offering much quarter (either).   
The Japanese war propaganda wasn't much different. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Reading "With The Old Breed," or even just the forwards thereof if you're pressed for time, will give a clear cut picture of the difference. I have read it. The Marines, while not as bad as their Japanese enemies, were not kind to them. pato |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Reading "With The Old Breed," or even just the forwards thereof if you're pressed for time, will give a clear cut picture of the difference. I have read it. The Marines, while not as bad as their Japanese enemies, were not kind to them. pato It's what happens when you refuse to surrender, you tend to get killed in whatever method is the best and with the least amount of casualties on the other side. If you are dug in or in caves, your death is likely to be pretty gruesome. |
|
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato They were at first, but the way the Japanese fought caused many to change. Crap such as acting like they were surrending but really having grenades drop from their armpits when they raised their hands sort of forced our guys not to take chances. Having said that, US troops were very kind and gentle to the children and other civilians on Okinawa and Saipan. which was very late in the war. That was if the mothers didn't jump off cliffs with their children. That was said and they were jumping because they were told that our guys would rape the mothers and kill them and their children. |
|
Quoted:
Saw this question on WW II History magazine, but on my way out. I am going back to buy the issue and read up, but figured I would ask. What made the Jap soldiers so brutal? Were Vietnamese soldiers that brutal? The VC were that brutal and were pieces of shit unlike the "noble warriors" and "freedom fighters" that some on the left tried to portray them as back then. Actually, they were worse. They would hide among women and children and rarely participated in a straight up fight. At least our guys knew that a Japanese soldier was just that whereas the VC didn't wear uniforms. |
| After I read Samurai! by Saburo Sakai, the Japanese WWII fighter ace, one of the themes that stuck with me and was jaw-dropping was the absolute brutality that was ingrained in the Japanese military, including its officers and NCOs. Sakai believed this was in large part responsible for the inhumanity the Japanese military inflicted upon those it conquered and captured. |
|
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Ok I'll be nice.. The Marines' action were a direct reflection of the fanaticism displayed by the Japanese. It was a brutal and bitter fight to defeat the Japanese, you give what you get. Second and more importantly is the way both sides treated their POWs, I don't think I need to go into that to make my point. |
|
BUSHIDO made them do it!!
And the fact that the Military was indictrinated with the concept that the Japanese were a superior race. It wasn't just the Nazis who believed in racial superiority. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Ok I'll be nice.. The Marines' action were a direct reflection of the fanaticism displayed by the Japanese. It was a brutal and bitter fight to defeat the Japanese, you give what you get. Second and more importantly is the way both sides treated their POWs, I don't think I need to go into that to make my point. When you read the books by Sledge and Leckie, you will note that the Marines truly hated the Japanese and that hatred was returned. Maybe it was Pearl Harbor, the treatment of captured Marines, or the fact that the Japanese just didn't act like we thought they should, but the Marines were plenty brutal to the Japanese. I ain't saying the Japanese were choirboys––they obviously were not and their brutality eclipsed that of the Marines, but saying that the Marines didn't abuse or act cruelly isn't factual. pato |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Ok I'll be nice.. The Marines' action were a direct reflection of the fanaticism displayed by the Japanese. It was a brutal and bitter fight to defeat the Japanese, you give what you get. Second and more importantly is the way both sides treated their POWs, I don't think I need to go into that to make my point. When you read the books by Sledge and Leckie, you will note that the Marines truly hated the Japanese and that hatred was returned. Maybe it was Pearl Harbor, the treatment of captured Marines, or the fact that the Japanese just didn't act like we thought they should, but the Marines were plenty brutal to the Japanese. I ain't saying the Japanese were choirboys––they obviously were not and their brutality eclipsed that of the Marines, but saying that the Marines didn't abuse or act cruelly isn't factual. pato True, it got nasty. But again, you give what you get. |
|
In addition to the contributions of others, it was part of the dehumanization process which made the individual Japanese soldier or marine or sailor more willing to kill his fellow human being. It was ritualistic for men to be slapped and beaten until blind obedience was obtained.
The reservists were not so bad. I met a former guest of the emperor who spent his time in a PoW camp in Los Banos, Cebu Island, Philippines. The commandant was a PhD educated in the U.S. Except for the sergeant, who was regular army, everyone was a reservist who didn't relish in brutality. The sergeant was the exception and he would warn the prisoners that while the commandant may be the commanding officer, it was HIS camp and he'd beat the PoWs to prove it. The ex-pow attributed his survival to one brutal beating that sent him to a hospital outside of camp. He got more food that way and because he had more food, he survived. He also recalled one particularly kind Japanese soldier who was American by birth. This Japanese-American made the mistake of visiting relatives before the war and getting drafted into the army. To help his fellow Americans, he would buy fruit which he would slice very thin (nickel thickness) and then he would palm it off to individual PoWs whenever he was out of sight of other guards. The ex-PoW told me he would suck on the lime or lemon (skin and all) all day long to extract any and all nutritional value from it. Ditto with slices of banana (skin and all). Typically American, the PoWs nicknamed the Japanese-American soldier Smitty. Smitty survived the war and resides in Japan today. The ex-Pow told me he still visits Smitty every other year and they are the best of friends today. I'm trying to get that ex-PoW to sit down for an audio-tape interview. |
| Do unto other as you would have them do unto you. During a show on the history channel they told a stat that was something like 5x as many soldiers wanted to kill the japanese vs german troops. As the japanese werent seen as honorable or even human and got everything they deserved. |
|
Quoted:
Do unto other as you would have them do unto you. During a show on the history channel they told a stat that was something like 5x as many soldiers wanted to kill the japanese vs german troops. As the japanese werent seen as honorable or even human and got everything they deserved. What's sad is many today will not attribute this to anger at the savage atrocities and brutal tactics of the Japanese, but instead to rubish racism and cultural misunderstanding.
*cough* Tom Hanks *cough cough* |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Ok I'll be nice.. The Marines' action were a direct reflection of the fanaticism displayed by the Japanese. It was a brutal and bitter fight to defeat the Japanese, you give what you get. Second and more importantly is the way both sides treated their POWs, I don't think I need to go into that to make my point. When you read the books by Sledge and Leckie, you will note that the Marines truly hated the Japanese and that hatred was returned. Maybe it was Pearl Harbor, the treatment of captured Marines, or the fact that the Japanese just didn't act like we thought they should, but the Marines were plenty brutal to the Japanese. I ain't saying the Japanese were choirboys––they obviously were not and their brutality eclipsed that of the Marines, but saying that the Marines didn't abuse or act cruelly isn't factual. pato True, it got nasty. But again, you give what you get. Well to roughly quote SNAFU from The Pacific, "They'z gettin' mean, Sledge-Hammuh. We gots to get meanuh!" |
|
The Japanese were an indoctrinated fanatical militaristic society that believed that they were racially superior to any other race on Earth and their intent was to capture more land and territory in Asia and to dominate the Pacific.
The Bushido code taught that the greatest honor was to die in combat for the Emperor, that he was in fact a God and that to surrender was dishonorable and anyone who in fact did fall into their hands alive was to be treated as an animal and used in slave labor and in some cases EATEN. The Japs were in many ways worse than the Nazis and even the Islamic freakshows we are fighting today. They got what they deserved, burned in caves and bunkers with flamethrowers and explosives all across the Pacific because they wouldn't surrender. The Marines were 100% justified in any and all treatment that they may have inflicted on the Japs. They weren't honorable fighters..they feigned surrenders, played dead while laying on their weapons to spring up, butchered and castrated captured GI's, and used Kamakaze tactics. They got everything they got and deserved worse. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Ok I'll be nice.. The Marines' action were a direct reflection of the fanaticism displayed by the Japanese. It was a brutal and bitter fight to defeat the Japanese, you give what you get. Second and more importantly is the way both sides treated their POWs, I don't think I need to go into that to make my point. When you read the books by Sledge and Leckie, you will note that the Marines truly hated the Japanese and that hatred was returned. Maybe it was Pearl Harbor, the treatment of captured Marines, or the fact that the Japanese just didn't act like we thought they should, but the Marines were plenty brutal to the Japanese. I ain't saying the Japanese were choirboys––they obviously were not and their brutality eclipsed that of the Marines, but saying that the Marines didn't abuse or act cruelly isn't factual. pato That right there is where you go right off the rails. You've put the cart before the horse. |
|
Quoted:
Read "The Rape of Nanking" if somebody says that American forces were just as brutal as Japanese... We didn't eat our enemies as a systematic matter of order. Exactly. Nor did we have "contests" to see which officer could cut off the most heads in the shortest amount of time, like the Japanese did. In addition to THE RAPE OF NANKING, another one that is very eye opening in this regard is A PLAGUE UPON HUMANITY by Barenblatt (recounts the sickening activities of Dr. Shiro Ishii and his infamous "Unit 731" germ warfare experiments on live human victims). ETA: I think it was "Unit 731" but not sure if I remember the number correctly. Whatever. BTW: Shiro Ishii was never brought to justice or tried for war crimes, and became a prosperous Japanese pharmaceutical company executive after the war. That would be about like Dr. Josef Mengele becoming an executive for Mercedes or BMW after the war in Germany, and no one caring one way or the other. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do unto other as you would have them do unto you. During a show on the history channel they told a stat that was something like 5x as many soldiers wanted to kill the japanese vs german troops. As the japanese werent seen as honorable or even human and got everything they deserved. What's sad is many today will not attribute this to anger at the savage atrocities and brutal tactics of the Japanese, but instead to rubish racism and cultural misunderstanding.
*cough* Tom Hanks *cough cough* Exactly, and why I suspect pato wrote what I just highlighted. Marxists deconstructionists have been couching everything in those terms and teaching for decades that racism ONLY flows from whites against all others. THat other races and creeds are in effect incapable of racism or of bearing any blame for such. Once that grossly distorted worldview is entrenched in the target, their perceptions are forever fucked up. One need only read the histories of ancient Japanese-Korean conflicts or even the Sino-Japanese war accounts, andthe aforementioned Rape of Nankang to grasp the elemental racism within the japanese culture. Even before the excesses of the 1930s, rolling into WWII. That pato clumsily or deliberately places the japanese extremism as a reaction to OUR attitudes shows that indoctrination and/or an ignorance of the broader subject matter, particularly the decades preceding WWII. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Read "The Rape of Nanking" if somebody says that American forces were just as brutal as Japanese... We didn't eat our enemies as a systematic matter of order. Exactly. Nor did we have "contests" to see which officer could cut off the most heads in the shortest amount of time, like the Japanese did. In addition to THE RAPE OF NANKING, another one that is very eye opening in this regard is A PLAGUE UPON HUMANITY by Barenblatt (recounts the sickening activities of Dr. Shiro Ishii and his infamous "Unit 731" germ warfare experiments on live human victims). ETA: I think it was "Unit 731" but not sure if I remember the number correctly. Whatever. You would be correct.  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Reading "With The Old Breed," or even just the forwards thereof if you're pressed for time, will give a clear cut picture of the difference. I have read it. The Marines, while not as bad as their Japanese enemies, were not kind to them. pato If you wanted to survive fighting the Japanese..being "kind" was not an option. |
|
Quoted: the hatred of the japanese is PARTLY pearl harbor. the majority of the hate comes from the battle of wake island. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wake_IslandQuoted: Quoted: The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Ok I'll be nice.. The Marines' action were a direct reflection of the fanaticism displayed by the Japanese. It was a brutal and bitter fight to defeat the Japanese, you give what you get. Second and more importantly is the way both sides treated their POWs, I don't think I need to go into that to make my point. When you read the books by Sledge and Leckie, you will note that the Marines truly hated the Japanese and that hatred was returned. Maybe it was Pearl Harbor, the treatment of captured Marines, or the fact that the Japanese just didn't act like we thought they should, but the Marines were plenty brutal to the Japanese. I ain't saying the Japanese were choirboys––they obviously were not and their brutality eclipsed that of the Marines, but saying that the Marines didn't abuse or act cruelly isn't factual. pato there was also the reports out of china as we had had a garrison there at one point. compared to the japanese, the germans were nothing.. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Marines that fought against the Japanese weren't exactly kind and generous. pato Reading "With The Old Breed," or even just the forwards thereof if you're pressed for time, will give a clear cut picture of the difference. I have read it. The Marines, while not as bad as their Japanese enemies, were not kind to them. pato If you wanted to survive fighting the Japanese..being "kind" was not an option. youd think we wouldve learned something about fighting modern fanatical enemies wouldnt you? |
|
Quoted:
Read "The Rape of Nanking" if somebody says that American forces were just as brutal as Japanese... We didn't eat our enemies as a systematic matter of order. There is also Unit 731. The Nazis weren't even that fucked up. For those unfamiliar with the subject, The Rape Of Nanking is a first hand account of the Japanese invasion of the Chinese city of NanKing. There are photographs in the book. Among other things, the Japanese took the Chinese women and used them as "comfort girls." These were for the Japanese soldiers to fuck since they were fighting away from home. Rape is the proper word for the title of the book. Unit 731 was a Japanese weapons testing unit in China. Other Japanese captors used prisoners to teach surgery to Japanese doctors. Anesthetics were in short supply, so the prisoners didn't get any while the doctors cut them open to practice their techniques. Yes, the Nazis did that, too, and plenty of other atrocities, but the Japanese seemed to have a special enthusiasm for it that even the Nazis respected and used. The Japanese also tested their weapons on live prisoners. They tied the prisoners to stakes around explosive test sites to see how the weapons would affect humans. Unit 731 is blamed for over half a million deaths. |
|
Quoted:
Brutal as compared to who? The Waffen SS? The Red Army? Listen to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast. In particular Ghosts of the Ostfront. The Japanese could take brutality lessons from the Germans and Russians. Read the Rape of Nanking. Japs were absolutely merciless. They got so bad that the Nazi's at their embassy intervened to save fleeing Chinese. Asia has a completely different culture than traditional US/western Europe. And Asians are just as racist as any other group of people. The Japanese motto at that time was "Asia for Asians", but the Japanese thought the other Asians were inferior to themselves. |
|
I don't care what sources you want to cite , but by and large the Japanese were significantly worse than the US. Don't think so? Go read up about the rape of nanking and unit 731 then get back to me. A lady that goes to my church was the daughter of missionaries in the Philippines when the Japanese took it over, over time a large portion of the people of the village where they lived were killed. In fact, her whole family along with a large number of other people were being marched to a area to be shot & buried when they were ambushed by marines who killed the execution squad. |