LogFAQs > #914056866

WheezinEd posted...

Darkman124 posted...

trial of war criminals

These are a sham anyway. Tons of them get pardoned and only ones the Japanese were willing to throw under the bus got tried.

that's a ridiculous generalization. we released far more than we should have, but allowing all of them to escape justice would have been unacceptable to the population of all of the allied nations.

and those at the very top did not escape their fate. anami killed himself. umezu and togo died in prison. tojo was executed. these are the names of the men who signed on to the high council's refusal of any surrender terms that did not protect war criminals from prosecution. these people were ON the high council, they were saving their own skins.

the realpolitik choices our post-war government made to cement control over the future japanese state do not undermine the significance of refusing a surrender from a high council made up of the very people their surrender terms were designed to protect.

and i see you have no argument against the terms for forced disarmament, withdrawal, or occupation. these were quite necessary to prevent further harm to chinese civilians, however much our post-war actions with unit 731 suggested we didn't give a shit.

Omnislasher posted...

why remove the assurances to the emperor when it was understood that the war could have been quickly and easily ended as long as they remained?

most likely because the assurances could not be made until after a full investigation determined whether the imperial house would be tried for class A war crimes or not.

i'm not going to watch your video. summarize the sections. i'll trust your summaries are accurate.
---

And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.