sad thoughts on poly posters

[Ned]

Tojo was not in power in the 30s. He became prime minister in Sept. 1941, IIRC.

Talking about attrocities that occured after the war broke out and about the evilness of Tojo for who took power after we instituted our embargo is the the very king of hindsight justification that I am trying to avoid.

This whole substread started when SD said that America's war in WWII was NOT about our saving democracy, but about protecting our interests. I simply asked, "What interests." To date, I have only received responses that so-and-so government we were protecting was democratic or suedo-democratic and the other guys were in effect barbarians. However, Japan was a "western" country at the time, a constitutional monarchy with a parliament and prime minister. As we have seen here, China itself was a brutal dictatorship that actually probably did provoke the wars with Japan in the 30s.

Here is a quote from an historian who suggests that Roosevelt deliberately provoked a war with Japan in order to overcome isolationists that were preventing US involvement in the European War.

"From 1931 to 1939 we Americans didn’t give a rats ass about the Asian conflict, in fact we pretty much portrayed the Japanese in a positive light especially in their cause against communism. After all, we had a massive trade surplus with them, not China. But then FDR showed himself to be at least as 2 faced as Hitler. As soon as Britain and Germany went to war, we did a complete 180 degree about face on the issue. The hope was that if we could provoke and goad Japan into war with us, that the patriotic uproar might finally permit FDR to overcome the isolationists in Congress and Senate and use the momentum to join the war on Britain’s side in Europe as well.

It started with racist policies here at home, we treated the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese immigrants and foreign workers like slaves, we took away their rights. Then we started making unreasonable demands. We told them to get out of Vichy French Indo-china, eventhough the Vichy gov’t itself never did. When they agreed to this by a certain date, we pushed up the deadline to an impossible date. From then on we kept making demands on them including China and even Manchukuo which China legally signed away rights to them. Every time the Japanese would agree to our demands, we would change our minds and add more. Eventually the Japanese could lose no more ‘face’ as the asians call it and would react. But they were annoyingly patient and FDR couldn’t wait. So we illegally froze their assets not only in the US but internationally. We not only embargoed our steel and oil against them knowing it would destroy their economy, but we forced other nations, even neutrals to do the same thing. This actually brought the militarists to power as the ‘peace party’ was obviously destroying Japan. We, the US, literally put the militarists and right wing in power. We now know that we did this deliberately.

By Spring 1941 Japan only had enough fuel to the end of the year when we slapped on a literal blockade even of food stuffs. Now Japan was not only facing the collapse of its economy, not only its ability to defend itself but now mass starvation as well. It was impossible to keep acceding to the never-ending stream of demands by the USA eventhough the new militarist PM Tojo himself didn’t want war with the West. Tojo himself pushed the planned attacks back from August to October and finally December. Japan had no choice but to defend itself. It attacked the blockading powers in December 1941, including Pearl Harbor.

Now we had the cause to declare war on Japan. But to FDR’s dismay, despite making the attack look like a surprise, the US gov’t STILL refused to go to war with Hitler (eventhough they would agreed to ally with Britain against Japan). FDR wrote an equally dismayed Churchill that all was not lost. That will full effort by we Americans against Japan, that would permit Britain to divert less against Hitler and Mussolini. That this would still permit the USA to send even more aid to Britain eventhough Americans wouldn’t be fighting Hitler directly. Like a domino effect. At least he had won that much in the gamble."


Hitler’s Worst Gamble

[Q Classic]

Tojo was not in power in the 30s. He became prime minister in Sept. 1941, IIRC.

Talking about attrocities that occured after the war broke out and about the evilness of Tojo for who took power after we instituted our embargo is the the very king of hindsight justification that I am trying to avoid.

my friend, see, most of those atrocities started happening before 1941...
Rape of Nanking was in the late 1930s. The Occupation of Korea was between 1905-1945, so for about 35 years it wasn't during a "war". Taiwan was occupied before WW2.
no, hirohito knew. he just didn't say anything.

However, Japan was a "western" country at the time, a constitutional monarchy with a parliament and prime minister. As we have seen here, China itself was a brutal dictatorship that actually probably did provoke the wars with Japan in the 30s.

how? when? when did china provoke a war with japan? what reason could it possibly have? where is your proof?

"From 1931 to 1939 we Americans didn’t give a rats ass about the Asian conflict, in fact we pretty much portrayed the Japanese in a positive light especially in their cause against communism. After all, we had a massive trade surplus with them, not China. But then FDR showed himself to be at least as 2 faced as Hitler. As soon as Britain and Germany went to war, we did a complete 180 degree about face on the issue. The hope was that if we could provoke and goad Japan into war with us, that the patriotic uproar might finally permit FDR to overcome the isolationists in Congress and Senate and use the momentum to join the war on Britain’s side in Europe as well.

It started with racist policies here at home, we treated the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese immigrants and foreign workers like slaves, we took away their rights.

actually, that was happening long before the US decided it didn't like japan. or don't you remember that little transcontinental railroad?
and actually, japan didn't give a damn about the Korean and Taiwanese immigrants, and didn't really care too much for the Japanese immigrants either.

Then we started making unreasonable demands. We told them to get out of Vichy French Indo-china, eventhough the Vichy gov’t itself never did. When they agreed to this by a certain date, we pushed up the deadline to an impossible date. From then on we kept making demands on them including China and even Manchukuo which China legally signed away rights to them. Every time the Japanese would agree to our demands, we would change our minds and add more. Eventually the Japanese could lose no more ‘face’ as the asians call it and would react.

they were too busy liberating asia from you white imperialist powers, don't you realize that? the us was a white imperialist power. japan wanted to save the asian people from that.

But they were annoyingly patient and FDR couldn’t wait. So we illegally froze their assets not only in the US but internationally. We not only embargoed our steel and oil against them knowing it would destroy their economy, but we forced other nations, even neutrals to do the same thing. This actually brought the militarists to power as the ‘peace party’ was obviously destroying Japan. We, the US, literally put the militarists and right wing in power. We now know that we did this deliberately.

so the us is at fault for what japan did to the rest of asia?
fine.
i can buy that.

but your friend here is placing the blame at the wrong time. you want to blame the us? blame the us for opening up japan to the world. blame the us for acceeding to japan's diplomatic request to occupy korea, the so called "gentleman's agreement" with the previous roosevelt.

besides, this Leigh Miller? i wouldn't put too much stock in his "facts".

Oh, certainly. Leigh Miller is a Canadian Comic Artist and Game designer. Mr. Miller is particularly famous for his knowledge on Japan. Leigh Miller's work and achievements are well documented. The best place to start is our 'biography'-section. It can be found over there. Do not hesitate to contact our staff if you need assistance."

take a look at his resume and his biography. it doesn't exactly scream credentials...

[Ned]

Q Cubed, Korea was formally annexed in 1910. Manchuria was ceeded to the Japanese by the Russians in 1905. The conflict between China and Japan started in 1931. The rape of Nanking occured in Dec. 1937. American anti-Japanese policy began, at least according to this historian, in 1939.

The escallating series of demands/sanctions is very consistent with the historical record.

Why Roosevelt did this is the question on the table.

[Dauphin]

I simply asked, "What interests."

Japan wished to have control of most of Asia and the Pacific, This was at odds with U.S. interests in Guam, Wake Island, the Philippines etc

The US had a large presence in the Pacific that they would want to protect.

Actions taken against Japan did not begin at the first rumblings of war. They occured when the clear and present threat was felt.

Given US behaviour through history, and most other countries too, truly altruistic actions are not something I would associate with the US involvement in WW2.

Roosevelt was probably interested in saving democracy, but it was not the first and most important concern - defending against aggressive expanionistic nations was.

[Q Classic]

Q Cubed, Korea was formally annexed in 1910. Manchuria was ceeded to the Japanese by the Russians in 1905. The conflict between China and Japan started in 1931. The rape of Nanking occured in Dec. 1937. American anti-Japanese policy began, at least according to this historian, in 1939.

i'm well aware of the dates, ned. after all, part of it is my history.
korea was "formally" annexed in 1910. in 1905, japan had set it up as a protectorate state after assassinating the dynastic leaders, controlling its foreign policy, its path of industrialization, and much domestic policy.

manchuria wasn't exactly ceded by the russians in 1905 after the russo-japanese war. what russia did was cede any political claim to the territories of manchuria, and any influence over the nation of korea.

the conflict between china and japan-- you still haven't answered. when did china provoke japan?

i pointed those atrocities out because of this:

Talking about attrocities that occured after the war broke out and about the evilness of Tojo for who took power after we instituted our embargo is the the very king of hindsight justification that I am trying to avoid.

Tojo was in a position of power in the Kwantung army when it raped Nanking. All the japanese people knew that they had occupied korea and manchuria, and were happy, because they were "civilizing" the people there.

that's what i'm talking about. i brought tojo up because he was one of the few leaders of japan executed in the tokyo war crimes trials-- in which hirohito himself should have been tried.

the demands and sanctions? that's besides the point. america did threaten japan in an underhanded way. but japan was threatening american territorial interests-- one need only look at american posessions in the pacific (guam, philippines, hawaii, etc.) and the burgeoning japanese pacific empire to see why america and japan could not be friends for too much longer.

ned, the only reason i pointed those things out was because it seemed that you did not think that japan was evil on its own, when it was in fact quite evil.

[chequita guevara]

Ned, the military seized power in Japan during the 19th Century, in the Meiji restoration. From that time until 1945, it was a military dictatorship.

In 1937, the Japanese attacked and sank an American gunboat on the Yangtze river (known as the Yangtze incident).

We allied with China only after Japan attacked us, though American volunteers served in China against the Japanese and the Reds.

In actuallity, Chaig as a co-belligerent of the Japanese, as most of the aid we sent during the war went to fight Mao's Red Army, while they drew back from the Japanese. Mao, on the other hand, concentrated his struggle against the Japanese.

After the war, we continued supplying Chaing, and even airlifted his troops to cities that were about to fall to the Reds. Only a little known mutiny by Amerian merchant marines, stopped the US from becoming more fully involved in the Chinese civil war. Sick of war and being away from home, they turned their ships around and refused to go to China.

[Ned]

C Cubed and SD, Just because two empires collide and go to war, as in Rome vs. Carthage, does not make one "evil" and the other "good." Just because Tojo was a responsible officer in the Army that raped Nanking does not necessarily make the whole Japanese nation guilty - however, the problem with Nanking was that the Japanese never put any of the responsible officers on trial, but later apparently appointed one of them, Tojo, prime mininister. This sounds very much like Ariel Sharon, doesn't it? The United States had Calley and Mi Lai, and recently Senator Kerrey. But the US is not evil because of their individual war crimes.

The war between Rome and Carthage started because each side was backing opponents in a local war in Sicily. Similarly, the war with Japan started because we backed Chiang, a brutal dictator we are told, against Japan, a western-style constitutional monarchy.

The asserted reason given here is that American interests in its East Pacific colonies were being threatened by Japan. Perhaps. But it is not clear that this was the case at all. I asked for even one example of Japan threatening the United States in the 30s. No examples are forthcoming.

The US state department site suggests that the downward spiral in US-Japanese relations begain when Germany and Japan signed the anti-communist pact in 1936. Right after this, Roosevelt recognized the communist regime in the USSR and began giving them foreign aid. Roosevelt's acts were said to be shocking not only to Japan and Germany, but to most of the West, including England.

Could it be that the US became anti-Japanese because Japan became anti-communist?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Could it be that the US became anti-Japanese because Japan became anti-communist?

Highly doubtful. The West was also anti-communist, and this is why Germany was given so much leeway until Poland. They were willing to let Hitler get the Commies, but not take over everyone in his way in order to do it. (They probably were hoping he'd make an alliace with Poland.)

Japan, however, threatened American business interest in China. American policy for over a hundred years was an open-China policy, i.e.e, no nation carves up China. Japan was trying to take China all for itself. If the Japanee had contented themselves to attacking the USSR instead, I highly doubt we'd have come into conflict with them.

[Ned]

Che, Your post sounds right - to a point. The problem with your post is that Japan, not China, was even then one of our largest trading partners. It makes no business sense whatsoever to cut business ties with Japan in order to protect business ties to China. The economics simply do not add up.

Besides, there is simply is no reason why we could not continue to trade with a Japanese-run China.

This logic is almost as sound as saying the reason for the Gulf War was to protect our access to Kuwaiti oil when we previously were allies of Saddam (in his war against Iran) and had good business relations with Iraq.

It doesn't add up or make much sense.

[chequita guevara]

Germany was also a very large trading partner. But you can't let them overrun your other business interests just because of that. Also, China has always been a much greater potential than actual partner. The old saying was, "if I could sell a pair of cufflinks to every man in China . . . ." The US was protecting future options.

You are forgetting the point of colonialism. A Japanese run China wouldn't be trading with any other country but Japan.

[Ned]

Che, I agree with you on Germany. Whether we had a large volume of trade with Germany was largely irrelevant to our growing hostility.

But for the same reasons, I doubt that business and trading interest in China have very much at all to do with our growing hostilty to Japan.

I was just reading another cite on the Rape of Nanking. Apparently, very few people of the world knew about this until recent decades. No western reporters were the. A John Rabe, a German Nazi who rescued 100,000 Chinese, was muzzled by Hitler - actually imprisoned - when he returned to Germany to get Hitler to denounce the Japanese.

So, even though the Japanese were brutal to an extreme in its war against China, few in the West knew, or given its anti-asian racists attitudes, even cared about the Japanese attrocities.

Again, the State Department says that our relations with Japan began to go down hill with the anti-communist pact of 1936. Others say our relationship really began to deteriorate in 1939 after the outbreak of the war in Europe.

I smell Churchill in this. It does seem reasonable to conclude that Churchhill and Roosevelt conspired to force Japan to attack us in order to get Congress to declare war on Germany.

[chequita guevara]

I don't doubt that our Japan policy wasn't designed to force Japan to attack us in order to get us into war with Germany. But there were still real grievences with the Empire of Japan, which is what I'm trying to show.

[Ned]

Well, Che, I am going to do a little more research and see what our trading relationships were with "Korea," and the Manchuriam and Nanking puppet governments. Even though your position seems unreasonable, you may be right.

[Ned]

Q Cubed, What do you say about this taken from the Columbia Encyclopedia. It does seem to suggest that China started hostilties in 1937.

"Outbreak of War
Growing domestic opposition to the Nationalist government’s policy of self-strengthening before counterattacking in N China and Manchuria led to the kidnapping of Chiang Kai-shek. He was kidnapped at Xi’an in Dec., 1936, by Chang Hsüeh-liang. Chiang was forced to agree to a united anti-Japanese front with the Communists as a condition for his release. The situation was tense, and in 1937 full war commenced. A clash (July, 1937) between soldiers of the Japanese garrison at Beijing and Chinese forces at the Marco Polo Bridge was the pretext for Japanese occupation at Beijing and Tianjin. Chiang Kai-shek refused to negotiate an end to hostilities on Japanese terms and placed crack troops outside the Japanese settlement at Shanghai. After a protracted struggle Shanghai and the national capital, Nanjing, fell to the Japanese. The Chinese broke the Huang He dikes (June, 1938) to slow the enemy advance. In late 1938, Hankou and Guangzhou were taken."

[Ned]

Che what I found is that Harvard University is leading an historical study of the Sino-Japanese war that will focus on economics, among other things. To date, there appears to be NO histories written by anyone on this war. The scholars are even debating what to call the war, because clearly, it was more than just WWII in the Pacific.

I also read the original diplomatic communiques from Britain, the US and France after they met with the Japanese foreign minister on Sept. 6-7, 1939. The three receives assurances from Japan that they hope for good relations with their respective countries, they expressed neutrality with respect to the European War, and hoped for its early conclusion.

The meetings were cordial, on the whole. There is no mention of US demands that Japan stop the war in China.

So it looks like the description of the evens by the above historian are accurate. The US, England and France cared only about whether Japan would stay neutral in Europe.