Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo?

Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

DDLAfan -> Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 8:52:25 PM)
Hi everybody, Last March I went on a two week vacation with my wife to Japan. As part of the itinerary, I wanted to go visit the Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo, which I had read had some controversy connected to it. As far as shrines go, it was one of the better ones we went to, the priests there were very polite (they went through great effort to get me a copy of a poster commemorating their victory over Russia in 1905. It was the 100th anniversary), and those hi-tech toilets they had were gorgeus (bidet?). In addition to the shrine, they have a museum on the grounds entirely devoted to Japan's military history. This was nice too, and had a lot of paraphanilia from their wars. In the WWII section, they had a Zero and a Kate on display, with a host of other period acoutrements. However... When I got to reading the plaques describing the conflict, I immediately saw how their perspective on the war was so different from ours. Without getting into details, according to the japanese the war started with American involvement in the China Incident, mentioning also that Roosevelt had precipitated the war by having the fleet out at sea several days before PH. I then came upon a room which had hundreds of black and white photos of their WWII war dead. In a special section was some thirty photos of their leaders, which included Tojo and some other war criminals, I think. As you leave the exhibit, they have a huge mural on the wall showing a Zero shooting down a Wildcat. My patriotisim was pretty riled up by this time, and I told my wife and cousin I was ready to leave (didn't see the rest of the museum). Talking about it later, I found it singularly interesting that while the Germans and Italians had reconciled themselves to their fascist past, Japan had obviously not. This was a total 180 degree version of what we know as the traditional history of the war. A few days later, we visited Hiroshima. It was pretty sad standing next to the a-bomb dome, as well as reading personal accounts of all the people who suffered through that. Yet, this feeling was tempered by what I had seen at Yakasuni. Almost a sense of satisfaction which I was not entirely comfortable with. So, I thought I would post this and see if anybody else had the same feelings after visiting the shrine. Also, if some of you can shed some light on why Japan has changed their history so much, I would appreciate that too.

mlees -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 9:03:19 PM)
I have been to the battleship Mikasa, that was interesting. (I perfer ships to planes, my apologies.) I have been to Hiroshima's Peace Park. Definately an anti-war message there, but a necessary one when considering the level of destruction atomic/nuke warheads bring to the table. I always wince when talk of "tactical" nuke/bunker busters are floated out as a trial balloon. There is a Zero on display in a really small "museum" on MCAS Iwakuni. The plane looked smaller than I thought it would... I forget the name of the town, but it is a seaside city (southwest of Tokyo) known for the large number of shrines. Spent a whole day there, beautiful stuff. There was a large 500 year old bronze Budda you could (for a small fee) go inside and look around.

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 9:09:36 PM)
Sorry to hijack, but.....How accessible is the Mikasa? (BB's rule!)

jwilkerson -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 9:29:12 PM)
quote: Also, if some of you can shed some light on why Japan has changed their history so much, I would appreciate that too. Not sure they've "changed it" ... I think it has always been remembered this way ... by them ... just like our version has always been remembered our way by us. There are at least a few Japanese scholars who recount versions of the facts as we ( would like to ) know them. And maybe there are a few American scholars who recount things the way the Japanese ( would like to ) remember them. I guess it is up to each person to decide what they believe. Not sure there is a court of absolute truth and justice !! Not on this planet anyway !

mlees -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 9:39:20 PM)
Mikasa is actually a Pre-Dreadnought, not a BB... Err, anyway, it is located very close to the Yokosuka Naval Base (on Tokyo Bay), but on public property. Restored as a museum (it looks like it was cemented into an old dry dock), there is a door charge to board. Very accessable. The Upper deck, Main deck, and bridge structure were setup for viewing when I was there. I would have liked to see inside the engineering spaces and/or a turret, but those were not open. (Dunno if there are plans to do so.) Inside is a moving diarama of the battle of Tsushima. Lots of stuff on display, like Togo's uniform. Largeish models of different ships, including those that fought in WW2. Togo's cabin, with a balcony hanging on the stern (called a gallery, I think) for after dinner smokes. Lush looking, showing how the upper crust lives... The Battle of Tsushima appears to be when the world sat up and took notice of Japan as a World Power (tm), and there is pride evident in the museum. (Maybe I read too much into it...)

Blackhorse -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 9:41:37 PM)
quote: When I got to reading the plaques describing the conflict, I immediately saw how their perspective on the war was so different from ours. I would be cautious about reading too much into the "Japanese perspective of the war" based on what is presented in Yakusuni. It is a private shrine, and controversial, even in Japan. Similarly, many (most?) modern Japanese do believe that their country was the wrongful aggressor in WWII. A great deal of attention is paid internationally to those nationalists who don't think so. For example, one of the latest international flaps was over a schoolbook that white-washed Japan's WWII atrocities -- but fewer than 1% of Japan's schoolchildren were in districts that approved the book.

jwilkerson -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 10:06:56 PM)
quote: many (most?) modern Japanese do believe that their country was the wrongful aggressor I guess I can only go based on the few that I've talked to about the topic ... but they have been 100% toward something equivalent to "ABCD encirclement left us no choice" ... this was mostly in University days ... < 12 people ... more than 6 people ... Japanese have in recent years seemed to reject the "revisionist" history books that small but vocal groups try to get adopted ( something like 4% adoption rate ) ... these stories stir up a lot of international flame - but seem to support idea that many do not agree with "revisionist" view. But really, not sure how we can know how many ( most ) Japanese feel about this w/o scientific poll.

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 10:27:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mlees Mikasa is actually a Pre-Dreadnought, not a BB... Before Dreadnought was built, she was called a "battleship" if you really want to get technical [;)] which really beats having to call something a Michigan or Pre-Michigan so thank god those Brits put the elbow greese on! hmmm....disapointing, sounds like Missouri....another locked down tighter than a drum memorial battleship. oh well.....thats why they invented lock cutters.

PzB74 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 11:01:46 PM)
I asked a Japanese once about what he knew about the war... He told me it started because America pressured Japan into attacking them. So yes, I'm afraid history has been re-written after the war in Japan. This is supported by the recent demonstrations in China against Japanese history books (if I remember it right:). Let's only hope that they still learned from their ancestors mistakes. Pride can be a double edged sword sometimes.

Alikchi2 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 11:15:38 PM)
The things happening in Japan are sad, but I can't say I'm surprised. Eventually the truth will win out. On a lighter note, here are some pictures of Mikasa, the world's last existing pre-dreadnaught: [image]http://www.bobhenneman.info/Mikasa7.jpg[/image] Set in concrete and preserved in a nice park [image]http://www.bobhenneman.info/mikasa6.jpg[/image] [image]http://www.bobhenneman.info/Mikasa8.jpg[/image] (Admiral Togo)

Alikchi2 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 11:18:26 PM)
addendum: "The ship was refloated but received only a minimum of repairs, and was inactive until stricken on September 20, 1923. On November 12, 1926, the ship was opened as a museum at Yokosuka, by honored guests Prince Hirohito and Admiral Togo. The ship remained there through WWII, escaping damage. After the war, she began to deteriorate badly, as she no longer operated as a museum following Japan's defeat. By 1959, she was in very bad shape, and there was talk of cutting her up for scrap. But a public campaign, aided by the American Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, raised enough money to restore the ship as a museum once again. In 1960, the ship was completely restored, and set in concrete as a permanent memorial, a testimony not only to the Japanese naval tradition, and Admiral Togo's victory at Tsushima, but also to the improvement of US-Japanese relations following the Second World War."

dereck -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/7/2005 11:58:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mlees I have been to the battleship Mikasa, that was interesting. (I perfer ships to planes, my apologies.) I have been to Hiroshima's Peace Park. Definately an anti-war message there, but a necessary one when considering the level of destruction atomic/nuke warheads bring to the table. I always wince when talk of "tactical" nuke/bunker busters are floated out as a trial balloon. There is a Zero on display in a really small "museum" on MCAS Iwakuni. The plane looked smaller than I thought it would... I forget the name of the town, but it is a seaside city (southwest of Tokyo) known for the large number of shrines. Spent a whole day there, beautiful stuff. There was a large 500 year old bronze Budda you could (for a small fee) go inside and look around. I was at the Yasukuni Shrine back in the early 80s when I was in the Navy on the Midway which was homeported in Yokosuka, Japan. Also been to the Mikasa (probably have slides of both places somewhere too seeing back then I was a photographer's mate and took photos of everything). Never made it to Hiroshima but did see Nagasaki and although I was reverent at the place I wasn't uncomfortable at all with the fact the US dropped the two bombs. And the bronze Buddha you're talking about Mlees is the Great Buddha which is at Kita-Kamakura about two train stops south of Yokosuka.

ChezDaJez -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 3:02:08 AM)
quote: Similarly, many (most?) modern Japanese do believe that their country was the wrongful aggressor in WWII. A great deal of attention is paid internationally to those nationalists who don't think so. For example, one of the latest international flaps was over a schoolbook that white-washed Japan's WWII atrocities -- but fewer than 1% of Japan's schoolchildren were in districts that approved the book. I made 3 deployments to Japan; 2 to Misawa (northern Honsho) and 1 to Okinawa. Just outside of Misawa is a Japanese P-3 base called Hachinoe where VP-4 from the JMSDF is stationed. We had many occasions to rub elbows with our Japanese counterparts. My Chief's Mess invited their chiefs over for dinner one evening and a small group of us had quite the discussion concerning WWII (after a few refreshments of course). I don't remember a lot of what we talked about but there were some definite "hotspots" that I remember pretty well. All of them had relatives that died in the war. One man's father had lost his parents and all of his siblings in combat or the fire bombings. Another's father had been a crewman on a transport plane that was shot down off the coast of Okinawa just prior to the invasion. He drifted for several days before a fishing boat found him. Most of the Japanese chiefs felt that Japan was the aggressor in the war but they also felt that the British, Dutch and American governments had done everything short of shooting to push them into it, primarily due to the economic embargoes placed on them. They all felt that the China war was simply used as an excuse by the Allies to "keep Japan in her place." They also felt that Japan could not have won the war no matter what they did One point that really prompted discussion was the atomic bombs. Most of them felt that their use had been justified however they also felt that cities shouldn't have been the targets. One of my chiefs asked them if Japan would have used them had they developed them before the US and they all said yes, but not in the same way we used them. Most of them felt that Japan would have used them on the invasion beaches in Okinawa if they had been available then otherwise they would have been used on the invasion beaches in Japan proper. Most felt that their use on the beaches could have resulted in a negotiated peace settlement. None of them felt that Japan could win the war by using them offensively, that they would have been used in a "defensive" way because Japan no longer had the means to deliver them anywhere else. One Japanese chief suggested that they could have been loaded on a submarine and sent to a west coast city and exploded but he also felt that would have only made things much worse for Japan. The discussions concerning the treatment of POWs was most enlightening and animated. Most of them said that their own soldiers were treated very badly in the field by their own officers and why should a POW expect to be treated better than their own soldiers? When asked about starving prisoners to death, many of them said what was the difference between starving in a POW camp or starving to death on an island that had been bypassed in the Pacific? They did all agree that Japan had committed atrocities during the war but also said that no one side had clean hands. Most felt that the terror type operations conducted in the PI and SRA against guerillas were justified but that the chemical experiments and similar atrocities should never have been undertaken. I got the impression that most felt a defeated enemy's military deserved harsh treatment but that the line should be drawn when it came to civilians unless the civilians were conducting a guerilla campaign. We also talked about the Kamikazes quite a bit. Most of the Japanese chiefs felt that the idea of using Kamikazes was simply a product of the situation Japan found herself in and that they couldn't see a situation today or in the future where men would blindly volunteer for missions like that. What I really remember is that they all seemed to believe that Japan surrendered because of the Russian invasion, not the dropping of the atomic bombs. They all felt that Russia's declaration of war meant that Japan would have been largely occupied by Russian forces before the US had time to invade Japan proper and that was something to be avoided at all costs. Anyways, we had some good, deep and sometimes animated discussions but they never became acrimonious. Chez

ctangus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 4:20:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez What I really remember is that they all seemed to believe that Japan surrendered because of the Russian invasion, not the dropping of the atomic bombs. They all felt that Russia's declaration of war meant that Japan would have been largely occupied by Russian forces before the US had time to invade Japan proper and that was something to be avoided at all costs. Chez Seems like they had a better read on the Russians than Roosevelt at Yalta. Interesting that - I never considered the Russian declaration of war a factor in Japan's surrender. It makes a lot of sense to me though. I always had a small question about the atomic bombs, horrific as they were, being the deciding factor. After all, the Japanese leadership was far more willing to accept large scale casualties than we're used to in the US. Perhaps not one or the other, but the two combined pushed Hirohito & others over the edge decision-wise.

dereck -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 5:44:16 AM)
I read one book where it stated that it was the double shock of the atomic bombs AND the Soviets entering the war that finally forced the surrender. Not sure if either one alone would have done the trick but both coming so close together may have been just what was needed to finally end the war.

BossGnome -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 2:51:38 PM)
i'm going to yasukuni in 2 weeks with my host mother here in tokyo. The problem is that while most japanese people do agree that they were the agressor in ww2, basically all they know about ww2 is that a bunch of people died, and that nuclear bombs were dropped on their country. I'm sorry, but i'm one of those people that thinks dropping the bomb was a good idea! Had the bomb not been dropped, much more people would have died in the bloody invasion of japan... Yasukuni is, indeed, controversial, even in japan. When I have more time I'll come back to this thread and post a few anecdotes. The problem is that Junichiro Koizumi, the japanese president (and a good friend of G.W. Bush by the way), is mostly in power because of the japanese far right, whose most prohiminent member is the Mayor of Tokyo, that same on who said last week that the massacre of Nanking "could not have possibly been as large as the chinese claim it is"...

Gen.Hoepner -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 3:19:51 PM)
rewrite history? Well, history is always "re-written". Each History student knows that to be a good historian you must a be a "revisionist" ( and this word hasn't any negative meaning). The winners gave their own vision of war, as always. The losers give theirs. There's nothing right or worng in this IMHO. It depends on which side are you. Ask Livius if was a good or a bad thing that Rome has annihilated Carthago... he will answer: a GOOD one! The garthaginias were bloody barbarians who sacrificed childs to Baal....they were simply beasts thursty of Roman blood! Now ask Hannibal or whoever what does he think. He will tell you that Rome has violated the agreements ( Seguntum, Ebrum etc) and its will of power has pushed Cartagho to war... Everything is relative in this world, war too. When i listen the "defenders of the TRUE history" that say the Allies have brought freedom to Italy by invading it, i just say no: they simply invaded it and won. They haven't freed(sp?) anybody. I think for Japanese is the same...for a part of them at least

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 5:40:11 PM)
Good viewpoint GH. I personally dont have a problem with the Japanese having their own viewpoint on the war. As related it's to be expected. The winners always write history from their viewpoint and in the case of the Pacific war, its not nearly as black and white as often portrayed. I do think Japan was the agressor nation and something needed to be done but that said, actions were taken diplomatically that helped push Japan to war and they "did" try to compromise with the US in the end but at that point we weren't interested and were preparing ourselves for war. Anyone who's studied Japan's history must also know that the "winners" in WWII all played parts in Japan's course towards aggressive imperalsm, starting with the US's forcing open the door to Japan when they wanted to be left alone. Having seen what the major powers did in Asia and India, it can be understood that Japan would want to avoid becoming a victim so she made herself into a world power. I can even understand (if not condone) Japan's desire to emulate the policy of Imperialism. After all when your a "have not" nation your viewpoint is inevitably going to be different from that of a "have" nation (such as my own country) Where Japan must be held accountable however is in her treatment of her Asian neighbors and for the militarists (hawks) to be allowed to rise to power and dominate the government. She can be held accountable for the consequences of going down the road to imperalism, same as Germany. Whatever "history" or "point of view" you want to believe, the important thing is to understand the components that led events happening the way they did. Thats why the old saying so true...."those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it" Remember history is not about finger pointing and chest thumping about who's on the side of right because for the most part as GH related...every side always thinks its on the side of right! There are few exceptions...one of them i consider the Nazi regime and it's deliberate policy of genocide. That was pure evil and most Germans know it. The Japanese with their cultural differences...are a more complex issue but in the end as mentioned....they did choose the sword and had to live with the results. All that said, I recalled the Naking controversy and i was angered by the attempts by right wing Japanese elements to play down the event.....i've read Iris Chang's book.....can understand the Chinese anger....the Japanese need to come to terms with events like that. (i usually stay out of politically charged discussions but i did hijack the thread so felt i should comment [:'(] the above is just my .02 cents)

Apollo11 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 9:25:37 PM)
Hi all, What was written here is all correct but we should not forget that "the other side" (i.e. loosing parties in WWII) had their own way of looking at things! Unfortunately it is shame that just a few history books were written in English about Japanese point of view. Therefore "gems" like below are great source of info and view from "the other side": The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire, 1936-1945 by John Toland It is great history book that reads very easily and shows how Japanese perceived the things - wholeheartedly recommended reading! Leo "Apollo11"

Honda -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 9:45:12 PM)
That book is the core of my diploma essay.

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 9:45:50 PM)
Just finished "Zero!" by Masatake Okumiya and Jiro Horikoshi. Interesting read.

Mike Solli -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 9:49:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nikademus Just finished "Zero!" by Masatake Okumiya and Jiro Horikoshi. Interesting read. I got that book from the library some 20 years ago and read it. I've looked for a copy since then and couldn't find it anywhere. The Guard deployed me, but first sent me to Germany for about a month. There it was at the PX. I've carried that book literally half way around the world with me getting it home. [:D]

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 9:52:19 PM)
Found mine in Oahu (of all places when you think about it......)

dereck -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 9:52:36 PM)
Still does not belay the fact that it was the Japanese who decided to replace diplomacy with military action. They were the ones who planned war while engaged in so-called diplomacy with a nation which had no intention of going to war with them. They struck first and for them to say they were not the aggressors and didn't deserve what they got is one of the most hypocritical ideas around. Maybe it just gauls me because I had these family members fight in WWII - all but my step-grandfather in the Pacific. A previous post on this thread mentioned Japanese who "all had relatives that died in the war". Well, I don't think you'll find a family in the states that wasn't touched by the war either.: Grandfather, US Army (same unit as Rodger Young) Grandfather(step), US Army and US Merchant Marine 2 Great-Uncles, US Navy Great-Uncle, US Army Great-Uncle, US Army, KIA, Munda, 1943 Third Cousin-Twice Removed, US Navy, KIA USS California, 7 Dec 1941 Father, US Army Air Corps, Pacific

Apollo11 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 10:08:44 PM)
Hi all, quote: ORIGINAL: Nikademus Just finished "Zero!" by Masatake Okumiya and Jiro Horikoshi. Interesting read. Wasn't Jiro Horikoshi the designer of the Zero? BTW, I would love to get my hands on that book... [:)] Leo "Apollo11"

Gen.Hoepner -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 10:10:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dereck Still does not belay the fact that it was the Japanese who decided to replace diplomacy with military action. They were the ones who planned war while engaged in so-called diplomacy with a nation which had no intention of going to war with them. They struck first and for them to say they were not the aggressors and didn't deserve what they got is one of the most hypocritical ideas around. Maybe it just gauls me because I had these family members fight in WWII - all but my step-grandfather in the Pacific. A previous post on this thread mentioned Japanese who "all had relatives that died in the war". Well, I don't think you'll find a family in the states that wasn't touched by the war either.: Grandfather, US Army (same unit as Rodger Young) Grandfather(step), US Army and US Merchant Marine 2 Great-Uncles, US Navy Great-Uncle, US Army Great-Uncle, US Army, KIA, Munda, 1943 Third Cousin-Twice Removed, US Navy, KIA USS California, 7 Dec 1941 Father, US Army Air Corps, Pacific It was a world war. I think everybody here, from Russia to France, from US to Japan has some relatives involved in war. This, obviously, changes our point of view and makes harder to be objective when looking at our history. My 2 granfathers both fought under the Flag of Italian Army first and then under R.S.I. and they both got captured and sent to POW camps. It's obvious that from their stories it's hard for me not to think about the allies as "enemies"... I think for the americans it's the same with Japan....exactly like Livius thought about the carthaginians just as enemies... Everything is relative. And about who started the war....also here it depends upon the point of view you decide to take. A war need to have one "starter". Then the winner will claim that his reasons were the right one : if he started the war he has brought freedom and liberty ( think about Napoleonic propaganda in italy,Spain,Portugal and Holland or about the Indipendece War of the US), if he has been attacked, doesn't matter if he pushed the other one to do so, he will claim that he has restored the law and peace ( again think about the 2� Punic War)....Centuries pass by but men always remain the same

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 10:12:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apollo11 Wasn't Jiro Horikoshi the designer of the Zero? Yes.

Apollo11 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 10:19:51 PM)
Hi all, quote: ORIGINAL: dereck Still does not belay the fact that it was the Japanese who decided to replace diplomacy with military action. They were the ones who planned war while engaged in so-called diplomacy with a nation which had no intention of going to war with them. They struck first and for them to say they were not the aggressors and didn't deserve what they got is one of the most hypocritical ideas around. Maybe it just gauls me because I had these family members fight in WWII - all but my step-grandfather in the Pacific. A previous post on this thread mentioned Japanese who "all had relatives that died in the war". Well, I don't think you'll find a family in the states that wasn't touched by the war either.: Grandfather, US Army (same unit as Rodger Young) Grandfather(step), US Army and US Merchant Marine 2 Great-Uncles, US Navy Great-Uncle, US Army Great-Uncle, US Army, KIA, Munda, 1943 Third Cousin-Twice Removed, US Navy, KIA USS California, 7 Dec 1941 Father, US Army Air Corps, Pacific Of course the Japanese started the war (and by doing this lose it the very first day they started it because waging war against USA was "suicide" - just as Germany committed "suicide" when attacking Russian and declaring war on USA)! But their decision was gradual sinking into "black hole"... This is why I really wholeheartedly recommend the book for everyone to read (if they didn't do it already because it would show the ways Japanese politics and military was made in those crucial years and this was something not widely known)! BTW, I think that the best way to approach history is to always try to get books from" both sides" (i.e. both sources). For example I have two "general" books about WWII Eastern Front: The Russo-German War 1941-1945 by Albert Seaton (German sources - German point of view) When Titans Clashed - How the Red Army Stopped Hitler by David M. Glanz and Johnatan House (Russian sources - Russian point of view) Only after you read both of them you can objectively look at same history because you now have info from both sides... Leo "Apollo11"

Nikademus -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 10:25:13 PM)
Glanz is an impressive author.....have read his co-written book on Kursk. Alan Clarke's Barbarossa is another good read. The Japanese decision to go to war is often described as "suicide" but i don't think the Japanese saw it that way. (Those in charge) I think they saw it more as, at the risk of oversimplifying, "better to live by the sword and die by the sword rather than risk being subjecated (as they saw it in view of the crippling oil embargo and demand for complete withdrawl from all occupied territory in Asia) Remember too...they did have two compromise plans that they were negotiating back in the fall of 41.

diesel7013 -> RE: Has anybody here been to Yakusuni Shrine in Tokyo? (11/8/2005 10:29:43 PM)
In many ways, the world was a much more complex place in the '30's than it is today... 1. There were several countries that believed ( some justifiably and others not so ) that they were major super powers on the world's stage and had a right to influence the world's direction... Germany, USSR, Britain, France, Italy, Japan, USA All to some degree or other attempted to exert their influence on the others for their own good. 2. No country - other than MAYBE the USA and Britain really understood what the other was attempting to accomplish and respected the will and goals of the other countries. There was significant distrust and lack of cultural and political understanding all the way around. Most Americans thought the Japanese were ignorant, myopic, and whatever... then came the Zero and night battles, and brilliant manuvers in Malaya and the DEI... The French and British were constantly at each others throats during the invasion of France - AND THEY WERE ALLIES - they didn't trust or undertand each other at all!! Don't even get me started on USSR and USA - could the cold war have been avoided?? Hell - if everyone had a better understanding of each other - could Europe have been spared WWII?? Today - with the cultural and political intermingling that we have - there is a much better attempt at understanding each other than ever before. There are a few examples - ( Middle East ) but then those countries really don't have the power to influence the larger contries unless the larger countries let them... see US led invasion of Afganistan and Iraq... What all this really means, is that with the complex world situation in the late 30's, war may have been inevitable... Japan was on a colision to war with a larger country as soon as they moved into French Indochina and refused to back out of China. Yes, I do believe that US diplomacy 'pushed' Japan into a rash move due to the imbargos of raw materials and forcing Japan into searching out for other sources of raw materials. Hell - the last message sent to Japan prior to the Dec 1 meeting with the emperor stated that Japan had to pull out of China - without leaving in that she could stay in Manchuria - this was purposly left out on our part, even though it had been agreed on that Japan could stay in Manchuria... This - to many in Japan - was the final straw... BUT, from the US stand point - we could not let Japan continue to move into other countries and take them over - we had to do something and soon to stop the expansion before Japan did have a source of raw materials - Most Americans in office were concerned that then they would have a fight on their hands if Japan could secrue oil and other resources... SO - who was wrong?? Well, Japan drew first blood - in Manchuria in '31, and China in '37 and moving into French Indochina - and finally in '41 against the US and Britian and Dutch and Aussies... So - you can't get any more wrong than that... Yes, maybe the US did intend to go to war with Japan in '42 or '43 if she didn't back down and Japan jumped the gun - but Japan was expanding and violently and had to be stopped... So - Japan was wrong... Final thoughts... 1. Starvign POW's vs. bypassing islands - POW's have agreed to stop hostile actions - Japs on the islands didn't - many had leaflets dropped asking for surrender - but they all refused - it was the Japanese on the island who starved themselves... 2. Dropping of A-Bomb - maybe could have dropped it elsewhere - but the war had to end soon from a US standpoint - USSR was getting ready to move and US didn't want to invade and if they did wanted to do it sooner rather then later - find out if this will work and get the biggest bang for your buck by hitting a population center Oh well - rants over... PS - ZERO is a wonderful look at carrier tactics and operations from Japans POV...

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.6484375