The Nanking Massacre and Iris Chang's Book The Rape of Nanking

[Rigby5]

I really didn't need to go past the first sentence... before realizing this was another Holocaust Revision thing. The Holocaust deniers put their words in pretty language, too.. but it's still bullshit.



You'd find some Uncle Toms in this country who will claim that slavery was kind of awesome...what's your point.

Most Koreans STILL hate the Japanese. In fact, it seems the more dealings with Japan a country had, the more they despise them.



No, no, no, bombing Pearl Harbor was immoral. Bombing Hiroshima was because the Japanese were too stupid to surrender after they HAD ALREADY LOST.



No, but they were the only ones to KIDNAP hundreds of thousands of women and systematically rape them. Most other countries had no problem finding willing prostitutes.

The Allies are the best at propaganda, like in WWI they falsely claimed the German soldier were barbecuing and eating Belgian babies.
The 6 million Jews were nothing compared to the 50 million total death count.
And before the war, there is correspondence between Chaim Weizmann and David ben Gurion about how it would take about 6 million dead Jews in order to steal Palestine for the Polish and Russian Zionists.

You are totally wrong about the fact the nuclear weapons were not at all needed.
The napalm firestorms were more destructive and deadly, and it is well documented Japan was trying desperately to surrender over a year before we finally let them surrender.
The goal being the opportunity to test and compare the uranium device with the plutonium device.
If you read the "Potsdam Diaries" by Truman, he and Stalin discuss how they pretended they did not understand the Japanese surrender attempts.

There were kidnappings and rapes in Nanking, but the actual number is just a few hundred. Not thousands or hundreds of thousands.

Bombing Pearl Harbor was totally moral because the US had illegally imposed economic sanctions on civilian goods, and that was causing starvation.
The Japanese assault was on a Sunday, to limit casualties, and was on a valid military target.

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, Mike, we think we found your soulmate.

I disagree.
The British, French, and US had taken over China illegally, and actually the Japanese were just trying to return the legal Emperor to the throne.

Several problems here.

First, Puyi was not the "legal" emperor, there was a revolution, and he abdicated. He abdicated again in 1917. The Japanese had no interest in restoring him as Emperor of China, just to use him as a figurehead in their Manchurian Puppet state.

Second, while the European colonizers were reprehensible in their behavior, that really doesn't excuse what the Japanese did.

Actually the Holocaust did not really happen.
I am Jewish, but the reality is that Zionists like David ben Guion and Chaim Weizmann stole secrets from Berlin and gave them to the British, in exchange for the Balfour Declaration, in WWI.
So the claim there was genocide of a religion is false.
In reality is was about a group of immigrants who were traitors.

Um, wow. Just wow. First, the Holocaust happened. My father liberated a concentration camp called Nordhausen. Friends of his generation liberated other camps.

Second, while there was awful behavior by SOME Jews in Germany during and after WWI, that doesn't excuse what the Nazis did. It might be a reason, but not a justification. (A distinction I've tried to explain to Axis Mikey, but he doesn't get.)

The proof of that is that over 100,000 Jews served in the Wehrmacht under Hitler, and neither they nor their Jewish families were harmed in any way.

While I am sure that some Germans with Jewish Ancestors did serve in WWII, (The Kriegsmarine was notorious for hiding Jewish officers from the SS), the Germans were damned serious about the Nuremburg Laws. EVERY German was required to trace his ancestry back a few generations just to prove there were no Jews back there .(Which is why my aunt could trace our ancestors back to the 17th century.)

Something happened in Nanking, because international embassies saw atrocities and saved lives. But the Iris Chang book is totally and completely fictional, without any valid or useful information in it.

Actually, Chang was the first scholar to do any serious research on it.

And while the article listed the winner of the contest based on how many of the enemy they killed in combat, with a sword, Iris Chang lied and claimed the contest was about how many bound prisoners they had beheaded.

Actually, those two officers were put on trial after the war for killing unarmed POWs. Mikey thinks they got a raw deal, but no one else does.

But it was this war in China over which the US imposed economic sanctions on Japan, over oil, coal, and steel. Which is illegal. The 1906 Geneva Convention had made economic sanctions on civilian goods, totally illegal.

I think you misunderstand what the 1906 GC calls for.

Second Geneva Convention - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

simple.wikipedia.org

Nothing in there about Sanctions.

So in reality it was the US that started WWII, and not the Japanese.
They were just retaliating.

Nope, a sneak attack is always the action of a coward.

The Allies are the best at propaganda, like in WWI they falsely claimed the German soldier were barbecuing and eating Belgian babies.
The 6 million Jews were nothing compared to the 50 million total death count.
And before the war, there is correspondence between Chaim Weizmann and David ben Gurion about how it would take about 6 million dead Jews in order to steal Palestine for the Polish and Russian Zionists.

While I think that the Zionists have milked the Holocaust for some unconscionable behavior in Palestine, the Holocaust was still a thing that happened.

You are totally wrong about the fact the nuclear weapons were not at all needed.
The napalm firestorms were more destructive and deadly, and it is well documented Japan was trying desperately to surrender over a year before we finally let them surrender.
The goal being the opportunity to test and compare the uranium device with the plutonium device.

This is what a lot of people get wrong. The nuke wasn't nearly as big of a deal at the time. It was just another weapon. SINCE then, we've done a lot of hand-wringing because we've all lived under the threat of nuclear annihilation all of our lives.

Russia's entry into the Pacific War was probably a bigger factor in the Japanese surrender. The thought of Russia getting Hokkaido and the northern half of Honshu (which is what the original occupation plan called for) was pretty scary. They probably heard horror stories of all the Rape going on in Germany at the time.

If you read the "Potsdam Diaries" by Truman, he and Stalin discuss how they pretended they did not understand the Japanese surrender attempts.

Actually, they understood perfectly well, that the Japanese wanted to have a CONDITIONAL Surrender, which was unacceptable. Japan wanted a surrender where they got to keep some of their ill-gotten territory.

Nope. Nobody in the Axis got to keep territory. They all lost territory, as they should have. Japan was returned to her 1894 borders, and that was reasonable. They also got to keep their Emperor, who should have been tried as a war criminal.

Bombing Pearl Harbor was totally moral because the US had illegally imposed economic sanctions on civilian goods, and that was causing starvation.
The Japanese assault was on a Sunday, to limit casualties, and was on a valid military target.

Except, no. Food wasn't being embargoed, just fuel and steel and coal.

Sanctions are an acceptable peaceful method to punish bad behavior.

 

[Rigby5]

It is not name-calling. It is accurate. You are a neo-Nazi. You are a Mao lover. And you do endlessly repeat jihadist propaganda about Israel and the Jews, which mirrors neo-Nazi propaganda about Israel and the Jews. I am simply describing what you yourself have made clear you are.

Just to remind you, in recent weeks you've said that the Jews caused Hitler's animosity toward them by supposedly wrecking Germany after WWI (an ugly Nazi lie), that "Hitler wasn't the problem" but that the Jews were the problem (yes, folks, he actually said that), that Jewish bankers played a major role in Germany's collapse (another Nazi lie), that Jews never pass up a chance to make money, that Jews have caused all the wars in the Middle East since 1948, that Jews control the U.S. Government, that you "guess" the Holocaust was bad, that Jews somehow prevented the USS Liberty Naval Court of Inquiry from recording or publishing key evidence that proved Israel knew the Liberty was an American ship (though you refuse to explain how they did this), that Mao was less repressive than Chiang, that there was no such country as "Free China," that Red China was less repressive than Free China (Taiwan), that Mao didn't really murder millions of people, etc., etc.

And you still have not admitted that you lied about General Fakui's relationship with Chiang. You got caught red-handed trying to mislead readers into believing that General Fakui sided with Wang Jingwei during the war and that therefore his admission that the Chinese were the aggressors in the fighting at Shanghai was worthless.

You never cite any serious scholarship on the Sino-Japanese War or Chiang Kai-Shek. The few times you do cite a source, you cite superficial, amateurish stuff that you find on the Internet. You keep repeating Chinese Communist talking points about Mao, Chiang, the Japanese, and the Sino-Japanese War.

You keep appealing to the fact that your wife is Chinese and then pretend to speak for all Chinese. Well, as I've said, my oldest son's wife is also Chinese and grew up in China, and she and her family view Mao as a monster.

You should feel fortunate that our moderators are so tolerant. Many forums would have long since banned you by now for your sick views and your rudeness.

Sorry, I have to switch sides.
The Jews WERE the problem.
The Zionists turned traitor and give German secrets to the British in exchange for the Balfour Declaration.
The proof is that Hitler harmed no Jews who proved their loyalty.
And it is beyond doubt that the Zionist were and still are disloyal.
The Zionists are the worst perpetrators of genocide in the entire history of the world.
And I say that as a person who is Jewish.
Real Jews honor the Diaspora Decree.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, I have to switch sides.
The Jews WERE the problem.
The Zionists turned traitor and give German secrets to the British in exchange for the Balfour Declaration.

Actually, the main purpose of Balfour was to encourage the (mostly Jewish) leaders of the Russian Revolution to keep Russia in the war.

Ben Gurion wasn't a master spy during WWI. He was a low-ranking enlisted man in the British Army.

The proof is that Hitler harmed no Jews who proved their loyalty.
And it is beyond doubt that the Zionist were and still are disloyal.
The Zionists are the worst perpetrators of genocide in the entire history of the world.
And I say that as a person who is Jewish.
Real Jews honor the Diaspora Decree.

I'm not sure what to make of this.

I believe that Zionist is a terrible idea in that it is just more European Colonialism.

 

[Rigby5]

Hey, Mike, we think we found your soulmate.



Several problems here.

First, Puyi was not the "legal" emperor, there was a revolution, and he abdicated. He abdicated again in 1917. The Japanese had no interest in restoring him as Emperor of China, just to use him as a figurehead in their Manchurian Puppet state.

Second, while the European colonizers were reprehensible in their behavior, that really doesn't excuse what the Japanese did.



Um, wow. Just wow. First, the Holocaust happened. My father liberated a concentration camp called Nordhausen. Friends of his generation liberated other camps.

Second, while there was awful behavior by SOME Jews in Germany during and after WWI, that doesn't excuse what the Nazis did. It might be a reason, but not a justification. (A distinction I've tried to explain to Axis Mikey, but he doesn't get.)



While I am sure that some Germans with Jewish Ancestors did serve in WWII, (The Kriegsmarine was notorious for hiding Jewish officers from the SS), the Germans were damned serious about the Nuremburg Laws. EVERY German was required to trace his ancestry back a few generations just to prove there were no Jews back there .(Which is why my aunt could trace our ancestors back to the 17th century.)



Actually, Chang was the first scholar to do any serious research on it.



Actually, those two officers were put on trial after the war for killing unarmed POWs. Mikey thinks they got a raw deal, but no one else does.



I think you misunderstand what the 1906 GC calls for.

Second Geneva Convention - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

simple.wikipedia.org

Nothing in there about Sanctions.



Nope, a sneak attack is always the action of a coward.



While I think that the Zionists have milked the Holocaust for some unconscionable behavior in Palestine, the Holocaust was still a thing that happened.




This is what a lot of people get wrong. The nuke wasn't nearly as big of a deal at the time. It was just another weapon. SINCE then, we've done a lot of hand-wringing because we've all lived under the threat of nuclear annihilation all of our lives.

Russia's entry into the Pacific War was probably a bigger factor in the Japanese surrender. The thought of Russia getting Hokkaido and the northern half of Honshu (which is what the original occupation plan called for) was pretty scary. They probably heard horror stories of all the Rape going on in Germany at the time.



Actually, they understood perfectly well, that the Japanese wanted to have a CONDITIONAL Surrender, which was unacceptable. Japan wanted a surrender where they got to keep some of their ill-gotten territory.

Nope. Nobody in the Axis got to keep territory. They all lost territory, as they should have. Japan was returned to her 1894 borders, and that was reasonable. They also got to keep their Emperor, who should have been tried as a war criminal.



Except, no. Food wasn't being embargoed, just fuel and steel and coal.

Sanctions are an acceptable peaceful method to punish bad behavior.

The emperor of China had been forced to abdicate by the colonial imperialist Allies, so then it was right for the Japanese to try to restore him.
That the Japanese did not really care about the Chinese, or anyone else, does not really matter.
Between Russian, British, French, Dutch, and US aggression in the Pacific, the Japanese had no alternative. Like the Treaty of 5-5-3.

As for the Holocaust, a concentration camp is identical to what we did to the Japanese.
That is not the Holocaust.
The Holocaust was the death camps, not labor camps.
And it was not about religion.
It was about loyalty.
So regardless that it was wrong, the claim it was genocide of innocents, is false.
It was bad, but almost half of the Jews survived the war.
I agree WWI Zionist espionage was not a justification, but the point is we have exaggerated the Holocaust into something it wasn't.
The reality is Germany had more Jews than any other country because Germany was more accepting of Jews before WWI and their treachery.
The British and French actually treated Jews much worse than average Germans did.

As for the Nuremburg Laws, they were only about citizenship and did not themselves cause harm to anyone. And they were not just about Jews, since the Romani, Blacks, and other Semitic people like Arabs were included.

In my opinion, Iris Chang did no research at all, just used mistranslated newspaper articles, and made the rest up.
The 2 Japanese officers in the sword contest had not harmed any POWs at all.
It was entirely false propaganda.

I think you are wrong about the 1906 Geneva Conventions, and they do make economic sanctions illegal. The previous way of capturing cities was to surround them and starve them out. The 1906 Geneva Conventions made that illegal. Which means what we did to Japan before WWII was illegal, and what we are currently doing to Venezuela, Iran, etc., is equally illegal. And in fact, during the war we did target food and deliberately starved Japan.
The idea is that all individuals have rights that are supposed to be equal. So you can't prevent commerce to individuals. You can only prevent weapons to governments.
Economic sanctions on individual commerce are totally and completely illegal.
Whether it is on steel, oil, and coal, it prevents commerce and causes poverty that causes starvation.
It is identically illegal to a country imposing economic sanctions on groups of individuals within a country.
Economic sanctions of any kind are always illegal because they harm individuals and not governments. There is zero justification. They do NOT at all "punish bad behavior", but devastate individuals, and ARE "bad behavior".

And it is pointless to denigrate "sneak attacks", since everyone always does them.
No one is going to announce an attack ahead of time. And really it was abusive for the US to even have a navy in the Pacific or to have taken Hawaii.

Nukes were a very BIG DEAL.
Instead of like normal weapons that are aimed at individuals or location, atomics blanket the whole city and slowly and painfully cause medical dysfunction that classify it as a biological weapon, which were already illegal.
We picked Nagasaki and Hiroshima because they had no defenses, since they had nothing worth targeting.
The goal being entirely just to have human nuclear test subjects, and no military goal at all.

And no, the Russian occupation of Sakhalins and nothing to do with the Japanese surrender.
Read the "Potsdam Diaries" by Truman.
They finally surrendered because we finally let them.

And NO, the "conditional surrender" the Japanese kept asking for was just to not harm the emperor. That is because the emperor was not just the leader of the country, but also of their main religion. Japan would have fallen apart without the emperor. Which we agreed with, and we did not touch the emperor. So we should have accepted their surrender a year earlier. But then we could not have tested the 2 types of nukes on people.

 

[Rigby5]

Actually, the main purpose of Balfour was to encourage the (mostly Jewish) leaders of the Russian Revolution to keep Russia in the war.

Ben Gurion wasn't a master spy during WWI. He was a low-ranking enlisted man in the British Army.



I'm not sure what to make of this.

I believe that Zionist is a terrible idea in that it is just more European Colonialism.

Wrong.
Getting mass migrations of Russian Jews to Palestine would not at all please the Jewish leaders of the Russian revolution.
The purpose of the Balfour Declaration instead was to encourage and in exchange for espionage against Germany.
And David ben Gurion and Chaim Weizmann were the leaders of a master spy network of Jews in Germany.
They not only stole the formula for synthetic acetone to make cordite with, but also the Zimmerman letter, which brought the US into the war and turned the tide.
It was Zionist espionage against Germany that cause Germany to be starved into surrender, even though militarily they still occupied most of France.
So it was Zionist espionage that not only caused the surrender of the innocent victim in WWI, but actually then was the cause of WWII.

But I agree Zionism is just more European colonialism.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The Allies are the best at propaganda, like in WWI they falsely claimed the German soldier were barbecuing and eating Belgian babies.
The 6 million Jews were nothing compared to the 50 million total death count.
And before the war, there is correspondence between Chaim Weizmann and David ben Gurion about how it would take about 6 million dead Jews in order to steal Palestine for the Polish and Russian Zionists.

You are totally wrong about the fact the nuclear weapons were not at all needed.
The napalm firestorms were more destructive and deadly, and it is well documented Japan was trying desperately to surrender over a year before we finally let them surrender.
The goal being the opportunity to test and compare the uranium device with the plutonium device.
If you read the "Potsdam Diaries" by Truman, he and Stalin discuss how they pretended they did not understand the Japanese surrender attempts.

There were kidnappings and rapes in Nanking, but the actual number is just a few hundred. Not thousands or hundreds of thousands.

Bombing Pearl Harbor was totally moral because the US had illegally imposed economic sanctions on civilian goods, and that was causing starvation.
The Japanese assault was on a Sunday, to limit casualties, and was on a valid military target.

There is no such documentation about the Japanese trying to surrender

The atomic bombs were justified DEAL WITH IT

 

[JoeB131]

What the fuck! You are making Mikey look sane!!!

The emperor of China had been forced to abdicate by the colonial imperialist Allies, so then it was right for the Japanese to try to restore him.

Um, no. The deposition of the Qing Dynasty was because the Chinese people had quite enough of their ineptitude. Did the fact that they were regularly slapped around by foreign powers have a lot to do with it? Yes. But the key figures in the 1911 Xinhai Revolution were Chinese. Mainly Sun Yat Sen and Yuan Shinkei.

That the Japanese did not really care about the Chinese, or anyone else, does not really matter.
Between Russian, British, French, Dutch, and US aggression in the Pacific, the Japanese had no alternative. Like the Treaty of 5-5-3.

They had a lot of alternatives. Living peacefully with their neighbors would have been a good start.

And, no, the Washington Naval Treaty was completely fair. It was based on how much coastline each nation had to defend. Japan knew it couldn't afford the 8-8 plan for Battleships and Battlecruisers.

As for the Holocaust, a concentration camp is identical to what we did to the Japanese.
That is not the Holocaust.
The Holocaust was the death camps, not labor camps.
And it was not about religion.
It was about loyalty.
So regardless that it was wrong, the claim it was genocide of innocents, is false.
It was bad, but almost half of the Jews survived the war.

How many Japanese got murdered in the internment camps? Subjected to inhuman experiments? Turned into lampshades and bars of soap? None. They weren't even subjected to forced labor. The vast majority of them were released before the war ended (and once people realized the Japanese didn't have enough ships left to credibly threaten California.) Furthermore while Japanese-Americans in California were relocated, Japanese Americans in Hawaii, where they made up a much larger percentage of the population, were largely left alone.

I agree WWI Zionist espionage was not a justification, but the point is we have exaggerated the Holocaust into something it wasn't.
The reality is Germany had more Jews than any other country because Germany was more accepting of Jews before WWI and their treachery.
The British and French actually treated Jews much worse than average Germans did.

That's not true, either. By the 20th century, Jews were less than 1% of the population. The vast majority of Jews killed in the Holocaust were from Poland. (3 million) and the Soviet Union (1.3 million). Meanwhile, only 165,000 thousand Jewish Holocaust victims hailed from Germany and 65,000 from Austria.

As for the Nuremburg Laws, they were only about citizenship and did not themselves cause harm to anyone. And they were not just about Jews, since the Romani, Blacks, and other Semitic people like Arabs were included.

Revoking citizenship rights doesn't harm people? Can we revoke your citizenship rights, then?

In my opinion, Iris Chang did no research at all, just used mistranslated newspaper articles, and made the rest up.
The 2 Japanese officers in the sword contest had not harmed any POWs at all.
It was entirely false propaganda.

Actually, she did extensive research, and no one kills 100 people with a sword in modern combat.

I think you are wrong about the 1906 Geneva Conventions, and they do make economic sanctions illegal. The previous way of capturing cities was to surround them and starve them out. The 1906 Geneva Conventions made that illegal. Which means what we did to Japan before WWII was illegal, and what we are currently doing to Venezuela, Iran, etc., is equally illegal. And in fact, during the war we did target food and deliberately starved Japan.

1906 Convention is only about treatment of the wounded. It has nothing to do with Sanctions, which are perfectly legal and an accepted tool of diplomacy.

The idea is that all individuals have rights that are supposed to be equal. So you can't prevent commerce to individuals. You can only prevent weapons to governments.

Except we do that all the time. Only the Japanese thought, "Hey, let's attack the two biggest Empires in the world with the two strongest navies" was a solid plan.

And it is pointless to denigrate "sneak attacks", since everyone always does them.
No one is going to announce an attack ahead of time. And really it was abusive for the US to even have a navy in the Pacific or to have taken Hawaii.

Huh? Actually, the US was probably restrained in its imperialism compared to Japan and the Western powers.

Nukes were a very BIG DEAL.
Instead of like normal weapons that are aimed at individuals or location, atomics blanket the whole city and slowly and painfully cause medical dysfunction that classify it as a biological weapon, which were already illegal.
We picked Nagasaki and Hiroshima because they had no defenses, since they had nothing worth targeting.
The goal being entirely just to have human nuclear test subjects, and no military goal at all.

Nagasaki was only bombed because it was too cloudy over Kokura that day. The bombs we used on those cities were relatively weak ones compared to the thermonuclear weapons we have today.

And no, the Russian occupation of Sakhalins and nothing to do with the Japanese surrender.

No, what had to do with the surrender was the Russians deployed three army groups to take Manchuria and rolled it up in less than a week. So quickly that Puyi didn't even have a chance to escape to Japan. In short, the USSR made more progress in China in a week than Chiang Kai-shek made in a decade of fighting Japan.

And NO, the "conditional surrender" the Japanese kept asking for was just to not harm the emperor. That is because the emperor was not just the leader of the country, but also of their main religion. Japan would have fallen apart without the emperor. Which we agreed with, and we did not touch the emperor. So we should have accepted their surrender a year earlier. But then we could not have tested the 2 types of nukes on people.

Actually, the decision to not formally charge Hirohito as the war criminal that he was didn't happen until after the surrender. As far as the Emperor goes, he could have abdicated in favor of his son. (HIs son would eventually abdicate the role to Hirohito's grandson). Abdication used to be quite common among Emperors, sometimes with the same person serving twice in the role.

Wrong.
Getting mass migrations of Russian Jews to Palestine would not at all please the Jewish leaders of the Russian revolution.
The purpose of the Balfour Declaration instead was to encourage and in exchange for espionage against Germany.
And David ben Gurion and Chaim Weizmann were the leaders of a master spy network of Jews in Germany.

Ben Gurion was a low-level enlisted man in the British Army in Egypt, he wasn't doing espinoge.

They not only stole the formula for synthetic acetone to make cordite with, but also the Zimmerman letter, which brought the US into the war and turned the tide.
It was Zionist espionage against Germany that cause Germany to be starved into surrender, even though militarily they still occupied most of France.
So it was Zionist espionage that not only caused the surrender of the innocent victim in WWI, but actually then was the cause of WWII.

I agree that the role of Jewish revolutionaries played an important part in the toppling of the Kaiser, which led to all the misery of the Weimar period, and eventually the Austrian Mustasche Man. Of course, you can't say that out loud these days, because the "Stabbed in the Back" has been officially declared a myth. (History is the lie everyone agrees upon)

The Zimmerman Letter was a telegram, and the British had broken the German diplomatic code. Also, the content of the telegram was that US Entry into the war was a given once unrestricted submarine warfare resumed, so the instruction was to see if they could get Mexico to attack the US. (Because the leadership in Germany had no idea how dysfunctional Mexico was in the 1910s.)

 

[mikegriffith1]

Hey, Mike, we think we found your soulmate [Rigby5].

Actually, you found your anti-Semitic soulmate in Rigby5. As he quickly revealed, he is every bit the Jew hater, Israel basher, international-Zionist-conspiracy peddler, and Hitler whitewasher that you are. In response to my previous reply in which I discussed some of your Nazi/neo-Nazi statements and whitewashing of Hitler, he came to your defense:

Rigby5:
I have to switch sides.
The Jews WERE the problem.
The Zionists turned traitor and give German secrets to the British in exchange for the Balfour Declaration.
The proof is that Hitler harmed no Jews who proved their loyalty.
And it is beyond doubt that the Zionist were and still are disloyal.
The Zionists are the worst perpetrators of genocide in the entire history of the world. Chaim Weizmann and David ben Gurion about how it would take about 6 million dead Jews in order to steal Palestine.
It was Zionist espionage against Germany that cause Germany to be starved into surrender, even though militarily they still occupied most of France.
So it was Zionist espionage that not only caused the surrender of the innocent victim in WWI, but actually then was the cause of WWII.

Gee, sound familiar? You and he are two peas in a pod when it comes to Hitler, the Jews, and Israel. And clearly he nods his head in strong agreement when he sees you spew the obscene claim that the Jews "definitely" provoked Hitler's animosity. The only substantive difference between you and Rigby5 regarding Hitler and the Jews is that while he says flatly that the Holocaust was bad ("it was bad"), you say you "guess" it was bad ("Was it bad? I guess").

And what do you want to bet that he buys the USS Liberty conspiracy theory just like you do? Why don't we ask him?

You can stop pretending that you have any business talking about Chiang Kai-Shek, Mao, the Nanking Massacre, and the Sino-Japanese War. You continue to just peddle Chinese Communist talking points on those subjects. You clearly have done no serious reading, other than Iris Chang's silly, discredited book, and some articles you've found online. You obviously haven't read the works of Kubek, Harmsen, Pantsov, De Vries, Askew, Hata, Fogel, Macri, F. C. Jones, R. Wilson, Crowley, Peattie, Drea, Toland, Ferguson, etc.

I see you are still citing the suicidal nutcase Iris Chang as a credible source. That speaks volumes about your education, research, and credibility.

Your vile anti-Japanese bigotry permeates your repeated repetition of the Chinese Communist version of the Sino-Japanese War and Mao's subjugation of China after WWII. It also shines through in your defense of the myth that nuking Japan was necessary to end the war, even though numerous senior American generals and admirals said otherwise--including General Eisenhower, General MacArthur, Admiral Leahy, and Admiral Halsey.

It is worth noting that you still deny that Mao killed tens of millions of people, in spite of the pile of documentation that I've presented to you that proves he did, and even though you can't cite a single non-communist source that says he didn't.

Finally, I again point out that you still have no admitted and apologized for trying to mislead readers into believing that General Fakui betrayed Chiang Kai-Shek and sided with Wang Jingwei during the war. You told this bald-faced lie because you wanted to try to discredit General Fakui's admission that the Chinese, not the Japanese, were the aggressors in the battle of Shanghai. The fact that you still refuse to man-up and admit what you did says much about your lack of character and candor.

 

[Unkotare]

...



How many Japanese got murdered in the internment camps? ...

Concentration camps.

 

[Unkotare]

... They weren't even subjected to forced labor. ...

Yes they were.

 

[JoeB131]

Axis Mikey, you really need to get out more.

Gee, sound familiar? You and he are two peas in a pod when it comes to Hitler, the Jews, and Israel. And clearly he nods his head in strong agreement when he sees you spew the obscene claim that the Jews "definitely" provoked Hitler's animosity. The only substantive difference between you and Rigby5 regarding Hitler and the Jews is that while he says flatly that the Holocaust was bad ("it was bad"), you say you "guess" it was bad ("Was it bad? I guess").

It wasn't just Hitler's animosity. You work on the assumption that everything was lovey-dovey between the Germans and the Jews before Hitler showed up.

They weren't. One Jewish person was asked why they didn't flee when Hitler came to power, and his response was, "Hitler wasn't any more anti-Semitic than anyone else in his rhetoric." Some rich Jews even supported Hitler because they thought he could turn the economy around.

Association of German National Jews - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can stop pretending that you have any business talking about Chiang Kai-Shek, Mao, the Nanking Massacre, and the Sino-Japanese War. You continue to just peddle Chinese Communist talking points on those subjects. You clearly have done no serious reading, other than Iris Chang's silly, discredited book, and some articles you've found online. You obviously haven't read the works of Kubek, Harmsen, Pantsov, De Vries, Askew, Hata, Fogel, Macri, F. C. Jones, R. Wilson, Crowley, Peattie, Drea, Toland, Ferguson, etc

So essentially, a bunch of white people, most of whom speak less Mandarin than I do, are going to tell me what is what about China.

Now, the reason why I take this so seriously is because Western ignorance about Chinese history, culture, and attitudes colors our relationship with the Middle Kingdom. Not a good thing when everyone involved has nuclear weapons. That the West was willing, for as long as it was, to let Japan abuse China, is a sore sticking point.

Your vile anti-Japanese bigotry permeates your repeated repetition of the Chinese Communist version of the Sino-Japanese War and Mao's subjugation of China after WWII. It also shines through in your defense of the myth that nuking Japan was necessary to end the war, even though numerous senior American generals and admirals said otherwise--including General Eisenhower, General MacArthur, Admiral Leahy, and Admiral Halsey.

Actually, I haven't argued it was necessary at all. My position has always been that the entry of the USSR into the war had a lot more to do with Japan's surrender than some low-yield fission bombs. My position...and I will type slowly for you... is that for people at the time, the Nukes were just another weapon in a long carnival of horror. They haven't lived like we have, under a lifetime of fear of nuclear annihilation.

WE are horrified by Nukes due to 80 years of being told how horrible it would be if we had a nuclear war. To the decision makers at the time, it wasn't a big deal.

Should also point out all those high-ranking military men, most of whom were Truman's enemies, all made these statements about their supposed opposition to using the Nukes in the 1950s. Retconning if fun.

MacArthur wanted to Nuke China during the Korean War, that's how nucking futz that guy was.

As for the Japanese, I love Japanese culture. Their women are hot. I enjoy Anime and Kaiju movies and J-Horror films.

And they were a bunch of bastards during World War 2, as bad as the Nazis.

It is worth noting that you still deny that Mao killed tens of millions of people, in spite of the pile of documentation that I've presented to you that proves he did, and even though you can't cite a single non-communist source that says he didn't.

No, I just apply simple logic, that if you take out the Famine of 1959-62, you don't get into the "tens of millions" or anywhere near that.

If you want to hold Mao accountable for the Famine, you should hold Trump accountable for Covid.

Finally, I again point out that you still have no admitted and apologized for trying to mislead readers into believing that General Fakui betrayed Chiang Kai-Shek and sided with Wang Jingwei during the war. You told this bald-faced lie because you wanted to try to discredit General Fakui's admission that the Chinese, not the Japanese, were the aggressors in the battle of Shanghai. The fact that you still refuse to man-up and admit what you did says much about your lack of character and candor.

Guy, we've been over this.

Zhang Fukui (aka Chang Fa-kuei, if you prefer your Wade-Giles) didn't exactly have a sterling reputation. He sided with Wang Jingwei in 1929 against Chiang Kaishek. Wang, being a traitor, eventually teamed up with the Japanese invaders. Zhang, being kind of a knob, completely botched the Shanghai operation.

I'm not even sure what bizarre world you get to that Japanese INVADERS in Shanghai were the "victims". What kind of fucked up Mormon Logic is that? (I guess the same kind that says it was okay to steal Utah from the Paiute First Peoples.)

 

[Unkotare]

This ^^^ mao nut-sucking commie apologist just can't stop disgracing himself. Trying to play "expert" is NOT working for you, joeblow.

 

[JoeB131]

This ^^^ mao nut-sucking commie apologist just can't stop disgracing himself. Trying to play "expert" is NOT working for you, joeblow.

Some day you'll add something to a conversation.

Today isn't that day.

Tomorrow isn't looking promising.

 

[Unkotare]

Some day you'll add something to a conversation.

Today isn't that day.

Tomorrow isn't looking promising.

Still ready to compare whenever you grow a pair.

 

[JoeB131]

Still ready to compare whenever you grow a pair.

I don't have to... You rarely say anything that has substance.

Reposting other people's stuff isn't substance.

 

[Unkotare]

I don't have to... ...

Chickenshit commie.

 

[mikegriffith1]

There were kidnappings and rapes in Nanking, but the actual number is just a few hundred. Not thousands or hundreds of thousands.

"Just" a few hundred rapes? The commission of hundreds of rapes under any circumstances is appalling and shameful.

And what about the killing of thousands of civilians? Multiple independent primary sources put the civilian death toll at around 10,000. That is a massacre and an atrocity by any definition.

There is no sugar-coating the conduct of the Japanese army in China. Leaving aside the extremes of Chinese propaganda and far-right Japanese propaganda, the undeniable reality is that in many cases, far too many cases, the Japanese army behaved savagely and barbarically in China. Yes, there were many exceptions, but these do not excuse or offset the many times the Japanese army engaged in barbaric conduct. And, yes, the Chinese frequently fought with equal savagery, but on balance, all things considered, the Chinese fought more honorably than did the Japanese.

Bombing Pearl Harbor was totally moral because the US had illegally imposed economic sanctions on civilian goods, and that was causing starvation. The Japanese assault was on a Sunday, to limit casualties, and was on a valid military target.

You're making a valid point badly. Japan was not even close to suffering from starvation in December 1941. FDR's sanctions were doing great harm to Japan's economy, but they were not causing starvation. And the Japanese did not choose Sunday because it would limit casualties but because they believed that our defensive posture would be the laxest on Sunday. It is true, however, that the Japanese pilots were under strict orders to avoid bombing civilian areas and to limit their attacks to the ships, the docks, and the air bases.

 

[JoeB131]

"Just" a few hundred rapes? The commission of hundreds of rapes under any circumstances is appalling and shameful.

And what about the killing of thousands of civilians? Multiple independent primary sources put the civilian death toll at around 10,000. That is a massacre and an atrocity by any definition.

There is no sugar-coating the conduct of the Japanese army in China. Leaving aside the extremes of Chinese propaganda and far-right Japanese propaganda, the undeniable reality is that in many cases, far too many cases, the Japanese army behaved savagely and barbarically in China. Yes, there were many exceptions, but these do not excuse or offset the many times the Japanese army engaged in barbaric conduct. And, yes, the Chinese frequently fought with equal savagery, but on balance, all things considered, the Chinese fought more honorably than did the Japanese.


You're making a valid point badly. Japan was not even close to suffering from starvation in December 1941. FDR's sanctions were doing great harm to Japan's economy, but they were not causing starvation. And the Japanese did not choose Sunday because it would limit casualties but because they believed that our defensive posture would be the laxest on Sunday. It is true, however, that the Japanese pilots were under strict orders to avoid bombing civilian areas and to limit their attacks to the ships, the docks, and the air bases.

That sounded...almost sensible. (Except for the lowballing of the Rape of Nanking. You just can't help yourself.)

What did you do to the real Mike, you fiend?

 

[mikegriffith1]

That sounded...almost sensible.

Uh, how would you know anything about "sensible"? You're in no position to be talking about "sensible" when you routinely repeat Nazi and neo-Nazi propaganda ("Hitler wasn't the problem, the Jews were" and "the Jews definitely caused Hitler's animosity by wrecking Germany after WWI," etc.), when you peddle neo-Nazi and ISIS/Hamas/Iranian propaganda about Jews and Israel ("the Jews have caused all the wars in the Middle East since 1948" and "Jews never pass up a chance to make money," "Was the Holocaust bad? I guess," etc.), and when you continue to deny that Mao Tse-Tung murdered tens of millions of people and to claim that Red China was less repressive than Free China.

Anyone who reads this thread will see that I didn't say anything about the Japanese army in my previous reply that I have not said several times earlier in this thread.

(Except for the lowballing of the Rape of Nanking. You just can't help yourself.)

You're the one who just can't help himself. I noted that the primary sources put the Nanking civilian death toll at around 10,000, which is an undeniable fact, as I have documented in several previous replies. But you wave aside all the primary evidence and rely on a discredited book written by a suicidal paranoid nutcase who wasn't even a professional historian. Even a number of openly anti-Japanese historians don't buy Chang's ridiculous 300K-plus figure for civilian deaths, not to mention her absurd expansion of the massacre area (never mind that Japanese forces were never in or near most of her fictional area).

We'll just keep going around and around and around. You cite one book written by an emotionally disturbed non-historian, while I cite all the primary sources and over a dozen Asia scholars. You don't care that most of the photos that Chang used in her book have nothing to do with the Nanking incident. You dismiss such brazen fraud as no big deal.

I'll point out all these facts, but you'll reply by repeating your Chinese Communist talking points about Nanking.

Finally, I note yet again that you still have not manned up, admitted, and apologized for purposely trying to mislead readers about General Fakui and Chiang Kai-Shek and Fakui's admission that the Chinese were the aggressors at Shanghai. You never had any credibility anyway, but you further blacken your already bad reputation by refusing to acknowledge your falsehood.