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

[mikegriffith1]

The FDR-Truman apologists here seem to forget, or choose to ignore, that the Chinese Nationalists were getting massive aid from the Soviet Union. They also keep acting like Japan started the Sino-Japanese War in 1937, but this is simply false--even most historians now admit that the Chinese, not the Japanese, started the Marco Polo Bridge Incident. Furthermore, as numerous scholars have documented, it was the Chinese, not the Japanese, who broke the truce (1) by moving four divisions into the area near Shanghai and (2) by attacking the Japanese quarter of Shanghai with two divisions. The record is clear that before the Nationalists attacked, the Japanese were urgently trying to reach a peace deal with the Nationalists because even the Army's general staff did not want to prolong the war in China any further.

Clarification: I should have said the Japanese army's general staff did not want to expand Japan's involvement in China any further. There was no "war" yet. There had been a few skirmishes in the preceding four years, but no war, and there was a long-standing truce in effect in 1937. The war began when the Chinese Nationalists, in response to Japan's peace offer, moved four divisions into the Shanghai region and then attacked the Japanese quarter of Shanghai with two full divisions in 1937.

The Japanese had been trying to defuse the tense situation in Shanghai when the Nationalists attacked a small Japanese garrison because they thought they could easily overrun the garrison before the Japanese could get reinforcements to the area. But, the 2,000-man garrison fought with unbelievable courage and held off the 30,000-man Chinese army that attacked it just long enough for reinforcements to arrive. However, this incident did not lead to an all-out battle for Shanghai. A compromise was reached, and Shanghai returned to some sense of normalcy (Peter Harmsen, Storm Clouds Over the Pacific, 1931-1941, locs. 732-762).

But, this situation changed when Chiang Kaishek, the Nationalist leader, decided to attack the Japanese section of Shanghai with two elite divisions. The Japanese brought in more reinforcements and an enormous battle ensued, ending with the Nationalist forces being expelled from Shanghai and the Japanese taking control of the city (Storms Clouds Over the Pacific, locs. 1413-1453).

Chiang Kaishek’s reasons for picking a fight with the Japanese at Shanghai remain a subject of debate. Harmsen:

Chiang may have genuinely thought that by concentrating his best troops in a shock attack on the meager Japanese garrison in Shanghai, he would be able to score a quick, dramatic victory that could rally the nation.​

Japan, on the other hand, only entered the battle reluctantly. The army already felt overstretched in the north of China, and for the wrong reasons. Many Japanese generals considered the Soviet Union to be the main threat and the one that most resources had to be directed towards. The Chinese themselves understood this was the case, and on occasion admitted so in public. “Japan had no wish to fight at Shanghai,” Chinese General Zhang Fakui, one of the top field commanders during the struggle for the city, said in a post-war interview. “It should be simple to see that we took the initiative.” (Storm Clouds Over the Pacific, loc. 1453)​

Yet, FDR and his allies in the press, along with the Soviets, blamed the Japanese and cited their capture of Shanghai as another alleged example of Japanese aggression.

 

[gipper]

So, committing genocide is justifiable in an effort to stop genocide. This is feeble thinking and something I find abhorrent and ignorant. Sadly, many Americans think as you do. Proof the power of the State to indoctrinate, should not be minimized.

Except last time I checked, there were still Germans and Japanese left after the war. We even kept them from starving to death after they were defeated.

I mean, I know you've avoided military service... but um, yeah,. War is violent. It's why you deal with the people who instigate them harshly.

View attachment 285832

Oh yes! In your world, our criminal government should have mass murdered ALL Germans and Japanese.

 

[gipper]

Wrong. FDR provoked Japan in a desperate attempt to get them to attack. So that he could save his mass murdering buddy Uncle Joe and communism. This resulted in millions of deaths worldwide and decades of tyranny and enslavement for Eastern Europe.

Wow... now you are going into full crazy... So using peaceful sanctions to not subsidize Japan's genocidal war effort was "provoking" them? Really.

And that black man wanting to ride at the Front of the Bus was provoking the Klan.

And that girl in the short dress was provoking that rapist.

Fuck off and Die.

LOL.

Clearly your third grade education isn’t enough for this thread. Please leave.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, and it also resulted in the Communist takeover of China, which in turn resulted in the deaths of over 30 million Chinese. It also resulted in the Communist takeover of much of Vietnam and the northern half of Korea, tragedies that never would have occurred if the Japanese had remained.

No, what resulted in the takeover of China was that "Cash my Check" was a corrupt, incompetent crook who failed to defend his country from Japanese Aggression.

Nobody wanted the Japanese to remain, they were bastards.

The FDR-Truman apologists here seem to forget, or choose to ignore, that the Chinese Nationalists were getting massive aid from the Soviet Union. They also keep acting like Japan started the Sino-Japanese War in 1937, but this is simply false--even most historians now admit that the Chinese, not the Japanese, started the Marco Polo Bridge Incident.

Two problems where.

The first one is that the Nationalists were initially getting aid from Nazi Germany. In fact, the Kuomintang and the NSDAP were ideologically very similar. Von Ribbentrop thought that Germany should ally with China, not Japan, but Japan had a navy.

Second, Japan's Aggression against China didn't start with the Marco Polo Bridge incident, which Japan provoked. The aggression began when they took over Manchuria and put a puppet on a throne.

Moreover, the Nationalists, not to mention the Communists, showed they had little regard for the lives of their fellow Chinese. Remember that the Nationalists were the ones who killed well over 400,000 Chinese by deliberately breaching the Yellow River dike at Huayuankou in June 1938. A post-war Nationalist commission put the number of dead at 800,000, nearly three times the number of people supposedly killed at Nanking.

Blah, blah, blah... nobody cares.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh yes! In your world, our criminal government should have mass murdered ALL Germans and Japanese.

No, we should have killed enough of them to render them unable to wage war... which is what we did.

Don't worry, Libertarian Child, that big mean soldier is protecting your right to be a douche.

 

[Unkotare]

Yes, and it also resulted in the Communist takeover of China, which in turn resulted in the deaths of over 30 million Chinese. It also resulted in the Communist takeover of much of Vietnam and the northern half of Korea, tragedies that never would have occurred if the Japanese had remained.

No, what resulted in the takeover of China was that "Cash my Check" was a corrupt, incompetent crook who failed to defend his country from Japanese Aggression.

Nobody wanted the Japanese to remain, they were bastards.

The FDR-Truman apologists here seem to forget, or choose to ignore, that the Chinese Nationalists were getting massive aid from the Soviet Union. They also keep acting like Japan started the Sino-Japanese War in 1937, but this is simply false--even most historians now admit that the Chinese, not the Japanese, started the Marco Polo Bridge Incident.

Two problems where.

The first one is that the Nationalists were initially getting aid from Nazi Germany. In fact, the Kuomintang and the NSDAP were ideologically very similar. Von Ribbentrop thought that Germany should ally with China, not Japan, but Japan had a navy.

Second, Japan's Aggression against China didn't start with the Marco Polo Bridge incident, which Japan provoked. The aggression began when they took over Manchuria and put a puppet on a throne.

Moreover, the Nationalists, not to mention the Communists, showed they had little regard for the lives of their fellow Chinese. Remember that the Nationalists were the ones who killed well over 400,000 Chinese by deliberately breaching the Yellow River dike at Huayuankou in June 1938. A post-war Nationalist commission put the number of dead at 800,000, nearly three times the number of people supposedly killed at Nanking.

Blah, blah, blah... nobody cares.

More proof you are not an historian in any sense. Wallow in your ignorance.

 

[gipper]

Oh yes! In your world, our criminal government should have mass murdered ALL Germans and Japanese.

No, we should have killed enough of them to render them unable to wage war... which is what we did.

Don't worry, Libertarian Child, that big mean soldier is protecting your right to be a douche.

Yes! You want the big mean soldier to mass murder women and children of the enemy of our government. I don’t.

Yet amazingly you think your blood lust is right. CRAZY!

 

[JoeB131]

Yes! You want the big mean soldier to mass murder women and children of the enemy of our government. I don’t.

Yet amazingly you think your blood lust is right. CRAZY!

The fact we are not having this discussion in Deutsch or Nihongo today makes me very thankful to that soldier...

Or that we are able to have this discussion at all. and are not exploring new career opportunities as a lampshade.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong. FDR provoked Japan in a desperate attempt to get them to attack. So that he could save his mass murdering buddy Uncle Joe and communism. This resulted in millions of deaths worldwide and decades of tyranny and enslavement for Eastern Europe.

Wow... now you are going into full crazy... So using peaceful sanctions to not subsidize Japan's genocidal war effort was "provoking" them? Really.

And that black man wanting to ride at the Front of the Bus was provoking the Klan.

And that girl in the short dress was provoking that rapist.

Fuck off and Die.

LOL.

Clearly your third grade education isn’t enough for this thread. Please leave.

Oh, sweetie, did you not like the slapping down I just gave you.

It's laughable to say that imposing sanctions on Japan after they engaged in a war of aggression against China was "provoking" them.

Emmit Till was provoking the Klan.

That lady who walked into the bar and got raped on the pool table was provoking those rapists...

 

[JoeB131]

Clarification: I should have said the Japanese army's general staff did not want to expand Japan's involvement in China any further. There was no "war" yet. There had been a few skirmishes in the preceding four years, but no war, and there was a long-standing truce in effect in 1937. The war began when the Chinese Nationalists, in response to Japan's peace offer, moved four divisions into the Shanghai region and then attacked the Japanese quarter of Shanghai with two full divisions in 1937.

Okay... I realize that geography eludes you.

Japan didn't belong in Shanghai. Japan didn't belong in Manchuria. Japan didn't belong in Taiwan.

Yet, FDR and his allies in the press, along with the Soviets, blamed the Japanese and cited their capture of Shanghai as another alleged example of Japanese aggression.

Um, yeah, when you are in someone else's city and attacking them, that's an act of aggression.

 

[gipper]

Wrong. FDR provoked Japan in a desperate attempt to get them to attack. So that he could save his mass murdering buddy Uncle Joe and communism. This resulted in millions of deaths worldwide and decades of tyranny and enslavement for Eastern Europe.

Wow... now you are going into full crazy... So using peaceful sanctions to not subsidize Japan's genocidal war effort was "provoking" them? Really.

And that black man wanting to ride at the Front of the Bus was provoking the Klan.

And that girl in the short dress was provoking that rapist.

Fuck off and Die.

LOL.

Clearly your third grade education isn’t enough for this thread. Please leave.

Oh, sweetie, did you not like the slapping down I just gave you.

It's laughable to say that imposing sanctions on Japan after they engaged in a war of aggression against China was "provoking" them.

Emmit Till was provoking the Klan.

That lady who walked into the bar and got raped on the pool table was provoking those rapists...

Joe you haven’t read the history as I have. You are uninformed.

FDR imposed absurd and draconian sanctions on Japan, entirely in an effort to get them to attack. He WANTED WAR. He KNEW Japan couldn’t accept his sanctions. He refused to find a way to peace.

He did this for nefarious reasons. He wanted to save his Uncle Joe and worldwide communism.

Your love of the Klan is inappropriate for this thread.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

You would need to provide actual examples.

LOL.

Your warmongering asshole leader Churchill demanded that the civilians of Dresden be mass murdered. Was this act a war crime?

Was Dirty Harry’s incineration of 200,000 innocent defenseless civilians, a war crime?

Was the ruthless fire bombings of German and Japanese cities, mass murdering thousands of civilians, a war crime?

You mean like the bombing of London, Coventry and Osborne St in my village ?

So, again, please try to think logically if that is possible.

The scumbag Churchill bombed Germany cities, prior to Hitler returning the favor. So, you must agree that Churchill was a war criminal who should have been hung.

Hitler was already a war criminal due to his actions in Poland. What kind of nonsense are you promoting here ?

Agreed.

So if Hitler is a war criminal how is it your beloved Churchill, is not ALSO a war criminal?

Or is it your belief that if your enemy mass murders civilians FIRST, your leaders are justified in ALSO mass murdering civilians in even greater numbers?

Please enlighten me.

I dont think there is an easy answer to this.
I have always viewed Churchill as a war criminal but not particularly for bombing nazis.
The allies did not instigate this .

 

[gipper]

LOL.

Your warmongering asshole leader Churchill demanded that the civilians of Dresden be mass murdered. Was this act a war crime?

Was Dirty Harry’s incineration of 200,000 innocent defenseless civilians, a war crime?

Was the ruthless fire bombings of German and Japanese cities, mass murdering thousands of civilians, a war crime?

You mean like the bombing of London, Coventry and Osborne St in my village ?

So, again, please try to think logically if that is possible.

The scumbag Churchill bombed Germany cities, prior to Hitler returning the favor. So, you must agree that Churchill was a war criminal who should have been hung.

Hitler was already a war criminal due to his actions in Poland. What kind of nonsense are you promoting here ?

Agreed.

So if Hitler is a war criminal how is it your beloved Churchill, is not ALSO a war criminal?

Or is it your belief that if your enemy mass murders civilians FIRST, your leaders are justified in ALSO mass murdering civilians in even greater numbers?

Please enlighten me.

I dont think there is an easy answer to this.
I have always viewed Churchill as a war criminal but not particularly for bombing nazis.
The allies did not instigate this .

Oh there is an easy answer. Mass murdering civilians is ALWAYS a war crime.

Apparently you are unaware the Allies did start the war. UK and France declared war on Germany. Hitler didn’t want war with them. He wanted to take out FDR’s Uncle.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

You mean like the bombing of London, Coventry and Osborne St in my village ?

So, again, please try to think logically if that is possible.

The scumbag Churchill bombed Germany cities, prior to Hitler returning the favor. So, you must agree that Churchill was a war criminal who should have been hung.

Hitler was already a war criminal due to his actions in Poland. What kind of nonsense are you promoting here ?

Agreed.

So if Hitler is a war criminal how is it your beloved Churchill, is not ALSO a war criminal?

Or is it your belief that if your enemy mass murders civilians FIRST, your leaders are justified in ALSO mass murdering civilians in even greater numbers?

Please enlighten me.

I dont think there is an easy answer to this.
I have always viewed Churchill as a war criminal but not particularly for bombing nazis.
The allies did not instigate this .

Oh there is an easy answer. Mass murdering civilians is ALWAYS a war crime.

Apparently you are unaware the Allies did start the war. UK and France declared war on Germany. Hitler didn’t want war with them. He wanted to take out FDR’s Uncle.

Poor misunderstood Adolf.

 

[gipper]

So, again, please try to think logically if that is possible.

The scumbag Churchill bombed Germany cities, prior to Hitler returning the favor. So, you must agree that Churchill was a war criminal who should have been hung.

Hitler was already a war criminal due to his actions in Poland. What kind of nonsense are you promoting here ?

Agreed.

So if Hitler is a war criminal how is it your beloved Churchill, is not ALSO a war criminal?

Or is it your belief that if your enemy mass murders civilians FIRST, your leaders are justified in ALSO mass murdering civilians in even greater numbers?

Please enlighten me.

I dont think there is an easy answer to this.
I have always viewed Churchill as a war criminal but not particularly for bombing nazis.
The allies did not instigate this .

Oh there is an easy answer. Mass murdering civilians is ALWAYS a war crime.

Apparently you are unaware the Allies did start the war. UK and France declared war on Germany. Hitler didn’t want war with them. He wanted to take out FDR’s Uncle.

Poor misunderstood Adolf.

Poor misunderstood Winston.

 

[mikegriffith1]

It boils down to this: For decades we have been fed lies. distortions, and half-truths about Japan and the Pacific War by FDR-Truman apologists to try to obscure FDR and Truman's disastrous pro-Soviet handling of WW II. Many of these falsehoods were originally peddled by the Chinese Communists, the Chinese Nationalists, and the Soviets, and they were parroted by FDR and his allies in the American press.

This is why most people have heard of the Nanking Massacre but few people have heard of the Yellow River Massacre carried out by the Nationalists, which killed, at the bare minimum, 400,000 Chinese and probably about twice that number. This is why a massacre that involved 15,000 to 40,000 deaths at Nanking has been transformed into a massacre that involved at least 300,000 deaths, even though a wealth of evidence supports the smaller numbers.

 

[JoeB131]

oe you haven’t read the history as I have. You are uninformed.

FDR imposed absurd and draconian sanctions on Japan, entirely in an effort to get them to attack. He WANTED WAR. He KNEW Japan couldn’t accept his sanctions. He refused to find a way to peace.

Yes, we realize this is the view in the Crazy Part of the world... real historians say otherwise.

Here was the thing. Attacking the US was just plain stupid. The Japanese let their experience fighting Russia in 1905 pollute their thinking.

He did this for nefarious reasons. He wanted to save his Uncle Joe and worldwide communism.

Your love of the Klan is inappropriate for this thread.

Naw, the kind of asshole who apologize for the Baby Rapists of Imperial Japan are the ones who would support the Klan... obviously.

t boils down to this: For decades we have been fed lies. distortions, and half-truths about Japan and the Pacific War by FDR-Truman apologists to try to obscure FDR and Truman's disastrous pro-Soviet handling of WW II. Many of these falsehoods were originally peddled by the Chinese Communists, the Chinese Nationalists, and the Soviets, and they were parroted by FDR and his allies in the American press.

Japan had no business being in China- period.

This is why most people have heard of the Nanking Massacre but few people have heard of the Yellow River Massacre carried out by the Nationalists, which killed, at the bare minimum, 400,000

Naw, we just can't get upset about infrastructure damage as we can about the systematic rape and murder of women and children, which is that the Japanese did at Nanking.

 

[gipper]

oe you haven’t read the history as I have. You are uninformed.

FDR imposed absurd and draconian sanctions on Japan, entirely in an effort to get them to attack. He WANTED WAR. He KNEW Japan couldn’t accept his sanctions. He refused to find a way to peace.

Yes, we realize this is the view in the Crazy Part of the world... real historians say otherwise.

Here was the thing. Attacking the US was just plain stupid. The Japanese let their experience fighting Russia in 1905 pollute their thinking.

He did this for nefarious reasons. He wanted to save his Uncle Joe and worldwide communism.

Your love of the Klan is inappropriate for this thread.

Naw, the kind of asshole who apologize for the Baby Rapists of Imperial Japan are the ones who would support the Klan... obviously.

t boils down to this: For decades we have been fed lies. distortions, and half-truths about Japan and the Pacific War by FDR-Truman apologists to try to obscure FDR and Truman's disastrous pro-Soviet handling of WW II. Many of these falsehoods were originally peddled by the Chinese Communists, the Chinese Nationalists, and the Soviets, and they were parroted by FDR and his allies in the American press.

Japan had no business being in China- period.

This is why most people have heard of the Nanking Massacre but few people have heard of the Yellow River Massacre carried out by the Nationalists, which killed, at the bare minimum, 400,000

Naw, we just can't get upset about infrastructure damage as we can about the systematic rape and murder of women and children, which is that the Japanese did at Nanking.

Wrong. Real historians agree with me. Fake statist historians known to be liars, agree with you.

You aren’t informed. Stop believing the lies of a lying government.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong. Real historians agree with me. Fake statist historians known to be liars, agree with you.

You aren’t informed. Stop believing the lies of a lying government.

Sorry, man, your conspiracy nutter stuff would be laughed out of any real history department...

 

[Unkotare]

Wrong. Real historians agree with me. Fake statist historians known to be liars, agree with you.

You aren’t informed. Stop believing the lies of a lying government.

Sorry, man, your conspiracy nutter stuff would be laughed out of any real history department...

You have absolutely no idea what happens in any real History Department, fraud.