disturbing Japanese anime' (hiroshima 1945)

[Njaco]

No worries BT, I just get alittle miffed when one starts a discussion about one subject and everything else gets thrown in. This was a vignette about an event and should be looked at objectively. But it wasn't. Its as if life was wonderful and suddenly big bad meanies ruined it. Theres a backstory to this event and it was totally skipped - just to draw out sympathy. There is no need to talk about the Indians, or Vietnam or how brutal the Klingons an be. The focus was the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and I can't understand why it can't stay on track or be objective.

 

[Shinpachi]

I have found out a comic which handles the Nanjing Massacre by Hiroshi Motomiya who is one of the leading comic creators in Japan. However, this comic 'Kuni ga moeru(Nation burns)' was obliged to stop publication in 2004 because a local politician group protested his work saying it was based on some wrong photos which were forged.

flickr/photos/92304708@N00/2037658943/
geocities/nankin1937jp/page070.html
mangazenkan/item/105.html

In my feeling, this historical incident seems still too 'fresh' for us to view with cool eye.

 

[Freebird]

In my feeling, this historical incident seems still too 'fresh' for us to view with cool eye.

I think that was one of the excuses given for opposition to Congress condemning the Ottoman Empire's genocide against the Armenians.

The President expressed dipleasure at Congress doing this, but didn't mention the genocide. {Dead Armenians don't vote}

 

[proton45]

g

 

[proton45]

Timshatz, I see what you ment with that hornet's nest remark.

I do think they were about to surrender, even if there was many faction within Japanese government opposing this. Some would say that the real reason as why Japan surrendered is USSR entering the war, but I think that wasn't only reason.

I don't think you are the one who opened the "hornets nest"...I think it was "comiso90" and his Nanking statement. The topic of the thread was about a Japanese cartoon that showed the human impact of the atomic bombings. I don't know why people always have to justify the action of the atomic bombing by bringing up China (the bombing wasn't suppose to be vengeance it was suppose to end the war...right?). For some reason Americans always want to "gloss over" the horrible impact these bombings had on civilians. Weather or not the atom bomb shortened the war is only part of the reality...it still had a devastating effect on the civilians (and their children) of these citys.

 

[GrauGeist]

I don't think you are the one who opened the "hornets nest"...I think it was "comiso90" and his Nanking statement. The topic of the thread was about a Japanese cartoon that showed the human impact of the atomic bombings. I don't know why people always have to justify the action of the atomic bombing by bringing up China (the bombing wasn't suppose to be vengeance it was suppose to end the war...right?). For some reason Americans always want to "gloss over" the horrible impact these bombings had on civilians. Weather or not the atom bomb shortened the war is only part of the reality...it still had a devastating effect on the civilians (and their children) of these citys.

And this comment brings up the question of why do people always slam Americans over the atom bombs?

The Japanese were not prepared to surrender, any student of military history can easily tell you this. The fire bombing of Tokyo and other large cities were horrific and accounted for a tremendous amount of deaths, injuries and displaced civilians that can easily rival both atomic bombs.

And this conventional bombing campaign was going to continue for at least another year. The Allied strategists and Japanese strategists were working on plans that continued well into 1946. (There's been a few threads here that have covered this in depth.)

While the weapons were terrible in thier own right, how terrible would it have been to have seen the casualties of a protracted defense the Japanese had in store for the Allies?

"the bombing wasn't suppose to be vengeance it was suppose to end the war...right?"
Yes, and it took dropping a second one to finally get them to come to terms of unconditional surrender.

 

[proton45]

And this comment brings up the question of why do people always slam Americans over the atom bombs?

The Japanese were not prepared to surrender, any student of military history can easily tell you this. The fire bombing of Tokyo and other large cities were horrific and accounted for a tremendous amount of deaths, injuries and displaced civilians that can easily rival both atomic bombs.

And this conventional bombing campaign was going to continue for at least another year. The Allied strategists and Japanese strategists were working on plans that continued well into 1946. (There's been a few threads here that have covered this in depth.)

While the weapons were terrible in thier own right, how terrible would it have been to have seen the casualties of a protracted defense the Japanese had in store for the Allies?

"the bombing wasn't suppose to be vengeance it was suppose to end the war...right?"
Yes, and it took dropping a second one to finally get them to come to terms of unconditional surrender.

again..."off topic". No one was slamming the USA.

 

[GrauGeist]

again..."off topic". No one was slamming the USA.

...For some reason Americans always want to "gloss over" the horrible impact these bombings had on civilians...

My comment was about as off topic as yours was

 

[proton45]

My comment was about as off topic as yours was

Perhaps...my comment was mostly aimed at the immediate reactions of a couple posts on this thread. Their where a couple of people posting here who's first reaction to the cartoon clip was to bring up Nanking. I found it interesting that some people can't just acknowledge the horrendous nature of the atomic bombing without having to justifie it (as vengence?). And yet I have seen interviews of crew men who where involved in dropping the bomb, who them selfs have commented on how horrible the devastation was.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Perhaps...my comment was mostly aimed at the immediate reactions of a couple posts on this thread. Their where a couple of people posting here who's first reaction to the cartoon clip was to bring up Nanking. I found it interesting that some people can't just acknowledge the horrendous nature of the atomic bombing without having to justifie it (as vengence?). And yet I have seen interviews of crew men who where involved in dropping the bomb, who them selfs have commented on how horrible the devastation was.

Well personally I feel it was justified and make no apologies what my country did - I have relatives who fought and were captured by the Japanese Army and seen the end result of their handiwork. My wife's grandfather actually testified against his captors who were later hung for war crimes.

Was the atomic bombings horrendous? Yes. Were they justified? In August 1945 they were.

Additionally I had other relatives who were on their way to Japan at the time of the bombings. They probably would not have been alive today (although very old) if it wasn't for those bombings.

I'll quote Adolf Hitler but will omit two words - "Whoever lights the torch of war can wish for nothing but chaos"

Perhaps the Japanese military should of thought of that in 1941.

BTW you mention some of the crews - Paul Tibbets up until the day he died never had any regrets of what he did and always stated if he was serving in the US military in today's and was faced with the same situation, he wouldn't hesitate to do the same mission as he did August 6, 1945.

 

[GrauGeist]

There will always be a "cause and effect" whenever subjects like this come up.

The mindset about "well, they ripped China a new one so they needed it" really isn't as valid of a discussion as the one is about why the bombs were dropped. I would agree that an atomic weapon is "over kill", but this was new technology and it was a global war that had seen force escalation on a tremendous scale between it's start in the 30's and the time that the bombs were dropped.

The moral issue is a tough one, but because of unique circumstances, they were used as a tool to actually stop killing. As far as paradoxes go, this is probably at the top of the list. Create suffering to stop suffering.

The destruction that the bombs produced was horriffic, but in any war, there is always scenes of total devestation (London, Dresden, Tokyo, Hamburg, Stalingrad and so on). Just not in a single flash. Typically, it takes weeks on end of countless bombs falling to acheive the same results. And there is perhaps more of an inner fear of the "flash bang" devestation than there is of a slow, drawn-out ruin. Something like: "maybe I have a chance to get missed this time around" way of thinking. An atom bomb doesn't give you that, it just sweeps the table clean in one shot.

I just hope that people remember why they were used, and use that knowledge as a deterrent from ever letting it happen again.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Justify? It was war. I've seen quotes of up to 50 million people died during WW2 whereas approx 250k people died from the 2 atomic blasts. How are their deaths any more horrific then the other 49.75 million people that died?

 

[proton45]

Well personally I feel it was justified and make no apologies what my country did - I have relatives who fought and were captured by the Japanese Army and seen the end result of their handiwork. My wife's grandfather actually testified against his captors who were later hung for war crimes.

Was the atomic bombings horrendous? Yes. Were they justified? In August 1945 they were.

Additionally I had other relatives who were on their way to Japan at the time of the bombings. They probably would not have been alive today (although very old) if it wasn't for those bombings.

I'll quote Adolf Hitler but will omit two words - "Whoever lights the torch of war can wish for nothing but chaos"

Perhaps the Japanese military should of thought of that in 1941.

BTW you mention some of the crews - Paul Tibbets up until the day he died never had any regrets of what he did and always stated if he was serving in the US military in today's and was faced with the same situation, he wouldn't hesitate to do the same mission as he did August 6, 1945.

I don't think its really an issue of apologizing... I too feel that it was probably the logical thing for us to do. I just don't understand why people always get so defensive when a Japanese filmmaker puts a human face on the suffering the civilian population endured.

It could be that I'm reacting to a series of "on-line" conversations I've had in the past few months... I was on another forum talking to a couple of guys (I assume they where guys) who loved the movie "Stalingrad" ( Das Boot). Their view was that these movies "showed it as it was". I brought up a resent Japanese movie I liked called, "For those we love", and their first reaction was that it had some cool airplane combat, but it seemed like propaganda. To cut to the chase of our conversation...they felt that the Germans in their preferred movies were NOT Nazi's so they seemed more sympathetic, while they assumed that ALL Japanese soldiers should he held responsible for the crimes of the military (in fact, they felt ALL Japanese citizens should be held responsible) because of their group mentality (loyalty to the Emperor). To be fair these guys admitted that their view could have been a little "uninformed"...and in fact they admitted that they had not given the issue much thought.

Justified bombing or not? This question is not really relevant for us today (thank God)... I had family on the American side the Japanese side. I have relatives who where held prisoner by the German the Japanese...and killed by the Allies.

As far as the bomber crew goes...I don't think you have to voice regret to admit the horrible power and suffering the bombs inflicted. I also don't think its "un-American" or hypocritical to empathize with the suffering of civilians...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I don't think its really an issue of apologizing... I too feel that it was probably the logical thing for us to do. I just don't understand why people always get so defensive when a Japanese filmmaker puts a human face on the suffering the civilian population endured.

It's real simple - for years they denied what that did to civilians and prisoners. As my wife grandfather put it - "what was endured at Hiroshima to many lasted seconds - the suffering at the march will continue for eternity." He survived the Bataan Death March - another event some Japanese denied ever happened.

As far as the bomber crew goes...I don't think you have to voice regret to admit the horrible power and suffering the bombs inflicted. I also don't think its "un-American" or hypocritical to empathize with the suffering of civilians...

Its not - but also consider the atrocities committed to unarmed civilians and POWs by the Japanese because the accepted culture at the time allowed them to do so. Accept their suffering when they truly "fess up" to what they did, at that point it you will not look "un-American."

 

[proton45]

It's real simple - for years they denied what that did to civilians and prisoners. As my wife grandfather put it - "what was endured at Hiroshima to many lasted seconds - the suffering at the march will continue for eternity." He survived the Bataan Death March - another event some Japanese denied ever happened.

Its not - but also consider the atrocities committed to unarmed civilians and POWs by the Japanese because the accepted culture at the time allowed them to do so. Accept their suffering when they truly "fess up" to what they did, at that point it you will not look "un-American."

alright i get it, you have bad feelings about japanese, thats your right. i don't see things as "black white".

 

[magnocain]

The video got removed.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

alright i get it, you have bad feelings about japanese, thats your right. i don't see things as "black white".

I actually don't have bad feelings about the Japanese (people). I've been to Japan including Okinawa several times and its one of my favorite countries to visit. I have bad feelings about those who wish to diminish Japanese WW2 atrocities while trying to demonize the US for using the atomic bomb. I've actually met Japanese who totally understood our reasoning for using the bomb. I could be more sympathetic toward the civilian Japanese WW2 population if POWs (that includes civilians) weren't slaughtered just because they captured. In the end I view it as poetic justice.

 

[GaryMcL]

.... This was a vignette about an event and should be looked at objectively. But it wasn't. Its as if life was wonderful and suddenly big bad meanies ruined it. Theres a backstory to this event and it was totally skipped - just to draw out sympathy. ...

I probably shouldn't, but here goes anyway.

Whether or not a post in this thread is on- or off-topic depends to me on whether or not the topic is the anime and its historical accuracy or the event itself. I don't know that that really got clearly defined but it was almost preordained that there would be a swerve into the event itself.

To look objectively at the anime itself, other than the technical quality of the graphics and sound and whether it accurately portrayed the visual horror of being nuked the only other areas to consider are its context and historical accuracy since it deals with a historical event. Since the technical aspects haven't received much comment that leaves only context and accuracy.

Any discussion of the bombings that portrays them as stand-alone events is at best slanted and totally removes the context. The bombings were the end of the road Japan chose to go down in 1941 and to ignore that is to expose the underlying agenda to portray the U.S. as the aggressors and for that reason it does in fact slam the U.S.. No big surprise that Americans would take offense. To point out what was omitted speaks directly to context and historical accuracy which is appropriate to a discussion of the anime. Had the anime at least in general terms acknowledged that there was a long, brutal war preceding the bombing it would have at least provided a minimally accurate context.

That Americans on the forum get their backs up after seeing the U.S. portrayed as maniacal demons who nuked a peace loving Japan just because it could shouldn't be that difficult for anyone to understand. It's got nothing to do with hating Japan or most of the other reasons posited here. It's got everything to do with selective memory or agenda ignoring the history leading up to the bombings and the patently anti-American slant.

It's maybe a bit of a stretch but think in terms of the Brits being portrayed as hateful, bloodthirsty, vicious sods who gleefully pounded Bismarck to the bottom of the Atlantic with massive loss of life in retribution for Hood instead of steaming alongside and capturing him (taking huge losses in ships and men), waiting for him to surrender (since he was clearly going to lose the battle anyway) or just make a big circle of ships around him to contain him and eventually starve him into surrendering. I suspect you'd get much the same reaction from the Brits to being portrayed this way in the face of the military necessity and impracticality of the other options as you have from Americans in this case.

Well, that's enough (and probably too much). I'll quit before I get into any more trouble.

Gary

 

[proton45]

I probably shouldn't, but here goes anyway.

Whether or not a post in this thread is on- or off-topic depends to me on whether or not the topic is the anime and its historical accuracy or the event itself. I don't know that that really got clearly defined but it was almost preordained that there would be a swerve into the event itself.

To look objectively at the anime itself, other than the technical quality of the graphics and sound and whether it accurately portrayed the visual horror of being nuked the only other areas to consider are its context and historical accuracy since it deals with a historical event. Since the technical aspects haven't received much comment that leaves only context and accuracy.

Any discussion of the bombings that portrays them as stand-alone events is at best slanted and totally removes the context. The bombings were the end of the road Japan chose to go down in 1941 and to ignore that is to expose the underlying agenda to portray the U.S. as the aggressors and for that reason it does in fact slam the U.S.. No big surprise that Americans would take offense. To point out what was omitted speaks directly to context and historical accuracy which is appropriate to a discussion of the anime. Had the anime at least in general terms acknowledged that there was a long, brutal war preceding the bombing it would have at least provided a minimally accurate context.

That Americans on the forum get their backs up after seeing the U.S. portrayed as maniacal demons who nuked a peace loving Japan just because it could shouldn't be that difficult for anyone to understand. It's got nothing to do with hating Japan or most of the other reasons posited here. It's got everything to do with selective memory or agenda ignoring the history leading up to the bombings and the patently anti-American slant.

It's maybe a bit of a stretch but think in terms of the Brits being portrayed as hateful, bloodthirsty, vicious sods who gleefully pounded Bismarck to the bottom of the Atlantic with massive loss of life in retribution for Hood instead of steaming alongside and capturing him (taking huge losses in ships and men), waiting for him to surrender (since he was clearly going to lose the battle anyway) or just make a big circle of ships around him to contain him and eventually starve him into surrendering. I suspect you'd get much the same reaction from the Brits to being portrayed this way in the face of the military necessity and impracticality of the other options as you have from Americans in this case.

Well, that's enough (and probably too much). I'll quit before I get into any more trouble.

Gary

The story is the childlike recollections of a real person...how do you expect a child to see things?

FYI, the author of the Manga , Keiji Nakazawa, that this cartoon is based on was extremely critical of the militarization of Japan. Here is a quote from an interview:

"NAKAZAWA: Well, I spent a lot of time thinking about why it happened. And if you think it through, the answer clearly lies with the militarists and the imperial system. And as a young kid, of course, I'd heard my father criticizing them too."

This was his response to a question about WHY THE BOMB WAS DROPPED...

What bothers me is that people watch a little 5 minute clip of a full length movie and they think they know the whole story...I think its dangerous thinking to lump all people into "fixed" categorizes (or nationality's). Some people watch a little Japanese film clip and they immediately assume its expressing anti-American feelings...The world is a complicated place and experiences are never black and white. From the point of view of a little kid the bombing must have seemed a scary and horrible experience, but the author makes it clear who is to blame.

America may have wielded the hammer that struck the blow but the die was cast by Japan's own military complex...


[Edit]: Here is a link to the interview I mentioned. http://www.tcj.com/256/i_nakazawa.html

 

[FLYBOYJ]

That Americans on the forum get their backs up after seeing the U.S. portrayed as maniacal demons who nuked a peace loving Japan just because it could shouldn't be that difficult for anyone to understand. It's got nothing to do with hating Japan or most of the other reasons posited here. It's got everything to do with selective memory or agenda ignoring the history leading up to the bombings and the patently anti-American slant.

Very well said Gary. I actually wrote to the mayor of Nagasaki over the anti-American slant in some of his speeches made about the subject and he was un-yielding in his feelings that the Japanese were totally victimized by US brutality. When presented with facts about the behavior of the Japanese military during WW2, his response was "we tend to remember history in the manner that suits our individual needs."