Comments by "August Hayek" (@hayek218) on "PeriscopeFilm"
channel.
-
ironmanh8sall
You are such an ignorant guy.
The Atomic bombs were never needed for the Japanese to surrender and US knew it. But still they used them as human experiments. This is clearly shown in the following sequence of events:
(1) After Nazi surrendered on May 7, 1945, Churchill kept on pushing Truman to hold Potsdam meeting immediately in a hope to end the WWII as soon as possible. However, Truman kept on postponing it until the first test of the ABomb on July 16, 1945. The first Potsdam meeting was postponed until July 17.
(2) On May 8, US summoned Japan to accept “unconditional surrender."
(3) However, the "Unconditional surrender” that Truman strongly insisted, is a military term used for an army and not for a country. It has no definition in the International Law, and thus bewildered not only Japan but everyone else including US law philosophers, US generals like Eisenhower, or even Churchill.
(4) US found that Japan started negotiating to surrender through Soviet in June 1941, to which MacArthur said to the General Staff Office that the War is over. The resolution for starting to negotiate the terms of surrender through Soviet was passed on June 22, 1945 in Japan WITHOUT atomic bombs.
(5) Joseph Grew, the former ambassador to Japan, knew from his experiences and suggested to Truman on May 28, 1945 that if US agreed to keep the Emperor, Japan would surrender immediately.
(6) Both Eisenhower and Stimson agreed to Grew's idea and to proposed it to the President on July 20, 1945. MacArthur also wrote that the Japanese would fight til the last person if US would not promise to preserve the Emperor. Only Byrnes, who newly came to the office on July 3, 1945, disagreed and opposed.
(7) Six out of all the seven Five Star Generals were against the use of ABombs, and thought that Japan would surrender without them.
(against: MacArthur, Eisenhower, Marshal, Arnold, Nimitz, Leahy)
(8) Preservation of the Emperor was included in the final US official proposal for the condition of Japan's surrender.
(9) However, on the way to Potsdam on Augusta, Byrnes succeeded in persuading Truman to remove the clause on the Emperor. Grew, Stimson and others were not on the ship.
(10) Truman heard the ABobm test was successful on July 16, 1945 during the Potsdam meeting with a message “Babies satisfactorily born."
(11) Stimson arrived at Potsdam after the Abomb test, and asked Truman to re-include the clause of preserving the Emperor. But Truman very strongly opposed to the idea and refused by saying "you can go home if you do not like it."
(12) At the meeting in Potsdam on August 17, Truman asked Stalin, when Soviet would invade Japan. Stalin replied August 15. (Japan had a non-aggression pact with the Soviet. But in Yalta Conference held from February 4 to 11, 1945, FDR secretly agreed with Stalin to give Soviet some parts of Japan in return for breaking the pact and invading Japan.) Truman wrote on this day's dairy that if Soviet aggresses on August 15, Jap will end, meaning that if Truman used Abombs BEFORE August 15, his purpose for the use would be something other than ending the War.
(13) The Potsdam declaration was issued July 26, but it was not signed by Soviet, delaying the sign by the Japanese. It was Truman that refused the signature by Stalin.
(14) On the same day, July 26, Truman gave a command to drop the first ABomb on the earliest clear day after August 3.
(15) Just before Soviet's invasion, US dropped the ABombs, on August 6 and 9, 1945. On hearing this news, Soviet started invading Manchuria on August 9, sooner than the previously planned date by breaking the non-aggression pact.
(16) The Japanese did not even know what the bombs were, but they surrendered when they found Soviet started invading Manchuria, because with almost no power to fight back even against US, they could not hold a two-front war; Japan did not have other route than through Soviet for negotiating the terms of surrender.
(17) Truman said on US TV that they used the ABombs that they "invested" so much money.
(18) US intervened treating patients at hospitals for collecting medical data. In some cases, they let patients die without treatment to collect intestines for studies back in US.
(19) The Emperor Hirohito was not prosecuted in the Tokyo Tribunal, and he stayed as the Emperor. The position of the emperor was also kept under the new constitution which was illegally (by International Law) forced by the US. So the whole hustle about the preservation of the Emperor did not mean anything at all in the end.
(20) In his memoirs, Truman wrote "Japanese are beast. So are treated as."
(21) A famous book, "Just and Unjust Wars," written by a prominent US political philosopher at Harvard, Michael Waltzer, condemns the uses of atomic bombs as crimes. This book is used as a must-read text book at West Point today.
5
-
4
-
David Brown
Asia:
Japan fought against the whites who were enslaving Asia for hundreds of years, not against the natives. What do you think the whites were doing in Asia?
Charity?
There were only about 60 countries in the world at the time, of which only 10 non-white countries were not yet colonized by the whites. And the figure was decreasing. Japan was the last country in Asia remaining totally independent, and within several years of the War all the countries were freed.
Who do you think formed and trained their armies in Asian countries, which fought against the West when they came back to recolonize after the WWII?
You think the Asians were holding US guns or Japanese guns?
Or, do they grow on trees?
For example, today, some 3,000 Japanese lay buried with orders in Kalibata Heroes Cemetery in Jakarta, Indonesia. Everybody in Indonesia including those in the first subsequent independent Government and Army like the first President Sukarno, Bun Tomo, Aramasa, Sanpas, Hatta, etc. were holding Japanese guns and fighting with the Japanese.
2
-
David Brown
China:
It is the Han Chinese that attacked Japan first.
Japan first got that part of Manchuria from Russia, not from China. The Han Chinese had never ruled Manchuria in their history. Never. Also they hate the Hans. When Qing fell, ROC asked Manchuria, Inner Mongol, Uighur, and Tibet to join. But they all refused.
In case you did not know, even though they boast about their five thousand year history, China was first united only less than three thousand years ago, and it was not by the Han Chinese. Since then, China was united for two of the three thousand years, and the Han Chinese only ruled for a total of six hundred years during the Former Han, the Latter Han and Ming. Other dynasties were established by other races, so Manchuria, Mongol, Uighur and Tibet were never ruled by the Han Chinese.
Before the 20th century, China was the name of the land, not of a country: there were just different dynasties or country of different races occupying the land called “China."
Even though you may think Panda are Chinese, they were always Tibetan's and never belonged to the Han Chinese in history. The Whites are brainwashed and fooled by the Han Chinese.
Also, because the West accepted the lie that Manchuria belongs to ROC before the WWII for their benefits, nobody today can deny the Han Chinese's rights on Tibet, Uighur and Inner Mongol; Nixon and Kissinger were made to swallow the One China Policy by Mao; this issue became an internal issues of “China”; and any local protesters become terrorists.
1
-
1
-
David Brown
Atrocities by US soldiers:
You can read confessions by US soldiers for their atorocities they committed during the War in books like "Summer, 1945: Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate” by Thomas Goodrich.
"We Americans have the dangerous tendency in our international thinking to take a holier-than-thou attitude toward other nations. We consider ourselves to be more noble and decent than other peoples, and consequently in a better position to decide what is right and wrong in the world.
What kind of war do civilians suppose we fought, anyway? We shot prisoners in cold blood, wiped out hospitals, strafed lifeboats, killed or mistreated enemy civilians, finished off the enemy wounded, tossed the dying into a hole with the dead, and in the Pacific boiled the flesh off enemy skulls to make table ornaments for sweethearts, or carved their bones into letter openers....
We mutilated the bodies of enemy dead, cutting off their ears and kicking out their gold teeth for souvenirs, and buried them with their testicles in their mouths....
We topped off our saturation bombing and burning of enemy civilians by dropping atomic bombs on two nearly defenseless cities, thereby setting an all-time record for instantaneous mass slaughter.
As victors we are privileged to try our defeated opponents for their crimes against humanity; but we should be realistic enough to appreciate that if we were on trial for breaking international laws, we should be found guilty on a dozen counts. We fought a dishonorable war, because morality had a low priority in battle.
The tougher the fighting, the less room for decency, and in Pacific contests we saw mankind reach the blackest depths of bestiality." ---- Edgar Jones, WWII Veteran
1
-
David Brown
Rapes:
Japan always had the world’s lowest crime rates in its history, especially rapes. You can read Spanish and Portuguese missionary letters of old times or compare today’s police statistics among OECD countries.
If rapes happen, there will be babies born at a certain percentage.
When US occupied Japan, the very first thing they did was to force the Japanese government to provide three types of brothels for officers, white soldiers and black soldiers using Japanese tax payers money (this order in writing by MacArthur still exists ). Japan did so, but still, there were over 20,000 rapes (reported only) in the first six months, for which some 6,000 amerasian were born. GHQ found this and forced the Japanese Police to stop collecting the data, but subsequently the US’s 80 Amerasian Act was enacted for one million amerasians around the world: God know how many you have to rape for that.
Koreans also raped and massacred so many civilians during the Vietnam War, and now there is a big issue of Lai Dai Han.
But where are the Japanese babies? Has anybody seen any?
If you say they killed the women, has anybody found any bodies yet?
If you say they burnt the women, has anybody found the ashes yet?
Where are they?
Or, they keep silent about rapes because of the shame factor?
But wait, they only talk about Koreans and Americans but not about Japanese? ....That makes sense.
The Japanese were the defeated and supposed to be the "bad guys.” So shouldn't they talk about the Japanese babies and keep silent about Koreans and Americans? After the War, US was frantically looking for Japanese war crimes for Tokyo Trial and WGIP, so the Japanese rapes are the ones that should be most talked about…...
In any wars, rapes and assaults are always used to bash the defeated.
1
-
David Brown
Massacre:
In the world's longest history of tens of thousand years, much longer than that of China, there was NO civilian massacre in Japan. All the arrowheads found are small for killing little animals for foods; no broken bones killed in massacre are found; and there is no record for massacre despite the fact that Japan always had the one of the world’s highest literacy rates since a thousand years ago. None.
Civilian massacre and slavery did not happen in Japan.
The biggest body count in a war was was the 16th century Battle of Sekigahara in which 5,000 to 10,000 were killed. But all were samurai. There were many records like diaries, memo, letters, pictures, etc. showing farmers were eating bento while watching the battle; selling foods and goods to the samurai. After all, unlike in the West, samurai needed farmers for cultivating rice paddies after wars.
That is why crime rates have always been one of the lowest in the world. That is why unlike many other countries, plunders or burglaries are very rare even in times of disasters, and people instead help each other. Trusts within the society are rooted deeply in its long history of tens of thousands of years. It is not something you can copy.
Also, all the killing and torturing methods described in the massacre of Chinese by the Japanese are Chinese traditional methods repeatedly appearing in their history books, but never in the Japanese history books. Killing, torturing and suicide methods are rooted in traditions and cultures: the most popular suicide method, for instance, in US is by guns; in UK, gas; and in Japan, by hanging. They are not something you can imagine out of blue, out of nowhere.
On the contrary, China is the exact opposite. Massive civilian massacres like the Cultural Revolution were commonplace every time their dynasties changed to the extent that the country's entire population dropped very severely. Civilian massacre is a part of their history, tradition and culture.
Earlier in the 20th century too, during the civil war between CCP and Kuomintang, i.e. at the time of the war between Japan and China, both were heavily involved in massacring civilians. In Yellow River Flood Incident alone, Kuomintang killed up to one million civilians while the CCP’s was basically butchering around landowners, business owners, and wealthies and thier relatives wherever they went to steal and distribute their wealth among themselves in the name of “revolution.” Bodies were everywhere.
One thing is that many Chinese soldiers were fighting in ordinary clothes, which is against the International Law. They are regarded as spies and can be executed by the Law.
But what is the reason for the Japanese to kill Chinese civilians? To annihilate the entire one billion Chinese? They were always short in supply of aminitions, and were strict on their use.
So the Japanese, who had never committed civilian massacre in their tens of thousands years of history, massacred tens of millions of Chinese civilians using killing methods described repeatedly in the Chinese history books while on humanitarian grounds saving tens of thousand lives of jews by allowing them into their Shanghai Settlement through Manchuria, and for which there is no legit primary source evidence or witnesses?
Does that make sense?
There is NO reason to kill Chinese civilians apart from Kuomintang and CCP soldiers wearing civilian clothes.
1