Japan gets weirder...

[NERVUN]

Oh... I'm going to love this.

So, because I'm saying something that doesn't match what the administration claimed and because the administration did not make declarations that what actually happened was not what had actually happened (crazy, I know) it's 'revisionism' (because, obviously, I'm actually rewriting the history here, rather than just claiming that the excuses used were false)?

Some of Truman's advisors told him to use Little Boy on barren areas. Some others claimed that Little Boy needed to be used on a settled area. That was an actual choice that was made - to drop a pure symbol, or to inflict massed casualties. We carefully positioned observors, and then repositioned them half a week later.

The logic suggests we wanted to kill people, rather than just scare people. The logic suggests we wanted to see what happened when you dropped nuclear devices on civlian areas (we'd already tested the technology here).

There is nothing revisionist or illogical about what I'm saying. It just doesn't match the propaganda you were raised on.

No, Galloism is quite right, you have nothing coming close to proof.

So I'll join him, bull fucking shit.

Let me repeat that, bull shit.

Do I need to do it again? Ok, bull shit.

You have nothing until you can come up with a source for your claims.

If it's 'bullshit' then there can be no evidence... which is, of course, what you (were raised to) expect.

Raised? Oh, you mean the 5 years of study I put in at my university on Japan, it's culture and history? You mean the close to two decades of informal study I have made of WWII? You mean the 5 years I have spent here in Japan reading up on what was going on in Japan at the end of WWII? THAT raised?

What do YOU got?

However, Truman's own personal writings reveal that HE fully believed that Japan were going to surrender anyway - and not only were our own forces aware of this, but many important people (especially in the military) were telling Truman NOT to attack civilian centres, and agressively condemned the move after the fact. Add to that - experts believed that Truman was lying about the risk of lost American lives if we HAD engaged militarily. One evaluation suggested that a WORST-case scenario for American casualties... would have been less than 50,000. We actually LOST American lives because we refused to entertain the ONE Japanese concern for surrender (survival of the Emperor) until AFTER the two bombs were dropped.

Oh I love you. Thank you for bringing up these wonderful points that I can shred. Point one, Truman had stated that much embellished figure of 1 million, but the figures that were being used by Truman were probably one done by the Joint Chiefs which showed "in April 1945, the figures of 7.45 casualties per 1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities per 1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that the two planned campaigns to conquer Japan would cost 1.6 million U.S. casualties, including 370,000 dead" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_ove ... o_invasion There's also a WONDERFUL walk though about what could have been waiting for us here: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/giangrec.htm so this wasn't just a fricken walk though the park and Truman KNEW it.

And 2, I'd LOVE too address this "Oh, if ONLY we had let them know they could keep the Emperor" idea. There are three reason why that wouldn't have been possible, one is political, one is diplomatic, and one is with the understanding of just what the hell the Japanese were asking for. The political reason is simply that the US had been working on unconditional surrender, it simply would not have been possible, after 4 years of war and sacrifice to suddenly tell the American people, "Well, we don't actually MEAN unconditional". The second, the diplomatic one, is a mirror of the first. The US had already agreed to the Potsdam Deceleration to accept unconditional surrender only from Japan. This was agreed with both the USSR AND the UK, again, the US could not have unilaterally suddenly declared, "We changed our minds". Finally though, and this is what I LOVE from these threads, the fact that no one actually bothers to read up on Japan before jumping in, when Japan wanted to secure the status of the emperor, they weren't talking about the emperor as he is now, the symbol of the state and the unity of the people, but the emperor as he was under the Meiji Constitution, you know, pretty much having absolute power that could be exploited by the military, like it HAD been. This would have been like saying that we would accept the surrender of Germany and allow Hitler to remain in power with all the powers given to him.

Yeah, BRILLIANT idea there.

It's interesting - there's a lot of evidence out there (that people like you and Gallo ignore). The only place where I am saying anything even vaguely revolutionary - is that most scholars argue the tests were designed to scare the soviets, rather than just to test the weapons.

And this 'exploded myth' isn't new - here's an article from 15 years ago:

http://www.csmonitor.com/1992/0806/06191.html

Yeah, an article that claims that the scholarly consensus is that... Bullshit. This is still hotly argued between scholars. There is no consensus and NOTHING that I have read (And believe me, I have read a lot on this topic, from BOTH sides of the Pacific), has claimed in all seriousness that the bombings were made JUST to test them.

And you STILL have not shown proof of the above. Do you actually have anything?

[NERVUN]

Only if you ignore what the Japanese were saying at the time, like say the minister of war who refused to admit that Hiroshima was an atomic bomb and attempted to explain it away as a natural disaster. He changed his tune after Nagasaki.

Anami Korechika was not typical, and actually opposed even Hirohito until he was expressly ordered otherwise. At which point he conceded... and then killed himself.

Yeah, so unusual that there was an attempted coup by militarists. He wasn't unusual, the hardliners were MORE than willing to keep on going.

[Non Aligned States]

You know NERVUN, the more I think of it, the more I suspect that GnI's pulling a reverse Mitanni on us.

Getting back on topic though, how do you imagine things will turn out with the current economic toilet Japan's sitting in? Will we see a drop in NEET numbers and extreme social misfits as they get around to adapting to the changing times, or will the heads up top still enforce the regimentation without really fixing anything?

[Daistallia 2104]

Actually either spelling works.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedophilia

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paedophilia

But since most British people spell it as the latter, and most American people pronounce it as the latter, and it comes from the Greek "pais" and "philia", I believe that "paedophilia" is more correct.

And you would be wrong.

[Grave_n_idle]

Oh... I'm going to love this.
Raised? Oh, you mean the 5 years of study I put in at my university on Japan, it's culture and history? You mean the close to two decades of informal study I have made of WWII? You mean the 5 years I have spent here in Japan reading up on what was going on in Japan at the end of WWII? THAT raised?

What do YOU got?

Oh I love you. Thank you for bringing up these wonderful points that I can shred. Point one, Truman had stated that much embellished figure of 1 million, but the figures that were being used by Truman were probably one done by the Joint Chiefs which showed "in April 1945, the figures of 7.45 casualties per 1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities per 1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that the two planned campaigns to conquer Japan would cost 1.6 million U.S. casualties, including 370,000 dead" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_ove ... o_invasion There's also a WONDERFUL walk though about what could have been waiting for us here: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/giangrec.htm so this wasn't just a fricken walk though the park and Truman KNEW it.

And 2, I'd LOVE too address this "Oh, if ONLY we had let them know they could keep the Emperor" idea. There are three reason why that wouldn't have been possible, one is political, one is diplomatic, and one is with the understanding of just what the hell the Japanese were asking for. The political reason is simply that the US had been working on unconditional surrender, it simply would not have been possible, after 4 years of war and sacrifice to suddenly tell the American people, "Well, we don't actually MEAN unconditional". The second, the diplomatic one, is a mirror of the first. The US had already agreed to the Potsdam Deceleration to accept unconditional surrender only from Japan. This was agreed with both the USSR AND the UK, again, the US could not have unilaterally suddenly declared, "We changed our minds". Finally though, and this is what I LOVE from these threads, the fact that no one actually bothers to read up on Japan before jumping in, when Japan wanted to secure the status of the emperor, they weren't talking about the emperor as he is now, the symbol of the state and the unity of the people, but the emperor as he was under the Meiji Constitution, you know, pretty much having absolute power that could be exploited by the military, like it HAD been. This would have been like saying that we would accept the surrender of Germany and allow Hitler to remain in power with all the powers given to him.

Yeah, BRILLIANT idea there.

Yeah, an article that claims that the scholarly consensus is that... Bullshit. This is still hotly argued between scholars. There is no consensus and NOTHING that I have read (And believe me, I have read a lot on this topic, from BOTH sides of the Pacific), has claimed in all seriousness that the bombings were made JUST to test them.

And you STILL have not shown proof of the above. Do you actually have anything?

So... an opinion piece that falls on it's face of in front of already presented evidence... a source from which you cherry pick some details and ignore the "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated" on the same page, several weak appeals to authority... and a claim that I said something I didn't say.

I'd like to respond... but it frankly doesn't seem to be needed.

[Grave_n_idle]

Only if you ignore what the Japanese were saying at the time, like say the minister of war who refused to admit that Hiroshima was an atomic bomb and attempted to explain it away as a natural disaster. He changed his tune after Nagasaki.

Anami Korechika was not typical, and actually opposed even Hirohito until he was expressly ordered otherwise. At which point he conceded... and then killed himself.

Yeah, so unusual that there was an attempted coup by militarists. He wasn't unusual, the hardliners were MORE than willing to keep on going.

There were hardliners. Yes. Anima Korechika was an important figure, yes. He represented a faction that would have defied the Emperor, if he - himself - hadn't over-ruled them. That doesn't mean he was 'typical'.

[Daistallia 2104]

However can we PLEASE split this to it's own thread and keep this one on topic?

Seconded. Discussing modern Japan's social ills is much more interesting than rehashing the old nuking of Hiroshima argument for the umpteenth time.

I'll also note Kat's comments above regarding the hijacking...

[Daistallia 2104]

Getting back on topic though, how do you imagine things will turn out with the current economic toilet Japan's sitting in? Will we see a drop in NEET numbers and extreme social misfits as they get around to adapting to the changing times, or will the heads up top still enforce the regimentation without really fixing anything?

Prospects are not good economically. There is a growing wealth gap. Numbers of NEETs and social misfit will most likely rise. And it will most likely take a major systemic shock to make any real changes to the social regementation.

[Milks Empire]

Getting back on topic though, how do you imagine things will turn out with the current economic toilet Japan's sitting in? Will we see a drop in NEET numbers and extreme social misfits as they get around to adapting to the changing times, or will the heads up top still enforce the regimentation without really fixing anything?

It would take a HUGE shock - bigger than the American postwar occupation - to make any major changes to the social order in Japan. The militarism largely disappeared, but you're not going to undo 1000 years of tradition overnight.

[Non Aligned States]

Prospects are not good economically. There is a growing wealth gap. Numbers of NEETs and social misfit will most likely rise. And it will most likely take a major systemic shock to make any real changes to the social regementation.

How big a shock are we talking here? And more importantly, can it be changed with a top down approach? i.e. someone up top decides to shake up the regimentation system. Or will it require a much more intrusive and thorough approach?

[NERVUN]

Oh... I'm going to love this.
Raised? Oh, you mean the 5 years of study I put in at my university on Japan, it's culture and history? You mean the close to two decades of informal study I have made of WWII? You mean the 5 years I have spent here in Japan reading up on what was going on in Japan at the end of WWII? THAT raised?

What do YOU got?

Oh I love you. Thank you for bringing up these wonderful points that I can shred. Point one, Truman had stated that much embellished figure of 1 million, but the figures that were being used by Truman were probably one done by the Joint Chiefs which showed "in April 1945, the figures of 7.45 casualties per 1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities per 1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that the two planned campaigns to conquer Japan would cost 1.6 million U.S. casualties, including 370,000 dead" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_ove ... o_invasion There's also a WONDERFUL walk though about what could have been waiting for us here: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/giangrec.htm so this wasn't just a fricken walk though the park and Truman KNEW it.

And 2, I'd LOVE too address this "Oh, if ONLY we had let them know they could keep the Emperor" idea. There are three reason why that wouldn't have been possible, one is political, one is diplomatic, and one is with the understanding of just what the hell the Japanese were asking for. The political reason is simply that the US had been working on unconditional surrender, it simply would not have been possible, after 4 years of war and sacrifice to suddenly tell the American people, "Well, we don't actually MEAN unconditional". The second, the diplomatic one, is a mirror of the first. The US had already agreed to the Potsdam Deceleration to accept unconditional surrender only from Japan. This was agreed with both the USSR AND the UK, again, the US could not have unilaterally suddenly declared, "We changed our minds". Finally though, and this is what I LOVE from these threads, the fact that no one actually bothers to read up on Japan before jumping in, when Japan wanted to secure the status of the emperor, they weren't talking about the emperor as he is now, the symbol of the state and the unity of the people, but the emperor as he was under the Meiji Constitution, you know, pretty much having absolute power that could be exploited by the military, like it HAD been. This would have been like saying that we would accept the surrender of Germany and allow Hitler to remain in power with all the powers given to him.

Yeah, BRILLIANT idea there.

Yeah, an article that claims that the scholarly consensus is that... Bullshit. This is still hotly argued between scholars. There is no consensus and NOTHING that I have read (And believe me, I have read a lot on this topic, from BOTH sides of the Pacific), has claimed in all seriousness that the bombings were made JUST to test them.

And you STILL have not shown proof of the above. Do you actually have anything?

So... an opinion piece that falls on it's face of in front of already presented evidence... a source from which you cherry pick some details and ignore the "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated" on the same page, several weak appeals to authority... and a claim that I said something I didn't say.

I'd like to respond... but I still have nothing to back up my claims.

Fixed.

[NERVUN]

However can we PLEASE split this to it's own thread and keep this one on topic?

Seconded. Discussing modern Japan's social ills is much more interesting than rehashing the old nuking of Hiroshima argument for the umpteenth time.

I'll also note Kat's comments above regarding the hijacking...

There's two threads on Moderation asking for it. Hopefully...

[Chrobalta]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iZlVN3g ... annel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLZ8YgD ... annel_page

TYT has been reporting a bit on this...

[Non Aligned States]

By the way, does anyone have the link showing the deconstruction the OP article and the possible waiwai link? I seem to remember it showing up, but can't find it.

[Anemos Major]

There was an interesting article in the IHT today, which prompted me to look for it on the web...

http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200907300089.html

I LOLed when i listened to the reporters on the TYT; they sounded astoundingly awkward and disbelieving. it's like they've never seen a man in a serious relationship with something he sleeps on... that could mean many things, yes.

'"And he would have no interest in me whatsoever". To be quite frank, madam, I doubt many would have any interest in you.

Anyways, the social ills of Japan... well, I have this long-running belief that the work ethos of this country affects that sort of thing. Generally, 'being successful' in this country means being in a financially stable position, and people tend to forget about families, or relationships, in the ensuing hunt for jobs and cash. Which may be a cause.

[NERVUN]

Prospects are not good economically. There is a growing wealth gap. Numbers of NEETs and social misfit will most likely rise. And it will most likely take a major systemic shock to make any real changes to the social regementation.

How big a shock are we talking here? And more importantly, can it be changed with a top down approach? i.e. someone up top decides to shake up the regimentation system. Or will it require a much more intrusive and thorough approach?

A HUGE shock, as in Japan needing to rebuild again. The problem with a top down approach is that it is very hard to figure out just where the hell the top is in Japan. A lot of times who you THINK is the top is naught but a figurehead and has no real decision making powers.

The best way to put it is that Japan, for all the many years it has supposedly stopped being a feudal system, still operates as one. You have a lot of entrenched groups with their fingers in certain pies who more or less work to keep their own, and face against any outside threat. The political system rides on top of this without really being able to control it. Imagine if K Street in Washington was in bed with the US Government (NOT Congress, the agencies themselves), and dictated policy to Congress and the President, not the other way around.

[NERVUN]

By the way, does anyone have the link showing the deconstruction the OP article and the possible waiwai link? I seem to remember it showing up, but can't find it.

Wai Wai is gone, NAS.

[Non Aligned States]

By the way, does anyone have the link showing the deconstruction the OP article and the possible waiwai link? I seem to remember it showing up, but can't find it.

Wai Wai is gone, NAS.

I know it's gone. In fact, that link was how I knew it existed in the first place. But I can't find the link in this thread anymore. I know it showed up because it pointed out that the 25% claim was bullshit and sensationalist, with strong indications that it came from Waiwai's archives before it got taken down.

The article was titled Nisan's revenge or something like that. There were two of them.

[Daistallia 2104]

It would take a HUGE shock - bigger than the American postwar occupation - to make any major changes to the social order in Japan. The militarism largely disappeared, but you're not going to undo 1000 years of tradition overnight.

400 years woulkd be more accurate, as a lot of the regementation (not all mind you, but a lot) stems from the Tokugawa government.

The occupation could have done it if the US hadn't decided it needed Japan as a supplier for the Korean War.

How big a shock are we talking here? And more importantly, can it be changed with a top down approach? i.e. someone up top decides to shake up the regimentation system. Or will it require a much more intrusive and thorough approach?

As Milks said, huge. Looking at Japanese history, 4 of the 5 the main social shake ups have all been associated with outside contacts - China in the 5th C., Europe in the 16th, the West in general in the 19th, and then the US occupation (the exception was the introduction of the shogunate in the 12th c.). Most of them were also associated with civil wars. Then a strongman type of government imposes social reforms.

Now, if the economy continues to go south and governmental, economic, and social institutions continue to be disfunctional and unable to change course, there will come a point where something has to give. I am fairly hopeful we'll see a fairly peaceful change for once, as it seems like a lot of ordinary people are well aware of what's wrong here. They just don't know what to do about it.

There's two threads on Moderation asking for it. Hopefully...

Indeed.

[Daistallia 2104]

By the way, does anyone have the link showing the deconstruction the OP article and the possible waiwai link? I seem to remember it showing up, but can't find it.

I posted it pages ago - somewhere around page 4 or 5 I think.

A HUGE shock, as in Japan needing to rebuild again. The problem with a top down approach is that it is very hard to figure out just where the hell the top is in Japan. A lot of times who you THINK is the top is naught but a figurehead and has no real decision making powers.

Indeed.

The best way to put it is that Japan, for all the many years it has supposedly stopped being a feudal system, still operates as one. You have a lot of entrenched groups with their fingers in certain pies who more or less work to keep their own, and face against any outside threat. The political system rides on top of this without really being able to control it. Imagine if K Street in Washington was in bed with the US Government (NOT Congress, the agencies themselves), and dictated policy to Congress and the President, not the other way around.

And again indeed.

The best prospects are for the economy to hit rock bottom and we see a sort of people powered bottom up restructuring as a result.

[Non Aligned States]

As Milks said, huge. Looking at Japanese history, 4 of the 5 the main social shake ups have all been associated with outside contacts - China in the 5th C., Europe in the 16th, the West in general in the 19th, and then the US occupation (the exception was the introduction of the shogunate in the 12th c.). Most of them were also associated with civil wars. Then a strongman type of government imposes social reforms.

Now, if the economy continues to go south and governmental, economic, and social institutions continue to be disfunctional and unable to change course, there will come a point where something has to give. I am fairly hopeful we'll see a fairly peaceful change for once, as it seems like a lot of ordinary people are well aware of what's wrong here. They just don't know what to do about it.

Hard to say, given everything you've said, that there will be a completely peaceful change. From the way it sounds, a severe shakeup is needed that would effectively vacate or neuter the entire upper echelons of Japanese society (politicians and business conglomerates) so that a new player can come in to make the necessary changes. That's pretty hard to do without the sort of social upheaval a civil war would create. I mean, the average Japanese citizen is dependent on the current structure for employment, and that structure is resistant to change with the current heads unwilling to threaten their rice bowl.

As you say, a lot of people are aware that things are going down the toilet, but it seems no one is willing to budge out of their comfort zone to do anything significant about it. If it keeps up, it'll eventually reach a boiling point and burst, with bad news all around or you'll see Japan effectively collapse in on itself (with even worse news).

[L3 Communications]

It sounds almost sweet, with all these socially-inept virgins finding love in an unconventional place, until you realized that these are middle-aged men who seek sexual gratification with passive images of pre-pubescent girls.

Then it just sounds dull. Ho-hum, yet another cohort of old men who only want relationships with little girls who never talk back.

Pedophilia is a little off...granted. But it doesn't make them child molestors. I know you didn't say this...but I see it so many times that I want to strangle someone...well...not really.

In all the facets of perversion, pedophilia is just a little more on the extreme side. But I'd personally rather have a pedophile jerk off to images of pre-pubescent girls rather than taking the other step and actually having sex with one. In the world of lolicon and shotacon, those who avidly are interested in these realms actually probably dislike child molestors more than fear-mongering mothers and fathers.

See...a child molestor is a pedophile, but a pedophile is not necessarily a child molestor. Just like an Oak is a tree, but a tree is not necessarily an Oak. It's like they just don't hear the analogy and only hear pedophile.

It's frankly disheartening.

This. In the same way a Nazi is a Fascist yet all Fascists are not Nazis.

Bad example I KNOW but it's late and my brain has stopped working.

[Redwulf]

However can we PLEASE split this to it's own thread and keep this one on topic?

Seconded. Discussing modern Japan's social ills is much more interesting than rehashing the old nuking of Hiroshima argument for the umpteenth time.

I'll also note Kat's comments above regarding the hijacking...

There's two threads on Moderation asking for it. Hopefully...

Or, you could actually start a new thread and the argument can move there. Saves work on the mods and it lessens the chance someone gets red texted for continuing the hijack after the first red text about the hijack.

[NERVUN]

Seconded. Discussing modern Japan's social ills is much more interesting than rehashing the old nuking of Hiroshima argument for the umpteenth time.

I'll also note Kat's comments above regarding the hijacking...

There's two threads on Moderation asking for it. Hopefully...

Or, you could actually start a new thread and the argument can move there. Saves work on the mods and it lessens the chance someone gets red texted for continuing the hijack after the first red text about the hijack.

Naw, I haven't lost enough self respect to actually START a Hiroshima/Nagasaki thread.

[North Suran]

If you're going to carry on with your Hiroshima-Nagasaki debate, perhaps move it to a thread which is actually about that subject?