Hello!
I am very intruiged by Origami's point of view. To make it clear: I do not support his view, but I think everyone is entitled to an opinion, and his is clear and.. Well, controversial to say the least.
I haven't had the time the read all the posts, so let me ask you a few question on your first post, if that's ok Origami?
Now, I've the read the report to which you have provided us a link. You use it as some sort of evidence to make us believe that the "comfort women" were prostitutes, and were not recruited by force. However, the report states:
Other reports show the "comfort girls" have been found wherever it was necessary for the Japanese Army to fight.
Which pretty much means that in other cases the Japanese did force girls to provide "services". It is therefore not truthful to make a generalized statement about this issue based on this report alone.
Also, it says that:
On the basis of these false representations many girls enlisted for overseas duty and were rewarded with an advance of a few hundred yen.
False representations? Doesn't seem like a fair deal does it? And besides that:
Many "masters" made life very difficult for the girls by charging them high prices for food and other articles.
Hm.. I fail to see how one could perceive this as "normal" prostitution.
If I may put this debate into a bit of perspective, even if it was very common to prostitute at that time, that doesn't mean that Japan hadn't done anything wrong. Wrongful conduct is often recognized only in hindsight; at the time it might have seemed like a normal thing to do, but it can still be recognized as a crime against humanity later.
For example, take the whole slavery business in between Europe/Africa/America. At the time it was pretty common to recognize negroid people as "lesser beings" and treat them as slaves. Moreover, the Africans themselves seemed to cooperate; a Ghanian historian Akosua Adoma Perbi has said that "slavery became an important part of the Asante state right from its inception" and that after abolition, in 1872, the king of Asante wrote to the British monarch asking for the slave trade to be renewed. [Source=The Economist, February 24 Issue, p59-61]
So even though there was some participation from the African side, as many families sold their childeren "willingly" it is still considered "wrong" to trade slaves. That is because we as human beings have, starting in the Enlightenment period, striving for a more liberal (free) and equality-based global society. This is what is considered "normal". I say "willingly" because many were having financial troubles or were lured under false representations.. Sound familiar?
Now, the Japanese have done some things during WWII, which are considered now as inhumane, according to these priciples of basic human rights. Although the magnitude of the problem is certainly debateable, there is little doubt as to the wrongful conduct of Japanese occupiers in Asia during WWII.
PS: I find the facts about the US "amusement house" in Japan and the UN's request for similar services in South Korea very interesting. Do you have any reliable sources for that? I am also quite stunned by your story about the Dutch prostitutes. I wish to see some sources for that too if you will. Thanks in advance.