I'm not a historian.But nanking Incident's definition was obviously changed by the Chinese.bossel said:You're obviously not a historian. Many events in history have been named after a place in the vicinity or, as in this case, after a centre of events. What's more "Massacre of Nanjing" is just a label, that doesn't mean that it was only one continuous event in only one strictly defined location. It may very well be a chain of events in a chain or cluster of locations. It all depends on the definition.
One book says the surrounding area is 3 times bigger than the whole Tokyo.It was not easy to go out and kill people just for their desire during their free time.(I don't know whether they had free time or not)bossel said:Hmm, maybe they did it without good reason?
Japanese soldiers roamed the whole area. As Rabe noted there seemed to be a certain lack of discipline.
It is the population of Nanking in the middle of 1930's.bossel said:Here is one source for the number of 1m:
http://www.hxwz.com/njmassacre/nj.html
It does not mention "surrounding area" and most of these kind of website do not either.December 13th, 1937, Nanking fell to the Japanese. In the next six weeks, the Japanese committed the infamous Nanking Massacre, or the Rape of Nanking, during which an estimated 300,000 Chinese soldiers and civilians were killed, and 20,000 women were raped.
Example of the evidence which proves the number of 300,000.bossel said:Example for what?
Yes,they had orders.bossel said:By "military order", you mean the soldiers had orders to kill the POW's? Well, that would only relate to responsibilities. The fact of a massacre would not be touched.
But Robe didn't.Robe never checked unless people asked him to help woman before she had raped.Indeed,the record of Scharfenberg in 10th Feb.1938 says "these incidents have been heard from the Chinese".bossel said:Wrong. They left the safety zone quite often & had a look around.
The Safety Zone Committee recorded only 23 murders (53 people died).bossel said:Suspects? Not only, as it seems. Numerous women have been killed after being raped, numerous men seem to have been killed while trying to stop a rape.
As far as I read the Rabe's diary from 16th Dec. to 17th of Feb.He never accidentally witnessed raping.He saw only 2 attempts of rape when he was asked to help the victims.bossel said:As I said, I had only time to sift through the book & could not thouroughly read it, since I had to return it on Monday. If you're referring to the quote that I got from a website, I haven't found it.
But I have read about numerous instances when Rabe personally witnessed Japanese soldiers raping (or attempts of rape) Chinese women. Whether he himself witnessed killings, I can't say. But when you see Japanese soldiers leading away groups of people, later hear machine guns & then find the bodies of those led away, it's quite easy to assume who killed them.
Please give me the date of that incident.bossel said:What's more, the Japanese sometimes admitted the killings. Eg. in the case of more than 40 workers at a local power station, reason to kill them: the power station was state property.
Luc said:I know some Chinese people and they get so pissed off if someone calls them a Japanese humm I guess this is a reason:
Between December 1937 and March 1938 at least 369,366 Chinese
civilians and prisoners of war were slaughtered by the invading
troops. An estimated 80,000 women and girls were raped; many of
them were then mutilated or murdered.
Thousands of victims were beheaded, burned, bayoneted, buried
alive, or disemboweled.
To this day the Japanese government has refused to apologize for
these and other World War II atrocities, and a significant sector of
Japanese society denies that they took place at all.
evil:
Wrong.It is because you cannot read Japansese article.sabro said:War time Japanese newspapers boasted of large numbers of civillians killed, recounted decapitation contests,
People should never try to rewrite true history.sabro said:I guess my point is that we should never try to rewrite history because we don't like a part of it. This was an aweful chapter that bears remembering and not repeating.
I mentioned the story that Japanese newspaper boasted the number of civilians killed was wrong.bossel said:Sabro, here is one for you regarding the decapitation contest which most probably was not a fabrication, quote:
whatever it's 300,000 or 200,000 that doesn't effect too much I think. still a great number. However, We can take a logically thinking of that JA need to spend more than 6 weeks to clear up that city with a large army... Most people were bury alived( so they can kill more faster?).urecco said:I mentioned the story that Japanese newspaper boasted the number of civilians killed was wrong.
Do not miss the point.
No matter whether the contest of civlians killed had happened,it is wrong history that Japanese newspaper boasted the number of civlians killed.
BTW,could you give me the source of 300,000?
bossel said:Although I doubt that it would satisfy you, since all would be "secondary" sources.
How many people were executed for war crimes in allied nations?sabro said:Only 992 Japanese soldiers were executed for war crimes. Over a Dozen of the "Class A" war criminals are memorialized in the Yasukuni shrine.
urecco said:How many people were executed for war crimes in allied nations?
Sorry, but I have to object. The SU was one of the allies & they invaded Poland just like Germany at the start of the war. Strangely the Western allies didn't care very much for that invasion. The Soviet troops were for a great part just as bad or even worse as the German ones regarding looting, rape & murder.sabro said:The allies [...] did not "wage a war of agression," did not systemetize the looting, rape, and murder of massive civillian population.
bossel said:Sorry, but I have to object. The SU was one of the allies & they invaded Poland just like Germany at the start of the war. Strangely the Western allies didn't care very much for that invasion. The Soviet troops were for a great part just as bad or even worse as the German ones regarding looting, rape & murder.
Not to forget that Stalin was as bad as Hitler, over time he was responsible for even more murders than the latter.
sabro said:But then again the Allied "war crimes" (all of which were defined ex post facto and do not include aerial bombardment of civillian populations, or the use of nuclear weapons) pale in comparison to the attrocities committed by Japan and Germany.
Not quite so. At the time of the invasion in 1931 both Japan & China were members of the League of Nations. Article 10 of its covenant says:urecco said:On the contrast,to invade other contries was not illegal.
That's because it's an estimate. For me the origins are hard to trace because the East Asia Institute at my university is rather small & the attached library not really bigger. Hence I didn't find very much, the best I can come up with is Honda Katsuichi's The Nanjing Massacre. Actually a very good book, as it seems, but he doesn't do his own evaluation of victim numbers. Yet he sums my thoughts about pretty well up (since I don't really understand why this 300,000 number matters so much for you; whether 40,000 or 400,000, it's still a massacre):What I want to emphasise is that even bossel and sabro ,who know lots of things about Nanking Massacre, can't show immediately the sourse of 300,000 killed and any websites don't either.
Yes, there are enough people who are actually proud of their deeds. Happened in Germany, Japan, all over the world.Many websites use the pictures of masscre.But there is no reason Japanese Army allow people to take picture of murder.
Do you know any pictures of murder?
They didn't want foreigners as witnesses for massacres. When you keep the evidence in your hands, it's easier to later go & say that nothing happened.Rabe mentioned Japanese Army hadn't wanted to be seen when they had executed.How could they take pictures?
I don't mean that it was alright to invade.but it was not illegal.bossel said:Even if that wouldn't be the case, I don't think it is considered alright to invade other countries just because you feel like it.
First of all,I said about 40,000 killed.But everyone denied.bossel said:That's because it's an estimate. For me the origins are hard to trace because the East Asia Institute at my university is rather small & the attached library not really bigger. Hence I didn't find very much, the best I can come up with is Honda Katsuichi's The Nanjing Massacre. Actually a very good book, as it seems, but he doesn't do his own evaluation of victim numbers. Yet he sums my thoughts about pretty well up (since I don't really understand why this 300,000 number matters so much for you; whether 40,000 or 400,000, it's still a massacre):
Hata's number includes the killing of prisoners and suspects of guerillas.bossel said:Between these extremes, we find the 300,000 claimed by the City of Nanjing; or 200,000 soldiers and civilians, excluding battlefield deaths (Hora Tomio). Among the lower estimates are 38,000 to 42,000 (Hata Ikuhiko) or 3,000 to 6,000 (Unemoto Masami), but what the lower estimates have in common is that they do not include the killing of prisoners and surrendered soldiers as part of the massacre. Yoshida Hiroshi estimates that at least a hundred thousand soldiers and civilians were killed, excluding those who died on the battlefield. I have not made my own estimates or investigations of these figures, but to me the most problematic point is where to draw the geographical boundaries of the atrocities.
No.At that time,Japanese policy was equality of human beings.bossel said:Yes, there are enough people who are actually proud of their deeds. Happened in Germany, Japan, all over the world.
Many Japanese soldiers were obviously not really ashamed for killing Untermenschen.
Then why there are many pictures?bossel said:They didn't want foreigners as witnesses for massacres. When you keep the evidence in your hands, it's easier to later go & say that nothing happened.
Who wanted to show off committing raping?bossel said:Furthermore, it is rather probable that the higher in command an officer was, the more he wanted to keep the record clean, while the lower the rank (& perhaps education) the more they wanted to show off their "superiority" (that's just my guess, though).
This massacre was executing POWs and I have admitted that.bossel said:Finally, in the attachment 2 pics (which you will probably believe to be faked) - a beheading with Japanese soldiers standing around & corpses on the banks of the River Yangzi - & the account by a Japanese soldier of one of the massacres.
urecco said:What I want to emphasise is that even bossel and sabro ,who know lots of things about Nanking Massacre, can't show immediately the sourse of 300,000 killed and any websites don't either.
Many websites use the pictures of masscre.But there is no reason Japanese Army allow people to take picture of murder.
Do you know any pictures of murder?
Rabe mentioned Japanese Army hadn't wanted to be seen when they had executed.How could they take pictures?
At that time,cameras were very expensive,so not many people had cameras.
If they had taken pictures,they would have been used on newspapers.During the war,China propagated Japanese war crimes or brutality.It was totally unreasonable not to use the photoes in Nanking if they had them.How many of these photoes were used timely?
According to Robe,the population of Nanking Peace are was about 200,000 and it increase in 250,000.And there were almost nobody outside of the Peace area.Robe told Hitler that foreigners thought from 50,000 to 60,000 civilians were killed,because the group called 紅卍会 had buried less than 200 corpses a day,but there were still 30,000 corpses bisides the river.sabro said:I stick to mainstream sources, like most of the internet ones that turn up when you type in "Nanking Massacre" Unless there is some reason to doubt the "official" account, that run of the mill, everyday, pedestrian version of history is what I stay with. Urecco, the ball is in your court. If you want to challenge the mainstream version, the burden of proof is yours.
Then what are the sourses of these books.sabro said:Where I get my information:.
Why they use pictures with wrong citations?sabro said:Your logic about the photos is flawed. the Photos were taken by Japanese soldiers (a few of whom owned expensive cameras) and printed in Japanese newspapers of the day. (some citations were wrong then, others have been used out of context since then) but there are hundreds and hundreds more.
You or Honda means 30,000 Chinese civilans were slaughtered in one day?sabro said:The numbers: many have spoken about how difficult it is to come up with accurate numbers when the scale of murder is so massive. Some reason that 300,000 is too high because of nanking's pre invasion population. Estimates of Nanking's 1937 population range from 200,000 to 600,000. Others say that the deaths were primarily military. Chinese military deaths in that area range from about 30,000 to over 100,000 (the difficulty is that Japanese sources counted any male of military age as a combatant.) One Japanese newspaper (cited in Honda's book) boasted of 30,000 chinese slaughtered in Nanking in one day. (I have to look this up, I can't confirm it). anyway, all of this supports a much higher number than you (Urreco) seem to want to believe..
Japan had not been member of the League of Nations,before WWII broke up.sabro said:Invading another country was illegal by Japans ratification of the League of Nations Charter. I hope it still is today.
Besides last one,those photoes were taken by the Japanese and originally used in Japanese books or newspapers with other explainations.So they can't be proof of being marched to a rape camp,burning the houses,or looting.sabro said:Urecco-
Photo logic:
The women weren't being marched to a rape camp-- only to nice vacation huts. You can tell by the mickey mouse ears they are wearing. (wishful thinking) The tank is too new, (this is obviously from an attrocity later in the invasion.)
The Soldiers are shopping.(You can tell by the gift bags) The Sword and the dead man's head is too clean. Corpses and soldiers are always dirty on old grainy photos. Does this make sense to anyone? Is it less of an attrocity if the victims were soldiers executed under some order, or soldiers that drowned trying to get away?
Were any British policians executed for invading all over the world?sabro said:Are you trying to say that invading another country and killing hundreds of thousands, if not tens of millions was bad, but not deserving of the death penalty?.
Wang said:I can name a list of houses China went to and did bad things to them in the past.
The Japanese government has up to now payed over 6 trillion yen to the PRC alone and still has the ODA program (Japan's Official Development Assistance).
I don't want to waste time telling my opinion about the screwed up land (read prison) called the People's Republic of China.
If you reply do it in english so everybody understands... ;-) from the text above I can see you are one of those fools who thinks Japan is the all evildoer, and China didn't do anything bac right??wake the fk up !!!! The crimes China committed in the past aren't that nice either..so stop blaming other countries.What happened happened...you didn't suffer from it, so why the hell get upset with it???If you can't say anything sane please leave the forum before your *** gets banned....thank you very much !!Sam said:打心眼里瞧不起[日本人]!!!用中国的汉字,中国的文化,连你们文字发音都类似与中国汉语,你们却欺师灭祖, 在中国犯下灭绝人寰的滔天罪行,并且厚颜无耻地觉得自己民族优越,现在告诉你:日本大和民族是世界上最劣等的民族,因为你们不敢承认自己犯下的错误,还有什么颜面活在人世???你认为你经济强大就不可一世了吗?告诉你,中国马上就会超越你们,我们一定可以战胜你们!!!