Tokis-Phoenix said:I think no one here can deny that the nanking masacre happened and it was a mass scale brutal, barbaric and unimaginably cruel act, crueler than cruel, it was evil to its core. During that time, the japanese not only became animals in their ways, but worse than animals.
lexico said:Wrong again, McTojo; you are being anachronistic by confusing Modern Japan of today and Imperial Japan who committed the brutalities. Tokis-Phoenix was capable of identifying the subhuman, animal behaviour in the Massacring troops on dispatch from IJ; but do you not ?
Please answer this, and all the other 6 fine points I raised, McTojo, 7 in all.
So, I wasn't the first person to use the term animallexico said:In fact you are the first member on this forum, as far as I can serach under key 'animal,' to call any nation 'animal.' In fact you have just insulted the Chinese as well as the Japanese by your name calling. Please explain yourself, for I do not believe your language behaviour is acceptable on this forum, McTojo.
McTojo said:nd the Japanese don't need China's forgiveness because China had been just as hypocrical and animalistic as Japan in her past against the poor monks and nuns in Tibet.
Maciamo said:I am not sure if you realise the difference of scale here. The population of Tibet is 500x smaller than Han China. Today's population is 2.5 million against 1.2 billion Han Chinese, and the proportion was the same 60 years ago, before China invaded Tibet. So, even had the Chinese anihilated completely the 1.2 million Tibetan in 1950 (which they didn't do), that would have been about 1/10th of the number of Chinese killed by the Japanese. The number of Tibetan killed by the Chinese is probably smaller than the number of Chinese killed only in Nanjing.
Technically you were. Tokis-Phoenix used 'animals' in the plural for Imperial Japanese Army in Nanjing of 1937. You are using it in the singular adjectival form of 'animalistic' for Modern Japanese of the now. Two differences that make for a huge difference which you fail to see. Please proceed with your 7 answers ?McTojo said:[ So, I wasn't the first person to use the term animal
If you've read my post regarding the Tibetans, you know where to go to post your point.McTojo said:Murder is murder Maciamo and no matter how statistically you crunch the numbers it does not justify China's past aggressions.
I've done the service of repeating that link for you.lexico said:Please direct all non-Nanjing Massacre topics to Chinese atrocities as you are straying from topic again. I have stated clearly the Tibet argument has no place here.
McTojo said:Are you becoming over emotional Lexicon...
McTojo said:You are way too emotional and you need to stop with the Japan bashing.
lexico said:Please prove your claim with proper evidence and argumentation as per accepted rules of logic, first by defining emotional, by demonstrating that member Tokis Phoenix is being emotional, and by proving that you, McTojo, are not.
And the Japanese don't need China's forgiveness because China had been just as hypocrical and animalistic as Japan in her past against the poor monks and nuns in Tibet. You have human rights issues that you haven't even touched upon either. Japan does NOT need you to forgive her.
Even if China chooses to hold a grudge then fine because it doesn't change anything.
You sound like Nanking was the worst atrocity every committed. Again, it's people like you who exaggerate things to the point where it starts to sound absurd. When you compare the sufferings of other peoples in other nations during different times in history Nanking doesn't even come close.
Dave, a poor boy in the South, desperately wants a gun, which a storeowner offers to sell him for two dollars. Dave asks his mother for the money. She agrees to the purchase because Dave's father needs a gun. Dave buys the gun and is fascinated by it. Plowing the fields the next morning, he decides to shoot the gun. To his horror, he unintentionally shoots and kills the mule he is working with. Later that day a crowd gathers to bury the mule and investigates what happened. Dave tells the others that the mule died because it impaled itself on the point of the plow. It becomes clear that Dave shot the mule, and the crowd mocks him. Dave must pay for the mule with two years of free labor. That night, Dave hops a train out of town, taking the gun with him, telling himself that he is going somewhere where he can be a man.
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:
McTojo said:You are way too emotional and you need to stop with the Japan bashing. What happened over sixty years ago is history and Japan should not pay out any more ODA money. And the Japanese don't need China's forgiveness because China had been just as hypocrical and animalistic as Japan in her past against the poor monks and nuns in Tibet. You have human rights issues that you haven't even touched upon either. Japan does NOT need you to forgive her. Even if China chooses to hold a grudge then fine because it doesn't change anything. You sound like Nanking was the worst atrocity every committed. Again, it's people like you who exaggerate things to the point where it starts to sound absurd. When you compare the sufferings of other peoples in other nations during different times in history Nanking doesn't even come close. Do the math from 1937-1938 Nanking Occurred; 300,000 purportedly died , but of course every year that figure rises ! Do the honorable thing by first stating unbaised facts !
Hyde_is_my_anti-drug said:I intend to read it over once I have some time. I was just hoping for a simple answer to my question, if it was true or not about the apologizing issue. *shrugs* Oh well.
Hyde_is_my_anti-drug said:I just thought that the nation itself had apologized but I'm not sure.
bluubear said:Hi Hyde, I can't remember off the top of my head, but I don't think any of Japan's apologies were very specific. They were more along the lines of Japan regrets the suffering and misery that it cause during the war, etc.
Even if Japan did specifically apologise regarding the Raping of Nanking, I can understand why China may not have accepted - if the apology were sincere, then any denial of history should've been outlawed by now.
Searching through Wikipedia Japanese regarding
Rape of Nanking, they are many academics in Japan who acknowledge that the massacre did occur, the centre of argument is more regarding how many people actually died (on that issue I don't think we'd ever know). What strikes me though is that quite a few Japanese academics (professors, honourable professors, etc) totally deny the occurrence of the massacre.
虐殺否定説・まぼろし説
一般的に否定派、まぼろし派、虐殺なかった派などと呼ばれる。ここでは否定説に統一する。主な研究者は鈴木明（雑誌記者）、田中正明 （拓殖大学講師）、東中野修道（亜細亜大学教授）、冨澤繁信（日本「南京」学会理事）、阿羅健一（近現代史研究家）、勝岡寛次（明星大学戦後教育史研究センター）、杉山徹宗（明海大学教授）、渡部昇一（上智大学名誉教授）、大原康男（國學院大學教授）、竹本忠雄（筑波大学名誉教授）、西岡香織（軍事史学会会員）、深田匠（日本歴史修正協議会会長）、前野徹、鈴木正男などが挙げられる。
So to this day, I still don't think any apology made is as sincere as it should be - it's not just words people are after, it's more the actions - outlaw any attempts to rewrite history!
lastmagi said:As an aside, that's what I love about JREF. We love Japan but we're willing to criticize it where it needs to be criticized. There are, of course, always those who feel that criticism=bashing, when in fact the very rejection and denial of reasoned criticism actually inspires more anger among those with valid complaints and raises questions about the maturity of that who was criticized.
Luc said:I know some Chinese people and they get so pissed off if someone calls them a Japanese
Whatever I say, I think you will believe what you learnt from your textbooks or whatever.Martialartsnovice said:To Urreco, I want to say this: You are entitled to what you choose to think or believe. But as for the idea of revisionist theories entering textbooks, I think theres enough of that in schools today as it is. People are being lied to, and its sad. If people today and in future generations cannot learn from history, whats to keep us from repeating the same mistakes.
Any nation that cant learn from its past, is in a world of hurt.
To qoute bluubear: History can be forgiven but not forgotten