Thirty Years after WWII, Who Won -

TuskCracker · 4 Sep 2007

Thirty Years after WWII, Who Won -

Some say, Japan, emerged in the long-term, the winner. Their country rebuilt and by 1980's was considered to take over the world, economically

I bet Tokyo is more modern than any large city in United States. Tokyo was completely rebuilt.

Some would say I am callous, to all the civilians that died in the bombings of Japanese cities. Also ignoring the huge poverty and chaos that Japan was after 1945.

My point is, 30 years later and more (1975 and on into the 1980's), Japan seemed to be number 1.

The7thSamurai · 4 Sep 2007

Huh? You might want to look into who was actually fighting who. The Japanese government at the time was a military government, but after the war most of the leaders were either executed or expelled from public life forever. So I think it's fair to say that Japan totally lost.

The7thSamurai · 4 Sep 2007

Just to add a bit more...the reason Japan was so prosperous after the War was because of massive US investment. The US, afterall, had access to an entire country. The success of Japan made the US extraordinarily rich.

A ke bono kane kotto · 4 Sep 2007

Huh ?? It's 62 years that the war is finished. Who cares what the situation was 30 years after or 32 years after ? Now it is China that could take over the world economically.

TuskCracker · 6 Sep 2007

the reason Japan was so prosperous after the War was because of massive US investment.

My point is made. Japan became prosperous. By the 1980's Japan was seen to take dominate the worlde economically. So did Japan really lose WW-II.

Geostigma · 6 Sep 2007

JackInBox said:
My point is made. Japan became prosperous. By the 1980's Japan was seen to take dominate the worlde economically. So did Japan really lose WW-II.

I wouldn't say Japan is "dominating" the world economy. They are second to the United States which has nearly 4 times their GDP.

Ewok85 · 6 Sep 2007

And I wouldn't say that "appearing prosperous" is a good way of judging the economic situation. As it was the qualitity of life 30 years ago was far lower than it was now, and nowhere near that of the US, and the economy is a real mess.

senseiman · 7 Sep 2007

Tokyo is no more "modern" than New York or a number of other American cities. Moreover I would say without a doubt that the quality of life in most American cities is way better than it is in Tokyo.

I fail to see the point in this thread. Japan lost the war, end of story.

Even accepting the notion that because Japan achieved high economic growth after the war they didn't "lose" the war, it still doesn't mean that they "won". Japan has never, before or after the war, come anywhere close to rivalling the US as a world power.

uyoku · 7 Sep 2007

senseiman said:
Tokyo is no more "modern" than New York or a number of other American cities. Moreover I would say without a doubt that the quality of life in most American cities is way better than it is in Tokyo.
I fail to see the point in this thread. Japan lost the war, end of story.
Even accepting the notion that because Japan achieved high economic growth after the war they didn't "lose" the war, it still doesn't mean that they "won". Japan has never, before or after the war, come anywhere close to rivalling the US as a world power.

I am sorry but you are mistaken, do you know where the biggest metropolitan area in the world is? Damn right it is Tokyo, bigger than New York. what do you mean the quality of life, in NYC Guiliani had to clean it up like the Bronx and Harlem and other places in NY and it is more dangerous to live and the quality of life sucks in the usa there is such disparity in the usa. japanese have a good quality of life and they live the longest to a ripe old age than any nation in the world.
did you know the biggest military and i say once again military surrender in world history was the americans and british and other allies to the japanese during WWII and hence the Bataan death march.
Calling america a world power why then the stalemate in Korea and the lose in Vietnam each one small nation. go figure yeah world power huh. now in Iraq now one small muslim nation and cant seem to resolve the issue as a modern day world power, yeah the usa has its head up its ***.

w1ngzer0 · 7 Sep 2007

argh, i can't reply i keep going on random tangents. Between the nukes and suicide bombers, usa protecting japan from asia, the economic boom of japan from the usa coming in. Japan won economic wise, USA won war wise. the united states has been on a downhill slide in the economic department since Vietnam.

caster51 · 7 Sep 2007

I think the problem is what was obtained by the war.

Japan obtained enormous things as a result.

what about other country?
1Colony independence
2Misery of war
3Economic development

If Japan can export wepons, it woud be richer....

caster51 · 7 Sep 2007

Nixon Shock
Nixon shock - Wikipedia

i think it was a kind of declaration of defeat against Japan for manufacture

and

Many of technologies of manufacturing are brushed up in the trial and error by
the manufacturing premise.

The United States technology cannot be upgraded without having the factory in the
United States.

Japan has many of high technologies related to manufacturing such as devices of
manufacturing an industrial robot and the semiconductor.

The industrial technology that the United States has is limited to a part of very
field such as defenses and the medicines.

usa alway needs tha Japanese manufacturing devices though USA has high technology.

senseiman · 8 Sep 2007

uyoku said:
I am sorry but you are mistaken, do you know where the biggest metropolitan area in the world is? Damn right it is Tokyo, bigger than New York.

I didn't say Tokyo wasn't bigger than New York, I said it wasn't more modern. "Bigger" does not equal "more modern". I don't necessarily mean that it is less modern, but I don't think Tokyo is more modern than most American cities.

uyoku said:
what do you mean the quality of life, in NYC Guiliani had to clean it up like the Bronx and Harlem and other places in NY and it is more dangerous to live and the quality of life sucks in the usa there is such disparity in the usa. japanese have a good quality of life and they live the longest to a ripe old age than any nation in the world.

I wasn't comparing the quality of life of Japanese in general, I was comparing the quality of life between Tokyo and New York (or other American cities). In Tokyo people live in tiny places they pay obscene prices for, have to commute 2 hours each way to work, have no parks or green space to speak of etc etc. I'm not saying New York is a paradise (I've never lived there), but I think people probably can enjoy a better day to day lifestyle there.

The story in the rest of Japan is different. Smaller cities and the countryside in Japan can be quite pleasant places to live and I would rather live there than in New York or any other major US city. But Tokyo I would avoid like the plague.

uyoku said:
did you know the biggest military and i say once again military surrender in world history was the americans and british and other allies to the japanese during WWII and hence the Bataan death march.

I'm not sure how this is relevant, but there were several million Japanese and German men under arms at the times of their surrenders in August and May of 1945, which would dwarf the number of American soldiers who surrendered in the Philipines.

uyoku said:
Calling america a world power why then the stalemate in Korea and the lose in Vietnam each one small nation. go figure yeah world power huh. now in Iraq now one small muslim nation and cant seem to resolve the issue as a modern day world power, yeah the usa has its head up its ***.

Well, in economic terms they are the largest world power, the US controls about 25% of the world's wealth, about 4 times as much as the second largest (Japan).

TuskCracker · 8 Sep 2007

Tokyo is no more "modern" than New York or a number of other American cities

Tokyo's public transportation; looks faster, cleaner, very comphrenseve and more modern than anywhere else in the world.

New York City subways, are old and slow. They work, and are cheap, but modern they are not.

senseiman · 8 Sep 2007

TuskCracker said:
Tokyo's public transportation; looks faster, cleaner, very comphrenseve and more modern than anywhere else in the world.
New York City subways, are old and slow. They work, and are cheap, but modern they are not.

Japan's train system is second to none. But that doesn't make the whole of Tokyo more "modern" than New York. It would be easy to make a list of things that Tokyo has which are more "modern" than in New York but then you could pretty much do the same thing with things in New York that are more "modern" than in Tokyo.

w1ngzer0 · 8 Sep 2007

oh god, don't even bring up New York. The people that think they are the center of the world. Both cities have their problems but, are Tokyo folks more polite then people in new york? probobly.

JimmySeal · 8 Sep 2007

New York City subways, are old and slow. They work, and are cheap, but modern they are not.

I'll take a $2 ride from The Bronx to Brooklyn in a slightly grimy subway over a $7 ride to travel one mile anyday. That's quality living.

Ewok85 · 8 Sep 2007

uyoku said:
I am sorry but you are mistaken, do you know where the biggest metropolitan area in the world is? Damn right it is Tokyo, bigger than New York.

Your name fits Just because Tokyo has the most people crammed in makes it better?

what do you mean the quality of life, in NYC Guiliani had to clean it up like the Bronx and Harlem and other places in NY and it is more dangerous to live and the quality of life sucks in the usa there is such disparity in the usa.

I would think living conditions, ease of living and transport, size of homes, amount of greenery and parks, quality and quantity of essential facilities (hospitals, schools etc), as well as how safe people feel and how much they "like" it.

New York beats in many of these areas without breaking a sweat.

did you know the biggest military and i say once again military surrender in world history was the americans and british and other allies to the japanese during WWII and hence the Bataan death march.

Not true as the German surrender was larger, and the Japanese surrender was probably larger still. As far as I can remember the allies who surrendered were mainly US infantry - maybe you are confusing it with Hong Kong and Singapore eh?

Ultraman · 8 Sep 2007

caster51 said:
If Japan can export wepons, it woud be richer....

Can't let this quote get away...
If Japan manufactured weapons... this country would be filthy rich! Reliable, high quality, moderate price...

Cars and weapons. The difference is no pesky trade agreements with weapons. Cash on the barrel head.

If Japan won anything from WWII, it was a long vacation from combat death. Every other nation in asia has some border issue simmering away, with soldiers dying at irregular intervals. What a peaceful nation this is.

What a topsy turvy world when the defeated live in safety and peace, while the victors have the hounds of hell snapping at their feet daily...

w1ngzer0 · 9 Sep 2007

not to sound clueless. But, does USA sell military grade weapons to random nations? Or only allied nations?

Thanks

uyoku · 9 Sep 2007

senseiman said:
I didn't say Tokyo wasn't bigger than New York, I said it wasn't more modern. "Bigger" does not equal "more modern". I don't necessarily mean that it is less modern, but I don't think Tokyo is more modern than most American cities.
I wasn't comparing the quality of life of Japanese in general, I was comparing the quality of life between Tokyo and New York (or other American cities). In Tokyo people live in tiny places they pay obscene prices for, have to commute 2 hours each way to work, have no parks or green space to speak of etc etc. I'm not saying New York is a paradise (I've never lived there), but I think people probably can enjoy a better day to day lifestyle there.
The story in the rest of Japan is different. Smaller cities and the countryside in Japan can be quite pleasant places to live and I would rather live there than in New York or any other major US city. But Tokyo I would avoid like the plague.
I'm not sure how this is relevant, but there were several million Japanese and German men under arms at the times of their surrenders in August and May of 1945, which would dwarf the number of American soldiers who surrendered in the Philipines.
Well, in economic terms they are the largest world power, the US controls about 25% of the world's wealth, about 4 times as much as the second largest (Japan).

With a larger metropolis area, more technological advancement is required for the logistics and operation of a sprawling city. You use the word "modern" loosely. Tokyo is a intricate network of people and NYC is by far less modern with its dilapidated old buildings because Tokyo was remade after all the bombings in WWII. NYC is a hodge podge of old and new mixtures. Tokyo still perserves the ancient buildings and castles and what is the oldest building in NYC anyways, it is falling apart. yeah you can only think about things because you never been to NYC so how can you make such comments without first hand knowledge so your opinion is quite trivial.
Saying most AMERICA cities are modern cuz you would have to include South America too. Tokyo is the most modern city in the world, so since you are so knowledgeable define "modern" and how NYC is more modern? Tokyo is cramped but if you have enough disposable income, you can live in a castle in the heart of Tokyo. If you can afford it you can live in a nice and spacious area if you are rich. If you dont have money then you will probably live miserably in Tokyo and wont enjoy the creature comforts of a metropolis.

Talk about commuting, the USA is hardly on time with their trains, planes and automobiles. Japan is the on time machine. some people commute 3 or more hours in the USA.

Tokyo is a lot more safer than NYC and you dont have to live in fear like you do in NYC, here is good movie for you to see "The Brave One" and it talks about the lifestyle of NYC.

uyoku · 9 Sep 2007

Ewok85 said:
Your name fits Just because Tokyo has the most people crammed in makes it better?
I would think living conditions, ease of living and transport, size of homes, amount of greenery and parks, quality and quantity of essential facilities (hospitals, schools etc), as well as how safe people feel and how much they "like" it.

New York beats in many of these areas without breaking a sweat.
Not true as the German surrender was larger, and the Japanese surrender was probably larger still. As far as I can remember the allies who surrendered were mainly US infantry - maybe you are confusing it with Hong Kong and Singapore eh?

NYC has crammed people too if you can afford it you can live in a castle if you can, those that cant afford it live in cramped quarters and the same in NYC but you probably live in a hovel rather than a hotel.

So your telling me that it is safer on the streets of NYC than Japan? give me a break. you probably never lived in NYC either, there are all these muggings and burglaries and thefts.

Mars Man · 10 Sep 2007

Gentlemen, I sugguest that the idea presented by the OP is a matter of endless debate, in the even of there not being any set parameters on a few definitions, or terms, and perogatives. For those who wish to wander off into that jungle, may the perplexing simplicity of Ying and Yang be with you !!

Otherwise, as for New York City. . . yes, I have lived just next door, I have stolled her streets and have seen her sights and lifstyle. I have never lived in Tokyo, but have been there enough. They are both nice places in their own and peculiar ways. I do not think there would be any advancement of the OP by arguing ones having modernity over the other, so would hope that the present string be left as it is on that point.

As far as winning a war goes--any war--I would define it as a matter of militarily neutralizing an opponent. . . as a point in time matter. (that means something at a fixed point in time that may or may not continue as is) In taking this definition to be the most correct for the concept of 'win a war,' it is historically correct to say that the American Government defeated the Japanese Government at that point in time.

Taiko666 · 10 Sep 2007

uyoku said:
and hence the Bataan death march.

Do you think the Bataan Death March is something to be proud of?

senseiman · 10 Sep 2007

uyoku said:
With a larger metropolis area, more technological advancement is required for the logistics and operation of a sprawling city. You use the word "modern" loosely. Tokyo is a intricate network of people and NYC is by far less modern with its dilapidated old buildings because Tokyo was remade after all the bombings in WWII. NYC is a hodge podge of old and new mixtures. Tokyo still perserves the ancient buildings and castles and what is the oldest building in NYC anyways, it is falling apart. yeah you can only think about things because you never been to NYC so how can you make such comments without first hand knowledge so your opinion is quite trivial.

Have you ever even been to Tokyo or Japan???? Pretty much all the cities are a mix of dilapidated old buildings interspersed with a bunch of new ones. Even in Tokyo, which was destroyed during the war BUT the early post-war reconstruction was carried out at a time when Japan was still quite poor and the stuff put up during the late 1940s/1950s is pretty damned bad. The number of ancient buildings being preseved in Tokyo (or just about any Japanese city, even Kyoto) is miniscule. The famous sites get preserved while neighborhoods full of Machiya get bulldozed and replaced with cheap ugly pre-fab junk.

I picked NY as a random example. The same arguments hold true for just about any city.

uyoku said:
Saying most AMERICA cities are modern cuz you would have to include South America too. Be specific, just say the USA cuz you want us to think Canada is part of the USA but it aint.

I used America as an example because the person who started this thread was American and I was attempting to draw an analogy using subject matter that was familiar to him.

uyoku said:
Tokyo is the most modern city in the world, so since you are so knowledgeable define "modern" and how NYC is more modern?

Read what I said. I specifically said I DON"T THINK NEW YORK IS MORE MODERN THAN TOKYO, I JUST DON"T THINK TOKYO IS MORE MODERN THAN NEW YORK. My whole frigging point has been that the term "modern" as used by the original poster, is ill-defined and I don't think you can say one city is more "modern" than the other.

uyoku said:
If you can afford it you can live in a nice and spacious area if you are rich. If you dont have money then you will probably live miserably in Tokyo and wont enjoy the creature comforts of a metropolis.

Yup, if you are rich you can live in a nice and spacious part of the city. In most other cities you don't need to be rich to live in a nice part of the city, so to me that is a big minus of living in Tokyo.

Whether I'm rich or poor is none of your business and if you insult me like that again I will identify you to the moderators as a troll who needs to be banned. This is a nice board where people have civil discussions and don't get personal.

Thirty Years after WWII, Who Won -

後輩

Master of the Universe

Master of the Universe

後輩

後輩

Sempai

先輩

先輩

Rock you like a hurricane

後輩

後輩

後輩

先輩

後輩

先輩

後輩

Tubthumper

先輩

Regular Coke

後輩

Rock you like a hurricane

Rock you like a hurricane

先輩

先輩

先輩

Similar threads