Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsuwabuki
The interesting thing is that I learned all of this in Japan, not in America. You think I would have, as this is definitely a part of the end of the war that Americans can be proud of.
I first learned of this in the Japan Times. Following that, I found out that Kyoto is pretty darn liberal and peace-loving, and my students go to Okinawa each year to visit the beaches and reflect on what the Japanese people did to the Okinawan people. The most amazing part is how the students come back recognising this as well. I've spoken to a few after the trips each year, and they tend to agree with the Okinawans. It is interesting how they can manage to discuss the issue with an American at all.
Finally, I learned a lot about it because the Hiroshima Peace Memorial is really, really balanced. It doesn't have too great a bias in any direction. It talks about Okinawa and how as horrible as nuclear bombs were, there was a sense that America was able to point to the actions of Japanese commanders in Okinawa and say, "Look, look. If we invade the country by traditional means, we won't be able to stop the fighting until we've killed a large portion of the population." While America certainly had ulterior motives like scaring the Soviet Union in their own backyard to prevent the spread of communism, it is true that the "Death with Honor" strategy meant that America certainly could claim justification when it said that the body count of a traditional invasion would simply be too high.
In the past few years Japan has done a lot of self-reflection, and I think the younger generation realises that Japanese history is a lot more complex than the older generations would some times like to believe. I see progress, and it can only help make the world a more peaceful place.
|
Really? You though it was balanced. I didn't really think it was that balanced, I definitely saw more biased towards the Japanese side. Which is understandable considering what happened there. But I never really saw where they blamed themselves for anything if full. They kind of skippied over the details of the wrong things they did. They played the role of the victim and played it off like the US did this horrible thing they didn't deserve. Now Im not defending the dropping of the bomb, becuase it was a horrible thing. But going through that museum I felt even worse becuase it felt very one sided. This is basically what I felt like the museum was saying: Japan- "We did some things in the time of war." "But then the overzealous Americans came and bombed our innocent country for no reason". Now this could have something to do with going to other museums first to compare to the Hiroshima museum to but I'm not sure. I went to the Kyoto peace museum first and though that that was very neutral. While the Hiroshima museum seemed to play the victim throughout. The Kyoto one took more of the side that warfare is bad in general. I learned a lot of things that happened in Japan throughout that time that I had never heard of. And I though I knew a decent amount. I saw a lot of things both US and Japan did during WWII at the Kyoto one, and the a lot of the bad things Japan did were missing at the Hiroshima one.