4 ms·

The crime against humanity was the government of Japan's actions over several decades, culminating in WW II. Here's a light introduction to some of the atrocit

The crime against humanity was the government of Japan's actions over several decades, culminating in WW II. Here's a light introduction to some of the atrocities committed by the criminals in this government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes Once these criminals attacked the US in Hawaii and the Philippines, it set a series of events in motion. Their unwillingness to stop their criminal activities was eventually met with decisive force. If you want to blame anyone, blame the government of Japan.

sydd 8y ago
The other being guilty does not acquit you from a crime. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were an act of genocide, there is nothing that makes this OK.
- tomohawk 8y ago
  They were stopped. The criminal activities ceased. Japan is a completely different country today. It's not the fault of the US that the government of Japan militarized their whole society and literally made the whole of the country a military target.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    Well, it's somebody's fault. Japan wanted to be left alone. Western powers took it to war to force it to their will. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakumatsu#Foreign_frictions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakumatsu#Foreign_frictions
    - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
      > Japan wanted to be left alone. Yeah, left alone to create the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperity_Sphere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperit...). You're welcome to ask the various Asian nations of that region whether they thought that was a good thing but I doubt you'd like the response.
      - coldtea 8y ago
        That's after the West pushed it to break isolationism and taught it it had to be ruthless to be respected, not before. In other words, that's a century later...
        ThrowawayR2 8y ago
        Ah, the classic "But he hit me first" argument[0]. Very persuasive. /s [0] Also known as the "two wrongs make a right" fallacy. See https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/177/Two-Wrongs-Make-a-Right https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla...
  - clarkmoody 8y ago
    > literally made the whole of the country a military target This is exactly the sort of collectivist thinking that makes it possible to have WWIII. When you can disregard fundamental human dignity based on the actions of a government, you've already lost.
- thomasfedb 8y ago
  That's a very absolute statement that will almost certainly break down under some real or conceivable hypothetical situation.
coldtea 8y ago
>Once these criminals attacked the US in Hawaii and the Philippines Wait, maybe rewind this a little? I know that the European settlers that created the US took the continental land from the natives, but how did they end up with claims to Hawaii and the Philippines in the first place?
- tomohawk 8y ago
  Whataboutism? Really? Please stay on topic.
  - cribbles 8y ago
    The topic was the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima by the USA being "a horrific crime against humanity."[1] Your response was "what about Japanese war crimes?" Please stay on topic. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18540748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18540748
    - tomohawk 8y ago
      Sure, let's play whatabout. What if the US wasn't there in the Philippines or Hawaii? Then Japan would have taken them over just like they took over all other stuff, done terrible things to the inhabitants, just like they did everywhere else, and the US would have sat out the war. The US being in the Philippines and Hawaii has nothing to do with Hiroshima, other than the US being there when Japan attacked. Japan attacked the wrong country and this resulted in decisive force being used against them.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    Oh, the irony. And, sorry, "whataboutism" is a cheap cop-out. Historical incidents should be seen in context, not just as isolated finger pointing (and always from one side to the other).

sydd 8y ago

The other being guilty does not acquit you from a crime. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were an act of genocide, there is nothing that makes this OK.

tomohawk 8y ago
They were stopped. The criminal activities ceased. Japan is a completely different country today. It's not the fault of the US that the government of Japan militarized their whole society and literally made the whole of the country a military target.
- coldtea 8y ago
  Well, it's somebody's fault. Japan wanted to be left alone. Western powers took it to war to force it to their will. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakumatsu#Foreign_frictions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakumatsu#Foreign_frictions
  - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
    > Japan wanted to be left alone. Yeah, left alone to create the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperity_Sphere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperit...). You're welcome to ask the various Asian nations of that region whether they thought that was a good thing but I doubt you'd like the response.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      That's after the West pushed it to break isolationism and taught it it had to be ruthless to be respected, not before. In other words, that's a century later...
      - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
        Ah, the classic "But he hit me first" argument[0]. Very persuasive. /s [0] Also known as the "two wrongs make a right" fallacy. See https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/177/Two-Wrongs-Make-a-Right https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla...
- clarkmoody 8y ago
  > literally made the whole of the country a military target This is exactly the sort of collectivist thinking that makes it possible to have WWIII. When you can disregard fundamental human dignity based on the actions of a government, you've already lost.
thomasfedb 8y ago
That's a very absolute statement that will almost certainly break down under some real or conceivable hypothetical situation.

coldtea 8y ago

>Once these criminals attacked the US in Hawaii and the Philippines Wait, maybe rewind this a little? I know that the European settlers that created the US took the continental land from the natives, but how did they end up with claims to Hawaii and the Philippines in the first place?

tomohawk 8y ago
Whataboutism? Really? Please stay on topic.
- cribbles 8y ago
  The topic was the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima by the USA being "a horrific crime against humanity."[1] Your response was "what about Japanese war crimes?" Please stay on topic. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18540748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18540748
  - tomohawk 8y ago
    Sure, let's play whatabout. What if the US wasn't there in the Philippines or Hawaii? Then Japan would have taken them over just like they took over all other stuff, done terrible things to the inhabitants, just like they did everywhere else, and the US would have sat out the war. The US being in the Philippines and Hawaii has nothing to do with Hiroshima, other than the US being there when Japan attacked. Japan attacked the wrong country and this resulted in decisive force being used against them.
- coldtea 8y ago
  Oh, the irony. And, sorry, "whataboutism" is a cheap cop-out. Historical incidents should be seen in context, not just as isolated finger pointing (and always from one side to the other).