Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc.

cv

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What about them?

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

I can only speak for myself but I have no interest in discussing that on a forum

I will stick with my first assessment of this: tm is just a TROLL, the thread will accomplish nothing and is intended to just stir sh1t between the members.

He needs a GAG order.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would appear that your consistency on this subject is about as good as your photography:

Although I believe it to be 2 nukes during WWII, do you think that it would have ended the war any quicker if the US had not done this. Maybe a better question would be: Do you believe that it saved more ALLIED forces by dropping these bombs. It's not a cut and dry world. You seem to be at least a couple of years older than I and I for one, would have thought you or at least your parents were happy to see the WAR end sooner than later. War is not a pretty thing and this war on terrorism is hurting everyone. I just think that the muslim religion ITSELF needs to do more to get the respect from the rest of the world that THEY are not just turning a BLIND EYE to what is happenning.

wrote Kringle on 2005-07-12 14:04:30

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

I can weigh in on the slave labor camp issue as 'me old boy' was one of them up in Manchuria - coal mines. Danm near killed him too. I didn't get much out of him on the subject but my mother related a bit or two he told her. Dysentery 24/7, maggot-infested food...

Its history

Yes the Japs wld have to have been bombed into submission,nukes or conventional.

Loss of life more or less? Debatable.

Long live independant thought.

Keep in mind that the conventional firebombing of Tokyo killed more than both nukes put together. It's just that the word nuclear raises hackles. People dying is always a horrible thing, but its not like Japan was an innocent bystander.

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So using this logic, America isn't innocent and therefore events like 911 is OK, right ?

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can weigh in on the slave labor camp issue as 'me old boy' was one of them up in Manchuria - coal mines. Danm near killed him too. I didn't get much out of him on the subject but my mother related a bit or two he told her. Dysentery 24/7, maggot-infested food...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It appears we have something in common. My old man and a few of his mates - not all returned - did some free engineering work, partly in LOS, mostly in Burma.

A subject rarely recounted but never forgotten.

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

I can weigh in on the slave labor camp issue as 'me old boy' was one of them up in Manchuria - coal mines. Danm near killed him too. I didn't get much out of him on the subject but my mother related a bit or two he told her. Dysentery 24/7, maggot-infested food...

It appears we have something in common. My old man and a few of his mates - not all returned - did some free engineering work, partly in LOS, mostly in Burma.

A subject rarely recounted but never forgotten.

Mine was an Engineer too captured on Corregedor and went through the Bataan Death March - not many of those boys made it. The Japs then shipped them up to Manchuria and in the later part of the war, down to the main island, Honshu. All in all, he was held 48 long months. Went in the Army weighing a strapping 225lbs and when Armistice was signed, down to skin & bones 98lbs.

Good thing he's not aware of the 'horrible conditions' of those prisoners at Gitmo dining on lemon chicken and rice pilaff...

I will stick with my first assessment of this: tm is just a TROLL, the thread will accomplish nothing and is intended to just stir sh1t between the members.

He needs a GAG order.

It would appear that your consistency on this subject is about as good as your photography:

Although I believe it to be 2 nukes during WWII, do you think that it would have ended the war any quicker if the US had not done this. Maybe a better question would be: Do you believe that it saved more ALLIED forces by dropping these bombs. It's not a cut and dry world. You seem to be at least a couple of years older than I and I for one, would have thought you or at least your parents were happy to see the WAR end sooner than later. War is not a pretty thing and this war on terrorism is hurting everyone. I just think that the muslim religion ITSELF needs to do more to get the respect from the rest of the world that THEY are not just turning a BLIND EYE to what is happenning.

wrote Kringle on 2005-07-12 14:04:30

You are still only just bringing up old sh1t that is in the past and has been debated by more intelligent people than you and even then with no real results. You are just an old man that just can't live without someone listenning to or reading the tripe you spout. If you are going to discuss this type of BS, take it to the bearpit. I really don't think this is the forum for such discussions or in you case just trolling material. You are an old man in years maybe but still immature and doubfully have even developed a brain.

Why don't you just GAG until you wake up. Of course it just might be that you have a GRIP on your other brain on a 24/7 time period.

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can weigh in on the slave labor camp issue as 'me old boy' was one of them up in Manchuria - coal mines. Danm near killed him too. I didn't get much out of him on the subject but my mother related a bit or two he told her. Dysentery 24/7, maggot-infested food...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It appears we have something in common. My old man and a few of his mates - not all returned - did some free engineering work, partly in LOS, mostly in Burma.

A subject rarely recounted but never forgotten.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mine was an Engineer too captured on Corregedor and went through the Bataan Death March - not many of those boys made it. The Japs then shipped them up to Manchuria and in the later part of the war, down to the main island, Honshu. All in all, he was held 48 long months. Went in the Army weighing a strapping 225lbs and when Armistice was signed, down to skin & bones 98lbs.

Good thing he's not aware of the 'horrible conditions' of those prisoners at Gitmo dining on lemon chicken and rice pilaff...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never could get that much detail out of my father, except he also was under a hundred pounds on release.

He would amuse us kids talking about the beauty of Thai women and his fascination with Buddhism - never a word about the bad times. But he never missed an Armistice Day parade or a mate's funeral (always wearing his medals).

He died 31 years ago.

My wife, who works in a care home (read hospice), befriended a guy, who died last month, aged 90, who was in the same regiment as my father. The only photographs this old man had - and displayed all over his room - were of his mates who either died in Burma or soon after.

We will never know the horrors that must have been theirs.

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

I can weigh in on the slave labor camp issue as 'me old boy' was one of them up in Manchuria - coal mines. Danm near killed him too. I didn't get much out of him on the subject but my mother related a bit or two he told her. Dysentery 24/7, maggot-infested food...

It appears we have something in common. My old man and a few of his mates - not all returned - did some free engineering work, partly in LOS, mostly in Burma.

A subject rarely recounted but never forgotten.

Mine was an Engineer too captured on Corregedor and went through the Bataan Death March - not many of those boys made it. The Japs then shipped them up to Manchuria and in the later part of the war, down to the main island, Honshu. All in all, he was held 48 long months. Went in the Army weighing a strapping 225lbs and when Armistice was signed, down to skin & bones 98lbs.

Good thing he's not aware of the 'horrible conditions' of those prisoners at Gitmo dining on lemon chicken and rice pilaff...

I never could get that much detail out of my father, except he also was under a hundred pounds on release.

We will never know the horrors that must have been theirs.

I never heard much directly from my father either. The little I do know came from my mother and grandmother (his mother).

One item he did tell me shortly before he passed was when he was in a 'hospital' up in Manchuria, one of the Army doctors made a comment in reference to my old man's condition that he probably wouldn't 'make it'.

He vowed to prove that quack wrong - and did...

Thomas_Merton 2005-08-01 12:46:22

On the 60th anniversary of the destruction of Hiroshima, new questions are being asked about whether it was necessary to drop the atomic bomb - and whether the bomb was really responsible for the Japanese surrender.

Ask the Men that where in that war and are buried in Kan Thomas_Merton, died at the hands of the ………………

Why aren't any of you starting discussions on Japanese war camps, comfort women, slave labour, invasion of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaya, most of the pacific rim...etc etc. 

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can weigh in on the slave labor camp issue as 'me old boy' was one of them up in Manchuria - coal mines. Danm near killed him too. I didn't get much out of him on the subject but my mother related a bit or two he told her. Dysentery 24/7, maggot-infested food...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It appears we have something in common. My old man and a few of his mates - not all returned - did some free engineering work, partly in LOS, mostly in Burma.

A subject rarely recounted but never forgotten.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We will never do so.

R.I.P. to all around the world who died in that WAR.

Yours truly,

Win from Kan

Perhaps this piece will put to rest the argument the bomb(s) should not have been dropped:

"The Army favored a direct, frontal invasion of the Japanese home islands as the quickest means of forcing Japanese unconditional surrender. By April 1, 1945, Japan showed no signs of surrender, encouraging the Joint Chiefs to order the invasion of Okinawa. Three months of ground, sea, and air warfare cost the United States 50,000 casualties and Japan 110,000 dead. The Okinawa experience colored all future plans for defeating Japan. An invasion force against the home islands would confront a Japanese army of possibly five million and many times more civilians receiving rudimentary training in how to oppose any landing. Japan also prepared more than five thousand kamikaze aircraft. The Army's invasion plan called for Operation OLYMPIC, the invasion of Kyushu, to begin November 1,1945, followed by Operation CORONET, the invasion of Honshu (specifically, the plain around Tokyo), to begin sometime in 1946. No one doubted the invasions would be successful. The question was whether the United States could withstand the American casualties that would result and whether it could stomach the millions of Japanese who would be killed in the process.22

Casualty figures were largely the product of the American experience on Saipan and Okinawa. Using the "Saipan ratio," staff officers predicted American casualties could reach 1.7 to 2 million, though by the spring of 1945 this number had declined to 500,000. They knew, however, that the Soviet Red Army had suffered 352,000 casualties attacking Berlin in the closing days of the European war. The Army made plans to recruit and train 720,000 soldiers to replace those injured, killed, or otherwise indisposed in the invasions. It also ordered the production of 400,000 Purple Hearts.23

This is what the United States faced when General Lauris Norstad, chief of staff for Twentieth Air Force, told his chief operational commander, General Curtis LeMay, that "If you don't get results it will mean eventually a mass amphibious invasion of Japan, to cost probably half a million more American lives." Norstad and LeMay knew that Japan had already been defeated- the Navy blockade had assured that. The task was how to get the Japanese to surrender. As early as 1932, Billy Mitchell, sent on a tour of the Far East to get him out of the United States, observed that, though he was opposed to the bombing of civilians, the best way to defeat Japan would be to attack what he called Japan?s "congested and highly inflammable cities." He was there just after a fire in Tokyo had killed 100,000.24

General Haywood Hansell began the precision bombing of Japan?s industries in November 1944, largely without effect. B-29s had to fly too far to carry meaningful bomb loads, but most importantly, the jet stream discovered high over Japan played havoc with the workings of the Norden bombsights that were to aim Twentieth Air Force bombs. Defeating Japan by destroying its capabilities or industries was not going to work. LeMay replaced Hansell, prompting Norstad to explain to Hansell that "LeMay is an operator, the rest of us are planners.? His assignment was to firebomb Japan's paper and wood cities to weaken the ability of the Japanese to resist the impending invasion, but more importantly, to force the Japanese to surrender without an invasion. 25

After the war LeMay explained his intentions: "I'll tell you what war is about. You've got to kill people, and when you've killed enough they stop fighting."26 Tokyo was the first to burn on March 9, followed by Nagoya, Osaka, Kobe, Kawasaki, and Yokohama. Hundreds of thousands were killed or injured, some incinerated and dead, some burned and scarred, some just shocked. Still the Japanese refused to surrender. Atomic bombs came on August 6 and 9 against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, targeted not so much as military weapons at the people of those cities, but as psychological weapons aimed at Japan's military leaders.

In August and September 1945, 650,000 American soldiers were completing the last phases of their training for the invasion of Kyushu. Japan had concentrated its defensive forces near the beaches of Kyushu, where they would have been exposed to the concentrated firepower of 2,500 ships and 5,000 aircraft. Meanwhile B-29s, now joined by B-17s and B-24s flying from Okinawa, were preparing to burn the remaining Japanese cities. Mercifully, for both sides, the word to quit came in August, with the Japanese surrender following on September 2. The largest amphibious invasion planned in world history never happened."

Because we nuked Japan, WW2 ended and the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers were saved.

Link

The same link that Boon Mee posted above also contains another option for ending the war in Japan. Below I have posted what the article said about a plan which would not have required the bombing of civilians:

" By 1944 the United States had settled on strategies for defeating Japan. The Navy favored a blockade, based on its success with submarines over the previous years. This was a classic Mahanian approach with the Allies cutting off the flow of resources on which Japan was dependent. In 1945 the Navy hoped to pull the noose tighter and tighter, based on possible landings in China and Korea and on the mining of Japan's inland waters, until sometime in 1946 or 1947, hopefully, Japan would be starved into surrender. A component of the Navy plan was a strategic bombing campaign of Japanese economic targets, identified in the prewar Orange planning as necessary to strangle the Japanese economy. Few believed, however, that the Allies could wait that long- public opinion would not allow it and few believed that Allied economies could continue to support the massive armies, navies, and air forces that would have to wait for this slow strangulation to take effect. Considering that the Japanese economy had collapsed in early 1945, there were no guarantees that this strategy would work. At best, many thought, it would produce a negotiated, limited surrender, short of the unconditional surrender demanded by wartime agreements."

And.....by the way......from Boon Mee's same link above I've copied and pasted information about the author below. Please note that he is retired Air Force and his major life's work is as an Air Force hostorian....I'm tring to point out that he probably has a bias.....he probably exagerates the usefullness of air power and minimizes sthe usefullness of other branches of the military....this type of bias is very very common in the US military....I'm not saying what he says is wrong...I'm just wanting people to know that there may be a bias in his writing. Anyway his stats follow:

Stephen McFarland is a leading authority on American airpower in the 1930s and 40s. His book, America's Pursuit of Precision Bombing, 1910-45, won the 1996 W. Stuart Symington Award from the Air Force History and Museums Program. Professor McFarland served in the United States Air Force, and earned his B.A. at the University of Kansas. Professor McFarland obtained his M.A. and Ph.D. at the University of Texas. He completed his Ph.D. in 1981, which featured a dissertation on the "crises in Iran, 1941-47." In 1980, Professor McFarland began his teaching career at St. Edwards University. His career in education spans over two decades at St. Edwards and Auburn Universities. Professor McFarland was a Visiting Professor at the U.S. Air Force Air War College in 1991-93. McFarland is currently Associate Dean of the Graduate School, Auburn University. His publications include: To Command the Sky: The Struggle for Air Superiority over Europe, 1942-44 (1991), which won a 1992 Certificate of Merit from the Aviation/Space Writers Association, and Army Air Forces Night Fighters in World War II (1997). Professor McFarland's current projects include a comprehensive history of the U.S. Air Force, to be published in 1998.

TM,  I'll help you out a little here.  An example of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque would be as follows:

Some TV members have defended the dropping of nuclear weapons on Japan during WWII.  They have since been given an opportunity to explain when it would be appropriate to drop a nuclear weapon in the future but none of them has done so.  This proves that their defence of dropping the nuclear weapons on Japan is false.

If I'm wrong about this being an example of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque then someone please let me know.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because we nuked Japan, WW2 ended and the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers were saved.

Only in your parallel world, Boon Me, only there

Because we nuked Japan, WW2 ended and the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers were saved

Just a question for all those for or against the droping of the bomb.

How many Allied lives would it of had to save to make it acceptable, 1, 10 100, 1000, 100,000 ect ?

Surely blockading Japan and increased strategic boming would of resulted in further allied casulties however small. Its also debatable weather this would of increased or decreased the Japanese casulteys.

Do you think that if Japan or germany had the capability of droping atomic bombs on America or Europe they would of hesitated for just one second?

Surly as a comander your overiding responsibility must be for the welfare of your own troups.

The same link that Boon Mee posted above also contains another option for ending the war in Japan. Below I have posted what the article said about a plan which would not have required the bombing of civilians:

  Considering that the Japanese economy had collapsed in early 1945, there were no guarantees that this strategy would work. At best, many thought, it would produce a negotiated, limited surrender, short of the unconditional surrender demanded by wartime agreements."

For a rice farmer, chownah, you do pretty good! Thanks for posting more from that link. It's useful to see that other options were being considered other than 'nuke 'em back to the stoneage' but as the above points out, a blockade would not have produced an unconditional surrender.

Because we nuked Japan, WW2 ended and the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers were saved

Just a question for all those for or against the droping of the bomb.

How many Allied lives would it of had to save to make it acceptable, 1, 10 100, 1000, 100,000 ect ?

Surely blockading Japan and increased strategic boming would of resulted in further allied casulties however small. Its also debatable weather this would of increased or decreased the Japanese casulteys.

Do you think that if Japan or germany had the capability of droping atomic bombs on America or Europe they would of hesitated for just one second?

Surly as a comander your overiding responsibility must be for the welfare of your own troups.

I actually think they would have hesitated for more than just a second, despite all the megalomania. It is all too easy to demonize the losers when you look at them with the sunglasses of the future.

The wounds are still relatively fresh, and the winners will never pass up on the chance to rub it in the face of the losers - because the winners write history.

This means the Japs and Germs have been portraid as Satan's cohorts, which is a tad too simple. For all the terrible war crimes they committed, and for all my belief that it was a truly great thing that the allied forces finally won the war, I still think the old Japanese and Germans were essentially people just like you and me, and many of them weren't evil, and surely had second thoughts before committing or allowing the atrocities committed.

It's a fallacy to think the same thing cannot and would not happen in another country in the future - even yours - or mine.

How often to does anyone hear from the guy that started all this SH!T?, not very often because he doesn't care which way someone responds. This is only put out to get a response and nothing else. Give it a rest you TWIT, it's OVER it's DONE, absolutely nothing is going to be resolved from this.

God, I hate history, it only comes back to haunt you and then draw out all the idiots to tell you about it.

"Learn by your mistakes, don't dwell on them."

The same link that Boon Mee posted above also contains another option for ending the war in Japan. Below I have posted what the article said about a plan which would not have required the bombing of civilians:

   Considering that the Japanese economy had collapsed in early 1945, there were no guarantees that this strategy would work. At best, many thought, it would produce a negotiated, limited surrender, short of the unconditional surrender demanded by wartime agreements."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For a rice farmer, chownah, you do pretty good! Thanks for posting more from that link. It's useful to see that other options were being considered other than 'nuke 'em back to the stoneage' but as the above points out, a blockade would not have produced an unconditional surrender.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why was having an unconditional surrender important?....other than to satisfy the national ego.....and it is not entirely certain that a blockade would not have produced an unconditional surrender....according to the article many people seemed to have been of the opinion that a blockade would not produce an unconditional surrender...but...people thought that the women and children would fight to the last...but they were wrong because the women and children didn't fight up to the least...when the inevitable became obviouis the unconditional surrender appeared...no one knows for sure whether a total blockade could have produced the same result. Again I want to point out that the author probably has a bias against the naval approach and for the air approach so before I decide what to think on this I would want to see other opinions. But I do want to thank you for posting the link....I found it very informative.

How often to does anyone hear from the guy that started all this SH!T?, not very often because he doesn't care which way someone responds. This is only put out to get a response and nothing else. Give it a rest you TWIT, it's OVER it's DONE, absolutely nothing is going to be resolved from this.

God, I hate history, it only comes back to haunt you and then draw out all the idiots to tell you about it.

"Learn by your mistakes, don't dwell on them."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

History is there for us to remember what we did wrong. I think discussing it is healthy. Should we forget Nazi Germany and the Death Camps ? should we forgive the germans for their support of Nazi Germany ? forgive maybe but not forget. Same goes for Hiroshima. The problem is that most of America is used to live in such a state of denial and "fairy tales" and "myths" that it's very harmful for its citizens to be faced with their disastrous past. They just can't accept it like the Japanese can't accept what they did in WW2. It won't stop those horrible things from happening again. Might it be the Americans or the Chinese or the European doing it. We don't learn from our mistake when we are in denial and we don't want to remember. That's why we need to be reminded and talk about it as much as we can. That's why we have "V day" to remember what war is really about. It's not about Victory but what it does to men.

Look at Iraq. An excellent example. Despite hope of never seeing another "dirty war" like Vietnam, we have another "disaster" with Iraq. All the conditions were similar prior to the war (no exit strategy, no clear objective, no democratic opposition to the war, silly wave flagging "support our troops" propaganda etc...) and all the conditions now are pointing to a complete failure of that invasion. At the end the US will leave Saigon style, humiliated and vindicated. You thought we would have remembered the mistake of a recent past but we didn't. History is there to repeat itself no matter what.

LEARN from your mistakes, do NOT dwell on them.

All fine and dandy to remember and pay respect but not to bring issues into a discussion for your own self satisfaction. How much more does ANYONE have to debate this issue or a multitude of other issues:

the poor jews, the poor blacks, the poor this, that or whatever. Get a grip on reality and DO SOMETHING with your OWN LIFE, don't whinge and moan about history.

LEARN from your mistakes, do NOT dwell on them.

All fine and dandy to remember and pay respect but not to bring issues into a discussion for your own self satisfaction. How much more does ANYONE have to debate this issue or a multitude of other issues:

the poor jews, the poor blacks, the poor this, that or whatever. Get a grip on reality and DO SOMETHING with your OWN LIFE, don't whinge and moan about history.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With all due respect Kringle, but you are the biggest whinger and moaner on this thread...this post of yours is nothing but.....when I'm not interested in a topic I just tune it out.

At least you didn't say I was the biggest whinger on TV.

Life is a real struggle and we all try (or at least most of us) to live a good life. If we all just learned from our mistakes instead of just dwelling on the past, wouldn't it make it easier for our decendents. You only breed anomosity and hatred by bringing up the past.

Before you can learn you have to read/listen, analyze and discuss. If there is no analysis and discussion, there is no true understanding. So how could you learn anything?

At least you didn't say I was the biggest whinger on TV.

Life is a real struggle and we all try (or at least most of us) to live a good life. If we all just learned from our mistakes instead of just dwelling on the past, wouldn't it make it easier for our decendents. You only breed anomosity and hatred by bringing up the past.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you saying that I breed animosity and hatred with my posts? Also, is a history class in school a place for breeding animosity and hatred?...because they bring up the past every day there.

Before you can learn you have to read/listen, analyze and discuss. If there is no analysis and discussion, there is no true understanding. So how could you learn anything?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. But it seems that some individuals don't like to analyze and remember things. So how do they expect to learn ? by God speaking to them directly ? wait I know someone who does

Before you can learn you have to read/listen, analyze and discuss. If there is no analysis and discussion, there is no true understanding. So how could you learn anything?

Exactly. But it seems that some individuals don't like to analyze and remember things. So how do they expect to learn ? by God speaking to them directly ? wait I know someone who does

He wouldn't be from Texas, would he?

Why was having an unconditional surrender important?....other than to satisfy the national ego.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Get real!

Unconditional surrender has nothing to do with "national ego!"

An unconditional surrender effectively means that the defeated and their country are "owned" by the victor and their country.

In other words, any governmental power that grew in post-war Japan, grew under the guidance and approval of the American government. The same is said for economic decisions, the military, etc.

So what eventually rose from the ashes of Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and other Japanese ruins?

The US gave them back their country and taught them how to become an economic power and an ally, while showing them to form a democratic government and at the same time allowing them to maintain all of their history and cultural traditions.

Oh yeah..... by the way ...... there was also this other thing in Europe called the Marshall Plan for West Germany, after the allied forces achieved unconditional surrender from the other bad guys. I'm sure that was for "national ego" too.

Try comparing that with what Stalin did to East Germany after WW2. Or with what recent regimes in the middle east have done when they came to be in a position of power.