Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 17706]

He wasn't just a grunt soldier though, here from the article "Hiroo Onoda, an army intelligence officer" if he was in fact the one in charge of his unit leftovers, he should have been tried for war crimes. He choose not to believe the proof they had that the war was over and that poor judgment lead the whole group to remain uncommunicated, which in the end resulted in the tragic death of dozens of unarmed civilians.

Im sorry to get upset at people cheering him up as a hero, there is not enough evidence to make a certain case out of this, but the little we know make him sound like a nationalist nutcase that refused to accept the reality in which his beloved country had lost the war .

There appears to be a ton of information about this guy out there. He was quite famous back when he re-emerged in the early 70s.

Not to say it definitely isn't the case, but I do wonder where "dozens of unarmed civilians" keeps coming from. The article says "30 people whom he mistakenly believed to be enemy soldiers."

Where are you folks getting your in-depth details on the encounters that lead to these killings?

 

[Liha]

Better than millions dieing by further war.

.

The soviet invasion of Manchuria was the main reason for the surrender. The atomic bomb was unnecessary.

 

[Cat Party]

There appears to be a ton of information about this guy out there. He was quite famous back when he re-emerged in the early 70s.

Not to say it definitely isn't the case, but I do wonder where "dozens of unarmed civilians" keeps coming from. The article says "30 people whom he mistakenly believed to be enemy soldiers."

Where are you folks getting your in-depth details on the encounters that lead to these killings?

That's what I'm wondering as well. Without context or even confirmation, I can't judge one way or the other.

 

[Baleoce]

War does crazy shit to people on all sides. There's no black or white in these things. RIP

 

[The Adder]

Did it have to happen? My personal oppinion is that is bullshit rhetoric. Cause, what is the government's going to say after they did some fucked up bullshit "Whoops, slight overkill on that one lol", but you can take it to heart if you want. Know it'd make me feel better if I could believe it.

Spoiler

It is serious bullshit though.

The alternative was the US and Russia running roughshod through Japan. If you think that would have resulted in fewer deaths, you were not paying attention to the rest of the war.

 

[Atraveller]

There's truly a defense force for everything here on gaf.

 

[Soyongdori]

War does crazy shit to people on all sides. There's no black or white in these things. RIP

Funny thing is, people never say things like this for the SS and Wehrmacht soldiers.

Dat double standard...

 

[Black-Wind]

Crazy sicko.

Not sure how there's a defense force for this ... no excuses.

 

[vas_a_morir]

The soviet invasion of Manchuria was the main reason for the surrender. The atomic bomb was unnecessary.

The invasion was an important development several reasons. It definitely weakened their bid for conditional surrender by removing a potentially valuable bargaining chip that would allow the Japanese to keep other territories gained via war with China 50 years prior. The possibility of a conditional surrender seemed unlikely anyway, but it was undeniably hopeless after that. Japan was going to shrink.

However, it also was the main reason why the US decided to strike the military infrastructure in HS and NS. They needed US troops on the ground in Japan to keep Soviet troops from occupying Japanese territory. I argue this was as much in the best interests of the Japanese as much as for the US. (By comparison, look what happened to the soviet-controlled Japanese territory in Manchuria and Korea following the war: two areas now with their traditional culture/way of life all but destroyed, society-wide poverty, gulags, low human rights and still 60 years later without a free election). The longer Japanese drag their feet with surrender, the greater likelihood that Communists would control part of mainland Japan. Or, so was the thinking at the time. .

The idea that the Japanese 'were going to surrender' may be true, but until you actually capitulate and agree to terms, the war continues. Killing continues. Destruction continues. It is not my understanding that they were trying to surrender and the Allies refused to accept. Some might view the refusal to officially surrender as an act of continued aggression, tantamount to an attack.

We're all gamers here, right? Think of it like Starcraft. It is courtesy to 'gg' whenever your chances of victory are hopeless. If you refuse to 'gg,' the victorious army must press on. This stubborn behavior hurts both players, but it only costs each other time. Zerg and Protoss don't have feelings, sense pain, or have families. Obviously, War isn't a game, but similarly, when it's time to gg, you gg, or the show goes on. Japan should have gg'd in 1943. After that, victory was assured for the Allies. EVERYTHING after that was unnecessary. In fact, if you believe that just the inevitability of eventual surrender qualifies opposing military actions as 'unnecessary,' you could argue with ease that the whole war was unnecessary. (Admiral Hara Tadaichi believed the war was lost on Dec 7, 1941).

As far as I know, the US did not continue to bomb Japan after all active troops had surrendered. For this reason, I believe that had Japan surrendered after the Soviets declared war, the US would have stopped. Yet, Japan did not surrender, so the US did not stop. 'going to' doesn't count for much in Total War.

 

[KillerMan91]

Funny thing is, people never say things like this for the SS and Wehrmacht soldiers.

Dat double standard...

Well about wehrmacht soldiers they really should. About SS well with Waffen-SS there were some guys drafted during the late years of war.

 

[Soyongdori]

The invasion was an important development several reasons. It definitely weakened their bid for conditional surrender by removing a potentially valuable bargaining chip that would allow the Japanese to keep other territories gained via war with China 50 years prior. The possibility of a conditional surrender seemed unlikely anyway, but it was undeniably hopeless after that. Japan was going to shrink.

However, it also was the main reason why the US decided to strike the military infrastructure in HS and NS. They needed US troops on the ground in Japan to keep Soviet troops from occupying Japanese territory. I argue this was as much in the best interests of the Japanese as much as for the US. (By comparison, look what happened to the soviet-controlled Japanese territory in Manchuria and Korea following the war: two areas now with their traditional culture/way of life all but destroyed, society-wide poverty, gulags, low human rights and still 60 years later without a free election). The longer Japanese drag their feet with surrender, the greater likelihood that Communists would control part of mainland Japan. Or, so was the thinking at the time. .

The idea that the Japanese 'were going to surrender' may be true, but until you actually capitulate and agree to terms, the war continues. Killing continues. Destruction continues. It is not my understanding that they were trying to surrender and the Allies refused to accept. Some might view the refusal to officially surrender as an act of continued aggression, tantamount to an attack.

We're all gamers here, right? Think of it like Starcraft. It is courtesy to 'gg' whenever your chances of victory are hopeless. If you refuse to 'gg,' the victorious army must press on. This stubborn behavior hurts both players, but it only costs each other time. Zerg and Protoss don't have feelings, sense pain, or have families. Obviously, War isn't a game, but similarly, when it's time to gg, you gg, or the show goes on. Japan should have gg'd in 1943. After that, victory was assured for the Allies. EVERYTHING after that was unnecessary. In fact, if you believe that just the inevitability of eventual surrender qualifies opposing military actions as 'unnecessary,' you could argue with ease that the whole war was unnecessary. (Admiral Hara Tadaichi believed the war was lost on Dec 7, 1941).

As far as I know, the US did not continue to bomb Japan after all active troops had surrendered. For this reason, I believe that had Japan surrendered after the Soviets declared war, the US would have stopped. Yet, Japan did not surrender, so the US did not stop. 'going to' doesn't count for much in Total War.

There are more reasons.

The Soviets threw away japan's surrender because japan still wanted to keep the existing colonies, such as Korean peninsula. There was no way that the Soviets would've agreed to that kind of surrender from japan. Plus Molotov never informed the Americans about japan's informal surrender to the Soviets. Soviets wanted to see japan flattened via massive invasion from Vladivostock. America saved that from happening by dropping A-bombs.

 

[vas_a_morir]

There are more reasons.

The Soviets threw away japan's surrender because japan still wanted to keep the existing colonies, such as Korean peninsula. There was no way that the Soviets would've agreed to that kind of surrender from japan. Plus Molotov never informed the Americans about japan's informal surrender to the Soviets.

Sure. That's what I was addressing in the first part about 'conditional surrender.' I've tried to stress the importance of securing 'unconditional surrender' vs. 'conditional surrender.' It was the belief at the time that anything short of unconditional surrender would have been unacceptable, and would have ultimately meant the entire war effort and the lives lost were have been thrown away in vain. But, I can't speculate on what would have happened.

EDIT: Yeah, Russians saw a great opportunity to get some prime real-estate, so I think it would have been hard to convince them to relent.

 

[StayDead]

He wasn't just a grunt soldier though, here from the article "Hiroo Onoda, an army intelligence officer" if he was in fact the one in charge of his unit leftovers, he should have been tried for war crimes. He choose not to believe the proof they had that the war was over and that poor judgment lead the whole group to remain uncommunicated, which in the end resulted in the tragic death of dozens of unarmed civilians.

Im sorry to get upset at people cheering him up as a hero, there is not enough evidence to make a certain case out of this, but the little we know make him sound like a nationalist nutcase that refused to accept the reality in which his beloved country had lost the war .

There were a hell of a lot more units than just his who were stuck in exactly the same situation his was. He probably killed as he had no choice if he wanted to secure the safety of his men and the police even killed one of his commrades and he most likely thought they were enemy forces.

He was given the order that his unit must defend that post at all costs until his commander came and told him he could stop. His commander never went for him and it's quite possible for anyone to think that a surrender letter dropped from the sky was faked as a reason to get them to come out and die.

Funny thing is, people never say things like this for the SS and Wehrmacht soldiers.

Dat double standard...

I say that about Wermacht soldiers all the time. I even did so in this thread. The SS are a different story as they were an elite special forces, most of them already being murderers who did what they did out of choice. The majority of the Wermacht and Imperial Army had no choice in the matter much like the large majority of the Red Army.

 

[vas_a_morir]

There were a hell of a lot more units than just his who were stuck in exactly the same situation his was. He probably killed as he had no choice if he wanted to secure the safety of his men and the police even killed one of his commrades and he most likely thought they were enemy forces.

He was given the order that his unit must defend that post at all costs until his commander came and told him he could stop. His commander never went for him and it's quite possible for anyone to think that a surrender letter dropped from the sky was faked as a reason to get them to come out and die.

You kinda get the feeling that he was trained without considering the possibility of returning home alive, don't you?

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Funny thing is, people never say things like this for the SS and Wehrmacht soldiers.

Dat double standard...

That's some assumption. Do you have a comparable situation involving that side on which people can comment?

 

[Lamel]

There's truly a defense force for everything here on gaf.

I know people love to throw this line around all the time, but there are actually some good arguments happening in this thread. Just because someone doesn't agree with you on a topic doesn't mean it is a defense force, and doesn't mean they are wrong.

 

[StayDead]

You kinda get the feeling that he was trained without considering the possibility of returning home alive, don't you?

No, that's not the case at all. He was trained much like every man outside Russia (who had very few actually trained conscripts) to believe that his country was going to win the war and they had to keep fighting until that happened.

Every single soldier in the war was given the choice to either fight or die by execution. The only path home was surviving a near fatal injury and being physically unable to fight. It was even worse for the Japanese stationed in Jungles in the Pacific because they had 0 contact with most other units outside of the surrounding area.

 

[vas_a_morir]

I know people love to throw this line around all the time, but there are actually some good arguments happening in this thread. Just because someone doesn't agree with you on a topic doesn't mean it is a defense force, and doesn't mean they are wrong.

Right. While I do think he was an man with severe psychological issues, I don't think he was a particularly malicious guy. I think he was trained irresponsibly, and had that kind of mentality that is drawn to fanaticism.

He did get to meet the Emperor, though. I wonder if that helped him come to terms with the War... or if it caused him to be disillusioned?

No, that's not the case at all. He was trained much like every man outside Russia (who had very few actually trained conscripts) to believe that his country was going to win the war and they had to keep fighting until that happened.

Every single soldier in the war was given the choice to either fight or die by execution. The only path home was surviving a near fatal injury and being physically unable to fight. It was even worse for the Japanese stationed in Jungles in the Pacific because they had 0 contact with most other units outside of the surrounding area.

It is quite possible that delusions ran all the way to the top, but one would think leadership had to have known they were sending these men to their death in hopeless military engagements. Or, maybe not, those were strange times.

They were trained to be so fanatical and devoted that they did not know how to deal with a breakdown of military command. Nazis, too, were ill equipped to adapt to these kinds of situations. I have heard it said that the British and American style of military was far more capable of adapting to extraordinary situations. For example, during the invasions on Normady, one unit arrived to find that the German military structures were abandoned, so the officers said 'okay, fuck it, we are running 8 miles and are going to flank the Germans from the back." The historian went on to say that it was his belief that Nazi troops would be far more inclined to hold position and await further orders under those circumstances. The gentleman in the OP probably simply did not have any protocols for what to do in case of a breakdown of leadership.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Maybe he just liked to kill people, and used "the war never ended" as an excuse.

 

[i_am_ben]

Guy sounds like an idiot.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/a-japanese-soldier-who-continued-fighting-wwii-29-years-after-the-japanese-surrendered-because-he-didnt-know/

n October 1945, after another cell had killed a cow from a local farm for food, they came across a leaflet from the local islanders to them saying “The war ended August 15th. Come down from the mountains!” The few remaining cells discussed this leaflet extensively, but eventually decided that it was Allied propaganda trying to get them to give themselves up. They felt that there was no way that Japan could have lost so quickly since the time when they were deployed. Indeed, this would seem strange to anyone who had no knowledge of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Also, another one of the cells had been fired upon just a few days before; they felt that this wouldn’t have happened if the war was over.

Eventually, near the end of the same year local islanders, fed up with being shot at and raided, got a Boeing B-17 to drop leaflets all over the jungle. These leaflets had the order to surrender printed on them from General Yamashita. The few remaining cells once again scrutinized these leaflets to try to determine their authenticity. In the end, the wording on the leaflet pertaining to the method with which they would be sent back to Japan seemed fishy to them; largely because the wording made it seem as if Japan had lost, something they couldn’t fathom and which was a big problem in their willingness to accept the war had ended. If Japan had won, they would come and get them. Japan couldn’t lose, so the war must still be going. So they once again believed it was the Allies becoming more tired of their successful guerrilla tactics and trying to get them to surrender.

When this didn’t work, more leaflets were dropped with newspapers from Japan; photographs and letters from the soldiers families; delegates were sent from Japan and went through the jungle speaking over loudspeakers begging the soldiers to give themselves up. In every case the cells encountered, there was always something suspicious in their minds about the way it was done to cause them to believe it was an elaborate hoax by the Allied troops.

Years passed in the jungle with these four soldiers continuing to perform their sworn duty of harrying the enemy at every opportunity and gather intelligence as best they could. At a certain point, when most everybody they saw was dressed in civilian clothing, they began thinking that this too was a ruse from the Allied forces to lull the Japanese guerrilla soldiers into a false sense of confidence. They considered the fact that every time they fired on these “civilians” shortly thereafter search parties would arrive hunting them. Over time they had gradually let their solitude twist their minds into thinking everyone was an enemy, even their own fellow Japanese who would occasionally come and try to find them and get them to come home. These of course in their minds were Japanese prisoners forced to come lure them away from the safety of the jungle.

 

[SapientWolf]

Nationalistic evils justified by nationalist pride.

That goes for everything.
Killing in the name of and dropping atomic bombs on citizens.

Though people will justify any excuse for their country because they were born there.
Nationalistic pride, when it comes to killing, is the most disgusting concept on this planet.

Humans have warred with each other before nations even existed. And will likely continue to do so when they exist no longer.

 

[StayDead]

Guy sounds like an idiot.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/a-japanese-soldier-who-continued-fighting-wwii-29-years-after-the-japanese-surrendered-because-he-didnt-know/

If reading that makes you think he's an idiot then I guess we must have completely different ideas of what an idiot is. Yes they were suspicious about everything and everyone that was trying to get them to surrender, but when you've been mentally at war for over 5-10 years it's not surprising they were incredibly suspicious of anything that happened. I don't think anyone would have guessed Japan would lose the war so quickly.

 

[YoungHav]

The soldier worship even extends to foreign soldiers lol. Any murderer that doesn't sign up for the military or a police force is doing it wrong. The public will defend you if you have dat uniform.

 

[Kiraly]

There's truly a defense force for everything here on gaf.

Just as there is a defense force for the great United States of America dropping two nuclear bombs on civilian communities.

 

[StayDead]

The soldier worship even extends to foreign soldiers lol. Any murderer that doesn't sign up for the military or a police force is doing it wrong. The public will defend you if you have dat uniform.

I don't agree with war and I don't agree with even having a military but I have a lot of repect for the soldiers of WW2 because in most cases they didn't have a choice but to do what they did. It makes me wish people would learn from what happened to all those poor innocent men thrown into battle and never have that happen again, anywhere.

 

[jimi_dini]

Kill 30 people who aren't trying to kill you, you're a mass murderer.

I agree. Obama is a mass murderer.

Interesting contrast:

Kill 30 people during war, you're a normal person.

Kill 30 people after, you're a crazy person.

Something to be learned here.

I will add to that:

Order people to kill way more people not during war and people will call you president and like your charisma.

Kill way more people in a country thousands of miles away from yourself not during war by using remote robots and people will call it a job.

One moment, I have to puke.

Guy sounds like an idiot.

Guy sounds as if war totally broke him and made him crazy. Complain about war, not about the effects of war.

 

[vas_a_morir]

Just as there is a defense force for the great United States of America dropping two nuclear bombs on civilian communities.

If you choose to build vital cogs of your war machine in areas heavy-populated with civilians, you must understand the great risk of civilian casualties associated with that decision. The leadership of Japan made the decision to do that. You honestly can't expect a foreign Army not to attack your military bases just because there are civilians there. There are civilians in/near every military base, including Pearl Harbor.

I admit we'll never know what would have happened without the attacks. If you had to make the decision on how to end the war as quick as possible and you want to minimize Japanese civilian casualties at all costs, what would you have done? Of course, you won't answer that question. No one ever does.

 

[Rehynn]

First thought:

YYYYUP! Kamasuka!

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

If reading that makes you think he's an idiot then I guess we must have completely different ideas of what an idiot is. Yes they were suspicious about everything and everyone that was trying to get them to surrender, but when you've been mentally at war for over 5-10 years it's not surprising they were incredibly suspicious of anything that happened. I don't think anyone would have guessed Japan would lose the war so quickly.

plenty of soldiers from other countries have been at war for a long time and they didn't commit these acts. Japanese people, letters from family, Japanese officers, everyone was telling tehm the war was over but he chose to ignore the many, many messages. no sympathy at all.

Just as there is a defense force for the great United States of America dropping two nuclear bombs on civilian communities.

how would you have ended the war quicker? Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't just tiny little hamlets with peaceful farmers, they were cities with strategic military resources and manufacturing.

 

[Minion101]

I always enjoy thinking about all the moral issues this war brings up.

 

[yogloo]

He is a a real life hachiko.

 

[legend166]

Moral relativism from weaboos is the worst kind of moral relativism.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Moral relativism from weaboos is the worst kind of moral relativism.

This pretty much boils down to dismissively saying "defense force," and that's no way to participate in a discussion.

 

[kurbaan]

And saved the lives of millions.

only in America.

 

[legend166]

This pretty much boils down to dismissively saying "defense force," and that's no way to participate in a discussion.

Okay, let me expand.

Japan launched a war of aggression first against China, then against the United States, and then the rest of the pacific in the 30s and 40s. They were directly responsible for the deaths of 20 million Chinese civilians. They committed horrific war crimes against civilians in practically every country they invaded.

To say that there were no 'good or bad' sides in that was is a poor attempt to white wash the crimes of the aggressor by appealing to the crimes of the victim. I would certainly agree the Allies were not pure saints. They too committed atrocities. But there is absolutely a difference between the two - because one was the aggressor.

As far as this soldier goes - it seems as though he was completely and utterly brainwashed. That's sad, but it doesn't take away his personal responsibility. He murdered civilians because of his fanatical support to a fascist, imperialist regime. It's easy to say 'Oh he was just a soldier following orders', but history shows us that for most soldiers, there comes a point where most put their own safety above any orders they receive. For this guy to last 30 years tells me he was incredibly committed to the cause. And when the cause is invading countries on an imperial conquest, you'll forgive people for not loving this dude.

 

[StayDead]

Okay, let me expand.

Japan launched a war of aggression first against China, then against the United States, and then the rest of the pacific in the 30s and 40s. They were directly responsible for the deaths of 20 million Chinese civilians. They committed horrific war crimes against civilians in practically every country they invaded.

To say that there were no 'good or bad' sides in that was is a poor attempt to white wash the crimes of the aggressor by appealing to the crimes of the victim. I would certainly agree the Allies were not pure saints. They too committed atrocities. But there is absolutely a difference between the two - because one was the aggressor.

As far as this soldier goes - it seems as though he was completely and utterly brainwashed. That's sad, but it doesn't take away his personal responsibility. He murdered civilians because of his fanatical support to a fascist, imperialist regime. It's easy to say 'Oh he was just a soldier following orders', but history shows us that for most soldiers, there comes a point where most put their own safety above any orders they receive. For this guy to last 30 years tells me he was incredibly committed to the cause. And when the cause is invading countries on an imperial conquest, you'll forgive people for not loving this dude.

I realise this is true, but saying this about one country and not another is entirely fair now is it. War time is horrible and countries do horrible things in various countries they occupy, it's happened since the dawn of humanity and it should be stopped, but it doesn't mean one side should take the large majority of the blame just because they lost the war.

If you were to total up the amount of civillian deaths caused by Allied troops and the amount of rapes commited by Allied troops in Germany and especially Berlin. Every single side did horrible vile things in the war and looking back at it afterwards it's not fair to take what the governments ordered and what a minority of soldiers actually did to people worldwide and tar every single soldier in especially the armies of the losing side as some kind of monsters because of what their country did.

Do you think the man here, who yes, mistakingly killed innocent people after the war was over, really had any say or decision to what happened in China? No he didn't and much like many other young men in those days who were lucky enough to survive the war they had to live with what they saw for the rest of their lives. For example my Grandad was a Desert Rat and he served in active combat in Italy and Africa. He went senile shortly after I was born but he had a lot of medals that I got to see when I got older.

After he returned from the war he never spoke to anyone, not even his own family or my nan about what happened in his time of service and what he saw. For someone to completely shut out their family like that it means he must have seen some terrible things happen to his comrades in his time of active service and young men of all ages worldwide went through a similar situation during that time period. Under any banner, flag or man, all young men at that time be they Allied or Axis had similar experiences.

If a person person truely commited horrific acts, for example aiding the genocide of millions out of choice (see the SS members who were mostly psycopaths) then fair enough they deserve no respect, but your general footsoldier no matter who they fought for should be respected one and the same. The man here killed civillians mistakingly and he blindly followed the orders that he should stay at his post until his commanding officer come to get, but I personally believe he still deserves to have a peaceful death after having his life turned upside down by a war that should've never had to happen and wouldn't have if humanity wasn't so horrible.

I'd also prefer to not be called a moral revolutionist and a weaboo for my stance considering you most likely are basing that off of my choice of avatar. Please let's try and keep this respectful.

 

[NahNever]

I'm sorry, but I can't shake the feeling that the defence of this mans behaviours wouldn't be so prevalent if it wasn't because of a bias towards Japanese culture (never give up type samurai ideology). Would a German soldier have acted the same way, how much understanding would have been afforded to him, considering they were just as brainwashed as Japanese soldiers?

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I'm sorry, but I can't shake the feeling that the defence of this mans behaviours wouldn't be so prevalent if it wasn't because of a bias towards Japanese culture (never give up type samurai ideology). Would a German soldier have acted the same way, how much understanding would have been afforded to him, considering they were just as brainwashed as Japanese soldiers?

That's like, your opinion, man. Unfortunately we don't have any examples of your hypothetical situation occurring with which to compare.

Personally, if the circumstances were similar, I'd feel sorry for the guy. It's unrealistic to expect some kind of magical innate set of morals in a person when they spend their entire life being brainwashed in a bubble of propaganda and come from a culture where going against the grain is a quick way to get ostracized or killed.

 

[legend166]

I realise this is true, but saying this about one country and not another is entirely fair now is it. War time is horrible and countries do horrible things in various countries they occupy, it's happened since the dawn of humanity and it should be stopped, but it doesn't mean one side should take the large majority of the blame just because they lost the war.

If you were to total up the amount of civillian deaths caused by Allied troops and the amount of rapes commited by Allied troops in Germany and especially Berlin. Every single side did horrible vile things in the war and looking back at it afterwards it's not fair to take what the governments ordered and what a minority of soldiers actually did to people worldwide and tar every single soldier in especially the armies of the losing side as some kind of monsters because of what their country did.

Do you think the man here, who yes, mistakingly killed innocent people after the war was over, really had any say or decision to what happened in China? No he didn't and much like many other young men in those days who were lucky enough to survive the war they had to live with what they saw for the rest of their lives. For example my Grandad was a Desert Rat and he served in active combat in Italy and Africa. He went senile shortly after I was born but he had a lot of medals that I got to see when I got older.

After he returned from the war he never spoke to anyone, not even his own family or my nan about what happened in his time of service and what he saw. For someone to completely shut out their family like that it means he must have seen some terrible things happen to his comrades in his time of active service and young men of all ages worldwide went through a similar situation during that time period. Under any banner, flag or man, all young men at that time be they Allied or Axis had similar experiences.

If a person person truely commited horrific acts, for example aiding the genocide of millions out of choice (see the SS members who were mostly psycopaths) then fair enough they deserve no respect, but your general footsoldier no matter who they fought for should be respected one and the same. The man here killed civillians mistakingly and he blindly followed the orders that he should stay at his post until his commanding officer come to get, but I personally believe he still deserves to have a peaceful death after having his life turned upside down by a war that should've never had to happen and wouldn't have if humanity wasn't so horrible.

I'd also prefer to not be called a moral revolutionist and a weaboo for my stance considering you most likely are basing that off of my choice of avatar. Please let's try and keep this respectful.

It's not about who lost the war. It's about who started it.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

It's not about who lost the war. It's about who started it.

Unless you win or can successfully fool the world about who was the true aggressor, of course.

 

[cafemomo]

RIP Onoda-san.

I bought your book today

Should be a good read

 

[Jenov]

RIP Onoda-san.

I bought your book today

Should be a good read

Ugh, the guy was a crazy murderer. He shouldn't be given any positive regard. It's rather sad to see some people trying to twist it differently because "oh he thought it was war!" His fanaticism and mental instability caused him to kill innocent people. He's no different than the Sandy Hook shooter who thought he was "saving children from the evils of society." They were both insane and killed innocents because they lost their senses.

 

[legend166]

Unless you win or can successfully fool the world about who was the true aggressor, of course.

I'm only talking about WWII. No one is foolibg anyone as to who the true agressor was.

 

[cafemomo]

Ugh, the guy was a crazy murderer. He shouldn't be given any positive regard. It's rather sad to see some people trying to twist it differently because "oh he thought it was war!" His fanaticism and mental instability caused him to kill innocent people. He's no different than the Sandy Hook shooter who thought he was "saving children from the evils of society." They were both insane and killed innocents because they lost their senses.

Where in my post did I put him in a positive light? All I said was rest in peace.

As for the book I'm just interested in his story and experiences in life.

I've read the communist manifesto, mien kampf, the green book, etc among others.

It doesn't mean I'm going to blindly follow their views.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Where in my post did I put him in a positive light? All I said was rest in peace.

As for the book I'm just interested in his story and experiences in life.

I've read the communist manifesto, mien kampf, the green book, etc among others.

It doesn't mean I'm going to blindly follow their views.

Apparently you're supposed to dismiss such people as simply insane, condemn them as such, and promptly forget about them.

That's one way to make sure their kind never comes up again!

 

[FourMyle]

Moral relativism from weaboos is the worst kind of moral relativism.

I guess they don't understand that the position they'd be on in this picture wouldn't be of the one holding the sword.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I guess they don't understand that the position they'd be on in this picture wouldn't be of the one holding the sword.

What are you going for with this post and picture?

That you can't be friendly with a nation that was once at war with yours?

That Japan executed western prisoners during the war?

 

[cafemomo]

What are you going for with this post and picture?

That you can't be friendly with a nation that was once at war with yours?

That Japan executed western prisoners during the war?

He/She is probably implying that people who "adore" Japanese culture will go to the ends of earth to defend the atrocities and genocides they did during the war.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

He/She is probably implying that people who "adore" Japanese culture will go to the ends of earth to defend the atrocities and genocides they did during the war.

Probably not a great picture to use as evidence, then.

 

[universalmind]

If reading that makes you think he's an idiot then I guess we must have completely different ideas of what an idiot is. Yes they were suspicious about everything and everyone that was trying to get them to surrender, but when you've been mentally at war for over 5-10 years it's not surprising they were incredibly suspicious of anything that happened. I don't think anyone would have guessed Japan would lose the war so quickly.

Christ.