• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Japan wants an apology

In some ways I can understand why they are asking for a formal apology from a President, but I would argue that it is meaningless and perhaps creates a liability in the context of actual history including all of the actions by both Japan and the US (and everyone else.) On a moral level it is hard to argue WWII actions with any real purpose other than today's context of warfare, but it would be wrong to assume that either side has the high moral road here. We did plenty of things that are reprehensible and so did they (and well as everyone is in WWII.)

I can see showing respect for all we have accomplished with Japan ever since WWII, and I can see showing respect for their memorials of what they lost. But I find it problematic to issue a formal apology for actions we cannot really undo or diminish in impact.

More importantly, I generally do not like the idea of an apology tour by any President as usually we are talking about today's advantageous goals against prior actions we cannot control. As the OP points out it is unlikely there will be a corresponding apology for all the actions that took place in the Pacific Theater of WWII (come to think of it, including actions taken before WWII broke out.)

Where does it end?
 
I knew it. Obama is such a weak and feckless idiot he'll probably go and apologize. No word yet on when the Japanese will apologize for the Rape Of Nanking or attacking Pearl Harbor.
 
OrphanSlug said:
In some ways I can understand why they are asking for a formal apology from a President, but I would argue that it is meaningless and perhaps creates a liability in the context of actual history including all of the actions by both Japan and the US (and everyone else.) On a moral level it is hard to argue WWII actions with any real purpose other than today's context of warfare, but it would be wrong to assume that either side has the high moral road here. We did plenty of things that are reprehensible and so did they (and well as everyone is in WWII.)

I can see showing respect for all we have accomplished with Japan ever since WWII, and I can see showing respect for their memorials of what they lost. But I find it problematic to issue a formal apology for actions we cannot really undo or diminish in impact.

More importantly, I generally do not like the idea of an apology tour by any President as usually we are talking about today's advantageous goals against prior actions we cannot control. As the OP points out it is unlikely there will be a corresponding apology for all the actions that took place in the Pacific Theater of WWII (come to think of it, including actions taken before WWII broke out.)

Where does it end?
Click to expand...

I largely agree, but Japan has formally apologized for their war crimes. I don't see why we shouldn't apologize for our war crimes. (And justified or not, dropping an atomic bomb on top of a civilian population chosen because it had such a high civilian population is, by definition, a war crime.)

It doesn't cost anyone anything for denouncing specific tactics used during war that were wrong. It's not like we lose the war, or like we're going to spend the next 40 years apologizing to Japan for every time we fire bombed their civilian populations.
 
What's an apology even going to do? Isn't a apology kind of meaningless?
 
FieldTheorist said:
I largely agree, but Japan has formally apologized for their war crimes. I don't see why we shouldn't apologize for our war crimes. (And justified or not, dropping an atomic bomb on top of a civilian population chosen because it had such a high civilian population is, by definition, a war crime.)

It doesn't cost anyone anything for denouncing specific tactics used during war that were wrong. It's not like we lose the war, or like we're going to spend the next 40 years apologizing to Japan for every time we fire bombed their civilian populations.
Click to expand...

In today's context what we did in WWII was a war crime. However, that is another mistake we are making. Taking historical actions that we cannot undo and re-judging them in today's context and asking for formal apologies (well after the conditions of a war or conflict coming to an end.)

It is still a reasonable question in my opinion to evaluate the idea of "where does it end?"

How far back, to whom, and what should we be demanding in response from those associated nations? Should we be looking at WWI actions? How far back do we need to go to satisfy everyone?

(And note, those are very loaded questions as ultimately it is impossible to appease everyone that wants something today to make up or apologize for actions that precede us by generations in some cases.)
 
Redress said:
Holy ****ing dishonest thread title. A few Japanese people would like an apology is not nearly the same thing as Japan wants an apology...
Click to expand...
I just now noticed that. That is pretty dishonest, huh?
 
Crovax said:
A-Bomb Survivors Want Obama to Meet, Apologize in Hiroshima - ABC News

So the japs want an apology for the nuclear bombs but are still unwilling to give one for pearl harbor.
Click to expand...

Well, a group does. The government not so much.

...Two leaders of the Tokyo-based nationwide group told a news conference Thursday that many survivors still want an apology, though they have long avoided an outright demand for one out of fear that it would be counterproductive.

Toshiki Fujimori, a survivor of the Hiroshima atomic bombing, said he found it awkward to hear local and central government officials say they are not asking for an apology....
Click to expand...
 
TheGoverness said:
I just now noticed that. That is pretty dishonest, huh?
Click to expand...

It happens a lot. People misrepresent their own sources a ton, which is why it pays to read the sources.
 
Redress said:
It happens a lot. People misrepresent their own sources a ton, which is why it pays to read the sources.
Click to expand...

I agree there was some misrepresentation of the source, but would also offer that this group is appealing to their own government (local and national) for something more formal when Obama visits.

We all know it is not going to happen. But, whatever has become the norm in relations between the government's of Japan and the US that does not seem to be the only defining factor in whom is still appealing for a different condition.

There is still plenty here to evaluate and discuss. From the OP article...

Toshiki Fujimori, a survivor of the Hiroshima atomic bombing, said he found it awkward to hear local and central government officials say they are not asking for an apology.

"I suspect there was a pressure (not to seek an apology) to create an atmosphere that would make it easier for Obama to visit Hiroshima," Fujimori said, declining to identify where the pressure was coming from. "But many of the survivors don't think they can do without an apology at all."
 
jet57 said:
Forget it. Japan owes an apology to the survivors and their families for not giving up when they should have.
Click to expand...

Wait... what? :shock:
 
Well if the US invaded Japan I am sure Japan would have suffered much more. Besides the fire bombing of Tokyo and other cities killed more people.
 
Redress said:
Holy ****ing dishonest thread title. A few Japanese people would like an apology is not nearly the same thing as Japan wants an apology...
Click to expand...

Just a few 180,000, small potatoes...
 
OrphanSlug said:
Wait... what? :shock:
Click to expand...

The Japanese were for all intents and purposes defeated, but the emperor and his generals decided that scarping the bottom of the barrel for troops ala Hitler was the thing to do. That left the US with the only other choice of an invasion of Japan proper with an estimated one million man loss, just for starters and not including the Japanese losses. War is War: Sherman burned Atlanta, the British fire bombed Dresden, we fire bombed Tokyo and other towns. So what were our real choices in Aug of 1945?

As I say, Japan needs to apologize to its own people.
 
Crovax said:
Just a few 180,000, small potatoes...
Click to expand...

That is about 1 % of the Japanese population, and assumes all the survivors want an apology. So the point stands, you where being incredibly dishonest.
 
OrphanSlug said:
In today's context what we did in WWII was a war crime. However, that is another mistake we are making. Taking historical actions that we cannot undo and re-judging them in today's context and asking for formal apologies (well after the conditions of a war or conflict coming to an end.)

It is still a reasonable question in my opinion to evaluate the idea of "where does it end?"

How far back, to whom, and what should we be demanding in response from those associated nations? Should we be looking at WWI actions? How far back do we need to go to satisfy everyone?

(And note, those are very loaded questions as ultimately it is impossible to appease everyone that wants something today to make up or apologize for actions that precede us by generations in some cases.)
Click to expand...

There were no laws against genocide in the Ottoman Empire (nor, indeed, in the world) when the Armenian Genocide took place. Does that mean that Turkey shouldn't have apologized because there wasn't a law against committing genocide in either Ottoman or international law at that point in history?
 
Redress said:
That is about 1 % of the Japanese population, and assumes all the survivors want an apology. So the point stands, you where being incredibly dishonest.
Click to expand...

I thought the point was linking an apology to President Obama's visit - the first visit by a sitting US President to the site of the bombing.

Only thing served by nit picking is to deflect from the real potential problem and the issue of an apology.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I thought the point was linking an apology to President Obama's visit - the first visit by a sitting US President to the site of the bombing.
Click to expand...

Then why did he lie about it?

Only thing served by nit picking is to deflect from the real potential problem and the issue of an apology.
Click to expand...

Going to Japan is not a problem. Obama, in deciding to go to Hiroshima, has done nothing inappropriate. If he apologized, that might be something to complain about. He has not done that. He might not(probably won't) do that. Crying that it is possible that maybe in the future some one might possibly, but probably won't, do something they might not like is about painfully ****ing silly.

And now that I have that out of the way, the thread title is a flat out lie still, despite your trying to deflect from that.
 
Redress said:
Then why did he lie about it?



Going to Japan is not a problem. Obama, in deciding to go to Hiroshima, has done nothing inappropriate. If he apologized, that might be something to complain about. He has not done that. He might not(probably won't) do that. Crying that it is possible that maybe in the future some one might possibly, but probably won't, do something they might not like is about painfully ****ing silly.

And now that I have that out of the way, the thread title is a flat out lie still, despite your trying to deflect from that.
Click to expand...

Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. Carry on with your petty outrage while others maybe would like to discuss the actual issue.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I thought the point was linking an apology to President Obama's visit - the first visit by a sitting US President to the site of the bombing.

Only thing served by nit picking is to deflect from the real potential problem and the issue of an apology.
Click to expand...

Greetings, CJ. :2wave:

I don't understand why an apology from us is being asked for! They attacked us first at Pearl Harbor, and over 2400 people were killed! Did they expect us to just accept what they did? Unbelievably cheeky and incredibly stupid if they did, IMO! It's just sad that so many Japanese people that had nothing to do with their government's decision died as a result of their miscalculation! :2mad:
 
CanadaJohn said:
Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. Carry on with your petty outrage while others maybe would like to discuss the actual issue.
Click to expand...

If he wanted to discuss actual issues, then why lie?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom