英語板対応スレ@Wiki 外国の戦後処理等

メニュー

資料Links

行動

記事スクラップ





意見要望



html plugin Error : このプラグインを使うにはこのページの編集権限を「管理者のみ」に設定してください。


※上記の広告は60日以上更新のないWIKIに表示されています。更新することで広告が下部へ移動します。

USA have been the cause of so much modern world grief..

To compare the savagery of USA to japan is very silly.

Heres some reasons USA is by far the most aggresive nation of modern times.

Massive war crimes in Vietnam war.
Destruction of democracy in Chile.
The USA supported the military junta in Greece 1967-1974.
Total support for Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Support for Pol Pot genocide.
Colonization of Hawaii.
Training of terrorists in Latin America.
Funding, weapons and training for Nicaraguan terrorists.
Support for Indonesian massacre of Chinese.
Support for Indonesian invasion and massacre of East Timor.

President Clinton ordered the bombing of a Sudanese pharmaceuticals factory, thinking erroneously that it was for producing
some sort of armaments. Several hundred people were killed in this. Then the USA put trade restrictions on Sudan so that
pharmaceuticals could not be imported. As a result, since that time many tens of thousands of additional people have died of
malaria because that factory was producing anti-malaria drugs.
This crime in itself was much more serious than the 2001-9-11 suicide hijacking

How about some illegal USA invasions.
(lauching aggresive war is worst of the warcrimes declared by the Geneva convention)
How about USA invasions...

Invasion of Haiti
Invasion of Panama
Invasion of Grenada
Attempted invasion of Cuba
Killing thousands of innocent poor Afghans

As for WW2.
Participation in the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians in terrorist attacks on Germany in the Second World War

First use of nuclear weapons in Japan in WW2.

The USA fire-bombed Tokyo, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, simply with the intention of terrorising the population.
This is a serious war crime. Both during WW2 and ever since then, the US government has openly expressed and followed
a doctrine of mass murder of civilians as a means to demoralize the enemy and minimize their own losses.
The Geneva convention was supposed to outlaw this.

The world has changed alot since USA became a superpower due to WW2 profits and the invent of Nukes.

In 2002/2003, the USA's very clever propaganda organisations have come up with a new euphemism for naked aggression.
Now they're calling it pre-emptive military action.
The US Americans are experts in language abuse. It used to be taken for granted that the country which attacks first is the guilty party.
This approach had the advantage that if no one wants to be the first to attack, then no one will ever attack.
So outlawing aggression has the effect of minimizing war. Now the USA has changed that with the new doctrine of pre-emptive war.
Since the USA is the leader of the world, all countries in the world will now conclude that they can conduct a pre-emptive action with justification.

I could go on but i wont...Some food for thought for those that believe USA is about freedom..
Wake up USA is the most aggresive nation since the Romans



Britain's ''Operation Nippoff''



The Japanese Soldier, a Casualty of War Films


By Stephen Hunter
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 14, 2007; Page N03

The Japanese soldier -- that is, the human being under the helmet and behind the rifle -- has long been AWOL from our movies.

No director has ever really looked at him, until now, in Clint Eastwood's corrective "Letters From Iwo Jima," which opened here Friday.
By my count, of the more than 600 English-language World War II movies made since 1940, only four have even acknowledged
the humanity of the soldiers of Nippon. There may be a few I've missed, but not many.

The war was over so long ago, and the German soldier has been humanized, time and again, beginning in 1958 with
"The Young Lions," in which Marlon Brando played a civilized Lt. Christian Diestl, thereby utterly reversing novelist
Irwin Shaw's portrait of a decent young man lured into decadence and evil by Nazism.
As early as 1977, Sam Peckinpah could make a movie called "Cross of Iron," in which the heroes were German soldiers
fighting on the Eastern Front, and a big American star, James Coburn, could front the picture.
A jovial TV comedy played for years about American POWs and their merry captors at a fictitious Stalag,
the late and unlamented "Hogan's Heroes."

So it's odd that such a revision never occurred for our opponents from the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.


George Will : A rare film raises empathy for the Japanese conscript

Clint Eastwood's "Letters From Iwo Jima" is a civilized achievement that also is up for Best Picture.
Washington Post
Published: February 25, 2007
WASHINGTON - On March 9, 1945, 346 B-29s left the Marianas, bound for Tokyo, where they dropped 1,858 tons of incendiaries
that destroyed one-sixth of Japan's capital, killing 83,000. Gen. Curtis LeMay, then commander of the air assault on Japan, later
wrote, "We scorched and boiled and baked to death more people in Tokyo ... than went up in vapor at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined."

That was inaccurate -- 80,000 died at Hiroshima alone. And in his new biography of LeMay, Barrett Tillman writes that the general was
more empathetic than his rhetoric suggested: "He could envision a three-year-old girl screaming for her mother in a burning
house." But LeMay was a warrior "whose government gave him a task that required killing large numbers of enemy civilians so the war
could be won."

It has been hotly debated how much indiscriminate killing of civilians in the Asian and European theaters really was "required"
and therefore was morally permissible. Even during the war there was empathy for civilian victims, at least European victims.
And less than 15 years after the war, movies (e.g., "The Young Lions," 1958) offered sympathetic portrayals of common German
soldiers swept into combat by the cyclone of a war launched by a tyrant.

But attitudes about the Japanese were especially harsh during the war and have been less softened by time.
During the war, it was acceptable for a billboard -- signed by Adm. William F. (Bull) Halsey -- at a U.S. Navy base in the South
Pacific to exhort "Kill Japs, Kill Japs, Kill More Japs." Killing America's enemies was Halsey's trade. His rhetoric, however, was
symptomatic of the special ferocity, rooted in race, of the war against Japan: "We are drowning and burning them all over the
Pacific, and it is just as much pleasure to burn them as to drown them." Halsey endorsed the Chinese proverb that the "Jap race"
was the result of "a mating between female apes and the worst Chinese criminals."

Wartime signs in West Coast restaurants announced: "This Restaurant Poisons Both Rats and Japs." In 1943, the Navy's representative
on the committee considering what should be done with a defeated Japan recommended genocide -- "the almost total elimination of
the Japanese as a race."

Stephen Hunter, movie critic for the Washington Post, says that of the more than 600 English-language movies made about World War II
since 1940, only four -- most notably "The Bridge on the River Kwai" (1957) -- "have even acknowledged the humanity" of Japanese
soldiers.

Perhaps empathy for the plight of the common enemy conscript is a postwar luxury; it certainly is a civilized achievement, an achievement
of moral imagination that often needs the assistance of art. That is why it is notable that Clint Eastwood's "Letters From Iwo Jima"
was one of five films nominated for Best Picture.

It is stressful viewing. An unsparing attempt to come as close as cinema can to conveying the reality of combat, specifically
the fighting that killed 6,821 Americans and all but 1,083 of the 22,000 Japanese soldiers on the small (eight square miles)
black lava island. Remember the searing first 15 minutes of "Saving Private Ryan" -- the carnage at Omaha Beach?
In "Letters From Iwo Jima" it is exceeded, with harrowing permutations.

The Japanese commander on the island, Tadamichi Kuribayashi, was -- like the admiral who attacked Pearl Harbor,
Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto -- a cosmopolitan warrior who had lived in, and never stopped admiring, America.

In 2005, a team of Japanese archaeologists scouring the island's man-made caves for artifacts of the battle found a sack
of undelivered mail from Kuribayashi and other officers and soldiers. All the writers knew they faced overwhelming force Japan had no assistance to send and were doomed to die in accordance with the Japanese military code that forbade
surrender and encouraged suicide.
http://www.startribune.com/562/story/1021870.html





マッカーサーが連れてきたニューディーラーの正体


日本の戦後は、アメリカの政界の最も悪質な部分である「ニューディーラー」にたちによってつくられた。
彼らニューディーラーたちは、1930年代のアメリカのリベラル勢力である。彼らの代表がフランクリン・ルーズベルト大統領であった。
この一部が敗戦直後にマッカーサー元師の取り巻きとして日本にも上陸した。
この者たちによって私たち日本人は、敗戦直後から現在までずっと管理・教育されてきた。この事を英文で書くと次のようになる。
The‘New Dealers'(i.e the prototypical globalists)brought int japan with their ideeas that brainwashed the japanese people
duringt the Occupation years.As a result,japan has led a sheltered existence for the past half-century from the rest of
the world in terms of prevailing political thoughts,thus creating a one- domineted ruling class. This ruling class then
intentionally isolated the country from the outside, in order to maintain control over the japanese people.
上の英文の訳
ニューディーラー(すなわち、グローバリストの初期の形態)が、占領時代に日本に彼らの思想を植えつけた。
その後、それらの意図的な思想が、日本国民の思考の中に根づいた。だから日本は、この半世紀の間ずっと、
世界中で通用している本物の政治思想や考え方から壁を作られて遮られてきた。
そして国内に専制的なひとつの支配階級をつくった。この支配層は日本国内の支配を維持するために、
日本を外側世界と意思が通じない状態に置く原因をつくった。
この英文を、自分の友人や知人のアメリカ人やイギリス人その他の英語圏国民に見せてみとよい。
政治問題に関心のある少し知的な英米人であれば、必ずそれなりの興味深い反応を示すだろう。
もし、本当に頭の良い賢明なアメリカ人であったら、「どうして、お前は、このことを知っているのだ?」
と驚かれたあとに、さらに多くの恐るべき真実をあれこれ語ってくれるだろう。
引用は副島隆彦「日本の危機の本質」P33~34

http://soejima.to/(副島隆彦の学問道場)
http://geopoli.exblog.jp/(地政学を英国で学ぶ)
http://amesei.exblog.jp/(ジャパン・ハンドラーズとアメリカ政治情報)
http://www.aynrand2001japan.com/index1.html(藤森かよこの日本アイン・ランド研究会)
http://www.tkataoka.com/(片岡鉄哉のアメリカ通信)
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/leeswijzer/  (leeswijzer: boeken annex van dagboek)
http://www5.plala.or.jp/kabusiki/ 株式日記と経済展望
http://www.soejimatakahiko.net/nlm/ リバータリアニズム研究のサイトです。
http://kyuuri.blogtribe.org/ Libertarianism @ Japan



UN World Conference on Racism, Radical Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
http://www.un.org/WCAR/

Analysis: Racism summit outcome
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1533415.stm
The African group never got the clear apology for slavery it wanted from the descendants of those who profited.

Durban: Success in the follow-up
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/09/08/racism.agree/
It dropped a call for reparations and a demand for apologies by African countries, making reference instead to debt relief and other economic and development assistance to Africa.

After Much Wrangling, an Accord at U.N. Race Meeting (requires registration)
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/09/international/09RACE.html
The wording fell far short of what had been sought by some Africans, who had demanded an explicit apology and specific promises of compensation from Europe.
The European delegation refused to apologize explicitly, fearing that they might open themselves up to lawsuits.

Crossfire Over Middle East and Slavery (Reuters)
http://www.imadr.org/durban.news4.html
European Union
"The declaration and the program of action are political, not legal documents. These documents cannot impose obligations or liability or a right to compensation on anyone. Nor are they intended to do so."

  • THE AFRICAN HOLOCAUST- WE CANNOT AFFORD TO FORGET

  • The future of Africa is a nightmare

  • Ivory Coast: Slave Labor Taints Sweetness of World's Chocolate

A History of Hostility in Philippines

U.S. troops aiding fight against rebels may find some islanders avenging long-ago atrocities.
By Richard C. Paddock LA Times Staff Writer February 27, 2003

During the American campaign, Philippine historians say, U.S. troops under Gen. John J.
Pershing committed atrocities against the Tausugs.
The troops massacred hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people, including women and children, they say.
Photos taken at the time show American soldiers standing amid hundreds of bodies.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/295730091.html?did=295730091&FMT=ABS&FMTS=FT&date=Feb+27%2C+2003&author
=Richard+C.+Paddock&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=THE+WORLD%3B+A+History+of+Hostility+in+Philippines%3B+U.S.+
troops+aiding+fight+against+rebels+may+find+some+islanders+avenging+long-ago+atrocities.

Bush's claim that the U.S. freed Filipinos strains the truth, bodes ill for Iraq and probably sets Mark Twain spinning.
By Amy Kaplan Los Angeles Times October 24, 2003
I heard President Bush, in a speech Saturday before the Philippine Congress,
refer to our history in that country as a "model" for establishing democracy in Iraq.
Alluding to the 1898 Spanish-American War, he said, "America is proud of its part in the great story of the Filipino people.
Together our soldiers liberated the Philippines from colonial rule."

Instead, the U.S. annexed the Philippines in 1899 and waged a brutal war to enforce its rule across the archipelago. Nearly 5,000 American soldiers died,
and historians estimate that 250,000 Filipinos perished ? 20,000 were killed in combat and the vast majority died from disease and starvation.
The U.S. Army burned villages and fields, massacred civilians and herded the residents of entire provinces into concentration camps.
http://www.dangerouscitizen.com/Articles/945.aspx

Dutch withhold apology in Indonesia

The Associated Press

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 17, 2005


JAKARTA The Netherlands' foreign minister on Tuesday refused to apologize for the violence in Indonesia before its independence from Dutch colonial rule in the late 1940s, saying only that his expressions of regret had been "clearly received" and come "straight from the heart."

Ben Bot, who is on a three-day visit to Indonesia, said that the large-scale deployment of military forces in 1947 had put the Netherlands "on the wrong side of history."

He also said that he wished to express "my profound regret for all that suffering" caused by the fighting.

But he refused to apologize and sidestepped the issue when pressed by reporters. The embassy said his comments were not to be construed as an apology, which some Indonesian lawmakers have demanded.

"Between friends, what matters first and foremost is the tone of the dialogue, tone we approach each other" with, and the way "we look forward and close certain chapters," he told reporters.

"We should not go into semantics. What is important is that we delivered a message that has been very clearly received in this country and comes straight from the heart."

Bot also reaffirmed comments he made Monday that the Netherlands for the first time recognizes that de facto independence began on Aug. 17, 1945, after insisting it was on Dec. 27, 1949, for the past six decades.

The Indonesian foreign minister, Hassan Wirayuda, said his government had never requested an apology and welcomed Bot's comments.

"We think this is a historical moment when we reconcile our past history," he said. "It will be much easier to move forward and strengthen bilateral relations between the two countries."

Rosihan Anwar, an 83-year-old Indonesian journalist, said Bot's comments were symbolic of a new generation in the Netherlands.

"I think the recognition is a natural thing since the old generations, politicians and veterans have died or are dying," Anwar said.

"In this case, Bot represents the new generation who naturally want to have better relations and cooperation with Indonesia," its biggest former colony.

The debate over the independence date and Dutch actions in the late 1940s have stirred little controversy in Indonesia, where history is overshadowed by the modern problems of terrorist attacks, poverty and the country's difficult transition to democracy.

"It's more a Dutch issue. It's a long time ago," said Bambang Harymurti, chief editor of the country's leading newsmagazine, Tempo. "For an editor, it's boring because it doesn't say anything. You ask Indonesians here, they don't care about this."

Japan's surrender on Aug. 15, 1945, ended the war in Asia and the occupation of Indonesia. But it opened another conflict as the Dutch sought to reclaim sovereignty over the colony they had held for 350 years.

During the so-called police actions in 1947 and 1948, Dutch troops tried to prevent Indonesia from gaining independence by occupying most of the Asian country's islands.

About 5,000 Dutch soldiers and tens of thousands of Indonesians, including women and children, are believed to have died.

The Netherlands did not recognize Indonesia's independence until Dec. 27, 1949, maintaining that the area it knew as the Dutch East Indies remained under its control.

Bot will become the first Dutch cabinet member to attend Indonesia's Independence Day celebrations on Wednesday, partly because of the early dispute over the date.

JAKARTA The Netherlands' foreign minister on Tuesday refused to apologize for the violence in Indonesia before its independence from Dutch colonial rule in the late 1940s, saying only that his expressions of regret had been "clearly received" and come "straight from the heart."

Ben Bot, who is on a three-day visit to Indonesia, said that the large-scale deployment of military forces in 1947 had put the Netherlands "on the wrong side of history."

He also said that he wished to express "my profound regret for all that suffering" caused by the fighting.

But he refused to apologize and sidestepped the issue when pressed by reporters. The embassy said his comments were not to be construed as an apology, which some Indonesian lawmakers have demanded.

"Between friends, what matters first and foremost is the tone of the dialogue, tone we approach each other" with, and the way "we look forward and close certain chapters," he told reporters
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/08/16/news/Indo.php