wwerewolff@yahoo.com wrote:

> After the war, the Japanese leadership, including the emporer, were
> essentially left unmolested. 

The Tokyo Tribunals led to 7 executions (including the prime minister, 
but not, as you say, the emperor) and 16 life imprisonments (survivors 
eventually released on parole).

But hundreds of thousands of Japanese were charged at the Tokyo 
Tribunals for lesser crimes, and China conducted its own trials, 
executing about 150 convicted war criminals, mostly Japanese, and 
imprisoning others.

It's perfectly true that some dubious characters did get off lightly, or 
even scot-free, but even factoring in Dachau and other related trials, 
one cannot claim that Japan as a whole got off all that lightly compared 
with Germany.

And, anyway, you ignore my point, which has nothing to do with the 
extent of post-war retribution in either country. Essentially, Germany 
took part in creating its own constitution, the Grundgesetz f$(D??(Br die 
Bundesrepublik Deutschland (i.e., they were treated like adults), 
whereas Japan had its constitution bestowed on it by the Americans 
(i.e., they were treated like children).

Try and stick to the point.

>  In Germany they were exterminated.

Hardly. 13 death penalties were meted out in the initial Nuremberg 
trials. A further 13 were executed as a result of later trials at 
Nuremberg and about 140 people were sentenced to various terms of 
imprisonment. Smaller numbers were executed and imprisoned in other trials.

> 70,000 US troops are in still-occupied Germany.  As for still-
> occupied Japan, ever hear of Okinawa?

Uh, yes. All I said was that I've never seen tanks in the streets, as 
you claim.

> Anyway, I can't be bothered wasting time with yet another
> politically corrected jackass trying to lecture me about all
> the current PC mantras 

Whyever not? If I am prepared to waste time on a right-wing libertarian 
extremist such as yourself, who are you to give yourself airs and turn 
your nose up?

Anyway, it's not about political correctness so much as *historical* 
correctness. If your views are based on publications that cannot be 
substantiated by the evidence (and the sources you have cited are 
dubious in the extreme) then you are not just politically incorrect, you 
are *wrong*.

> My fault, though, for posting on this troll thread in the first
> place.

Oh, we all know the OP is a retard. In his case, I suspect it's 
congenital. What's your excuse?


John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com