in article 2tm6vbF211ck1U1@uni-berlin.de, m.yoshida at masa@yahoo.co.jp
wrote on 10/20/04 1:13 PM:

> "Ernest Schaal" <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote in message
> news:BD9BC081.29A25%eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp...
>> 
>> Okay, so you estimate the number of Chinese victims at 40,000-50,000, so why
>> do you say: "One of the reasons why Japanese scholars of modern history use
>> the term "Nanking Incident" would be that the debate is included a question
>> whether or not the "Rape" really took place."
>> 
>> Do you think the rape occurred? Do you doubt that the Japanese military
>> committed atrocities? Do you think the 40,000-50,000 deaths were justified?
>> 
>> There seems to be a conflict between your most recent statement and that of
>> the time before. I am not trying to trick you, instead I am trying to get
>> you to clarify your remarks.
>> 
>> By the way, I doubt the high numbers of the Chinese estimates and the real
>> low numbers of the Japanese apologists. I don't doubt that rape and murder
>> was used as a military tactic to scare other Chinese cities into surrender.
> 
> http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/China/Nanjing/nanjing4.html


You never answered my questions:

Do you think the rape occurred?

Do you doubt that the Japanese military committed atrocities?

Do you think the 40,000-50,000 deaths were justified?