in article 2tm99gF1vl9m2U1@uni-berlin.de, m.yoshida at masa@yahoo.co.jp
wrote on 10/20/04 1:53 PM:

> "Ernest Schaal" <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote in message
> news:BD9C18DA.29A81%eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp...
>> 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?
> 
> I said three times here in this thread that my position is closed to
> Prof. Hata's one.
> 
> Masayuki

Prof. Hata's article never comes out and answers the questions I asked you.
Now let us do this simple.

Prof. Hata wrote that he expressed doubts about some of the sources, but he
neither denied nor affirmed that the rapes occurred. Do you think the rape
occurred?

Prof. Hata never commented on whether he thought the Japanese military
committed atrocities. Instead, he wrote merely on the number of deaths. Do
you doubt that the Japanese military committed atrocities?


Prof. Hata never commented on whether he thought the deaths were justified.
Do you think the 40,000-50,000 deaths were justified?