Allied War Crimes in the Pacific

[A Potts]

Let us be honest. War crimes were committed against the Japanese.

There are many reasons for this and I do not try to down play the war crimes committed by the Japanese.

However, Australian, American and others committed what can only be described as war crimes against surrendering Japanese.

What are your thoughts?

[Warlord]

I think it´s not easy not to believe yourself Supreme Judge when you have in your hands, a member of a race that caused so much pain and suffering without justification.

Many veterans that killed Jap prisoners, for instance, must have had in their heads pictures of Dutch women and children thrown down into mineshafts hundreds of meters deep, of Filipino newborns bayoneted in the head, of British nurses machine-gunned while made to walk into the sea, of American living skeletons burned to death inside the caves where they were held captive, of Chinese civilians used for target practice...

The list is too long not to feel the same hatred allied soldiers felt back in those days against beings which disdained to such an extent the value of human life, even their own.

[Owen]

However, Australian, American and others committed what can only be described as war crimes against surrendering Japanese.

First the Japs had to be taken prisoner.
I'm sure many a trigger finger was "accidently" forgotten to be released.
I've read many a time of 14th Army soldiers saying the Japs were like vermin and had to be destroyed.

[von Poop]

Any specific 'Substantial' incidents, or links to accounts?
I'm not very clued up on this at all.

Edit: maybe one or two on the excellent 'atrocities of WW2' site, but I've not fully read it yet:
Massacres and Atrocities of WWII in the Pacific Region

Cheers,
Adam.

[Harry Ree]

Owen,I feel draws on the truth regarding the behaviour of the Japanese.Theirs was a different military culture framed in the philosophy of the Knights of the Bushido.Surrender to the enemy was not an option for the Japanese Imperial Forces and its leadership preferred to commit Hari Kari (spelling perhaps) to living with the feeling of personal failure.

Above all was the loyalty to the Emperor, a figure that the Japanese had never heard speak until he addressed surrender to them in August 1945 and yet this loyalty had been established from the dawn of the foundation of the Japanese Empire over 2600 years (Japanese calender). This loyalty was thought to have it origins in the principles of "Hakko Ichiu" (making the world one big family) and "Kodo" meaning that "Hakko Ichiu" could only be attained by loyalty to the Emperor.These two concepts were at the heart of the Japanese military powers who used them to further their own agenda of Japanese territorial expansion throughout south east Asia.

This moral code was enacted on the battlefield and determined how captured enemy personnel and civilians would be treated.Moreover it determined how the Japanese would conduct themselves in defeat. Wounded Japanese in the majority of cases saw their predicament as an opportunity to kill their enemy rather than receive aid to preserve their life.

There is no doubt that Allied forces initially treated Japanese combatants with due regard to the Geneva Convention but Japanese battlefield behaviour which prevented them from surrendering and then concealing weapons when captured in order to kill Allied soldiers in a suicide act led to Allied units reviewing how the Japanese were were to be handled in defeat. The Japanese who were saved were those who surrendered without concealed arms and weapons and as a precaution were made strip down to their briefs.At this stage they were thought to represent minimum danger to their captors.Further there was a motivation from Allied soldiers to kill the Japanese from their hatred of the enemy as atrocity reports carried out by the Japanese filtered back to the Allied side.

[spidge]

There was an "atrocity" committed by a POW camp guard in New Zealand. His brother was one of the 23 Coastwatchers (my avatar) who was beheaded on Tarawa in 1942.

He went berserk and mowed them down with a machine gun. They say he could not have known of his brothers death.

I would have helped him!

Allied atrocities have to be placed into the correct context. Many of the Australians for instance 6th/7th/9th divisions had come from the Middle East where it was predominantly a clean war on both civilians and the enemy and POW's were treated fairly well.

When these Australian troops came up against this type of warfare they reciprocated in kind without hesitation.

A friend of my fathers from the 9th division was repulsed at the Japanese "dirty tricks" and all of his company shot the Japanese twice. If they wanted to die with honour, they were obliged with another bullet, just in case any of them made a miraculous recovery and decided to explode a grenade amongst them.

[A Potts]

I am so glad that you have not reacted badly to my assertions. I also apologise for the lateness of my reply.

Let's put it this way, from my converastions with Australian WW2 Pacific veterans, they thought that the Japanese were worse than scum.

However there are many comments along the lines of:

1. 'We never took prisoners'
2. 'After that we never took prisoners'

These were not idle words. They meant something.

They certainly were not 'top' organised or planned, but still very real. If a soldier surrenders, they should be treated according to the rules of war (the Geneva Convention).

My father mentions to me that my grandfather shot prisoners, I have no way of knowing this, but then again I find it quite believable.

I know of one instance when Japanese prisoners (20+) were taken in New Guinea and the air supply drop missed its mark and landed on the Japanese lines. The Japanese soldiers were then executed.

Do I feel I can morally judge these men - NO. Do I feel that it breached the Geneva Convention - YES.

Thanks,
Aaron

[4th wilts]

i remember years ago,that there was a visit to london,a state visit i believe,by that scum hirohito.old soldiers were throwing their medals at the car where h.m the queen,and that jap b#####d,was in.the coppers were trying all they could to stop those old boys.shameful indeed.lee.

[Donnie]

My great grandfather never fought the Japanese, though he did fight the Germans the Italians and the Arabs. i remember my great grandfather did say before he died that "dont think it was just the germans that did bad things, we did it aswell. War changed me and my mates". Well that chilled me when he said that.......but in fierce combat, hand to hand fighting i spose that maybe some rules of war are forgotten. My Great Uncle Cyril however, he did fight the Japs in Burma and he hated them deeply....no doubt he did some terrible things...i dont know of any POWs being shot but i do have a knife that he killed a Jap with


Donnie

[A Potts]

Originally Posted by Donnie

My great grandfather never fought the Japanese, though he did fight the Germans the Italians and the Arabs. i remember my great grandfather did say before he died that "dont think it was just the germans that did bad things, we did it aswell. War changed me and my mates". Well that chilled me when he said that.......but in fierce combat, hand to hand fighting i spose that maybe some rules of war are forgotten. My Great Uncle Cyril however, he did fight the Japs in Burma and he hated them deeply....no doubt he did some terrible things...i dont know of any POWs being shot but i do have a knife that he killed a Jap with


Donnie

Thanks Donnie,

My Grandfather hated the Japanese, so much so that he would always if the thing was made in Japan.

If it was he would not touch it.

Aaron