BarkellWH -> RE: Video Tour of a 7 String Guitar (Jul. 26 2012 23:49:00)
|
Stephen and Richard, As I am about 12 to 14 time zones ahead of both of you, I just completed holding my Friday morning Embassy staff meeting and have had time to read your interesting comments on Micronesia, the Japanese, WWII, etc. Great stuff! If you will indulge me, I will add a few comments and observations, in no particular order of importance. Something that is rarely acknowledged is that during the 1930s, the Japanese colonists in Micronesia brought with them, and implemented, good agricultural techniques, particularly terraced farming. Unfortunately, the Micronesians did not continue the practice on their own, and former terraced farms are now covered in rainforest and vegetation. Just to add to what both of you have said regarding Japanese militarism, undoubtedly the militarists set the agenda, but the Emperor and a large majority of the population enthusiastically supported it. As Richard pointed out, scholarship during the last 20 years reveals that the Emperor was heavily involved in the planning and encouragement of Japanese Imperial conquests. And like Germany, like Austria (the Anschluss), like Vichy France, there were far more Japanese citizens who supported the conquests and war effort than cared to admit it after the war. MacArthur's decision to allow the Emperor to remain on the throne was, and will always be, a controversial decision. If you had polled the American people after the war, I'm sure that 95 percent would have said he should be hanged. (The remaining 5 percent probably would have been pacifists!) And for his part in the Japanese conquests and atrocities, he probably deserved to hang. But, in my opinion, MacArthur was absolutely correct in his decision. It was important, not so much because Hirohito became a puppet, but because to have removed the Emperor would have resulted in the complete breakdown of the society. He was the glue that kept it together and allowed the U.S. occupation to succeed as well as it did. I have always been amused by those who criticize the U.S. for dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, saying that Japan was ready to surrender. There is no evidence to substantiate that claim. All the evidence supports the view that the Japanese expected the U.S. to invade the home islands, and their strategy was to make the invasion so difficult that eventually the U.S. would have to come to terms (an armistice, if you will) without a Japanese surrender. Even after the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the War Party was, to a man, arguing for continuing the fighting. It was only after Nagasaki that the emperor was convinced that the situation was hopeless. It all makes for interesting history. Stephen, when my scheduled departure firms up and I have a hard itinerary, I'll see if there is time to get together in SF. If not, perhaps another time. I like your idea of Richard joining us. I had the great good fortune to meet and have dinner with Richard last year in Texas, where I was involved in providing and injecting foreign policy scenarios into a U.S. Army command post exercise at Fort Hood. I think the three of us would have a wonderful evening together, over dinner and a bottle (or two) of wine. Cheers, Bill
|
|
|
|