On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 09:49:36 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:


"Michael Starke" wrote in message
news:ly5Gb.439267$Dw6.1339032@attbi_s02...


He also cites the poor treatment Philippinos got
by American forces after the Spanish occupation. Bradley says the
Japanese were not doing anything different than Americans
had done in the west.


So when did the US Army adopt germ warfare in the Phillipines
andwhile there were arguable atrocities by American soldiers, it
should also be noted that this occured during a very ugly guerrilla
war-- but that civilians not-involved in such hostilities were by and
large not simply left alone, but actively aided by the American
authorities.
For example, the Philipene education system was almost completely
built by the U.S. among other things. More importantly, you should
note that the U.S. agreed with the Taft amendment to return the
phillipines to local control, and followed through in 1946-- the
planned date being delayed due to the war.
Japan, conversely, viewed their possessions as resource points, from
which everything of value was to be extracted. This included the human
resources.



The Japanese said the Geneva Convention rules did not apply to
Americans because they indiscriminately bombed civilians in
their raids on Japan.


Complete ********. The US raids on Japan didnt start in earnest
until almost 10 years AFTER the Japanese bombed civilian
centres in China

And such an arguement would play better if you could say the
treatment of U.S. fliers differed noticably from that of other POWS--
when the Bataan death march occured, bomb one hadn't fallen on Japan.
At no point can I think of any officer who gave and seriously aattmped
to insure compliance with, order mandating the treatment of Allied
POW's in accordance with the conventions Japan had signed.



Brutality was a deliberate policy of the Japanese militarists.
Its that simple.

As shown by just how *loved* Japan is in most of Asia.


Keith