On 5 May 2004 03:29:10 -0700, (Fred the Red
Shirt) wrote:

Yes. That is the doctrine of command responsibility. Mere ignorance
of those crimes is not a defense. In Yama****a's case it was proven
that capital crimes were openly commotted within 200 yards of his
office showing that even if he was ignorant of those crimes, his
ignorance was willful at best. ALthough, unlike Remsfeld and Bush,
Yama****o did prove that he gave orders intended to prevent those
crimes it is also clear that he did not enforce those orders in
any effective way.

Yama****a could not enforce his orders. They were
countermanded by "high officials" ( i.e., people around the emperor
and likely even the emperor himself ) who had their own chains of
command separate from his.

As numerous historians have pointed out, no middle class
Japanese general is likely to win in such a situation. When
Yama****a could control the situation, he tried to limit atrocities.
E.g., IIRC he released 3K allied prisoners in his retreat, though
ordered to kill them all.

Not when you consider the factual evidence against Yama****a. His
defense was a sham. Note also that his conviction was uphelp
upon appeal to a Federal Court, demonstrating that trials conducted
outside of the US ARE subject to judicial review within the US.

With their own consent, Yama****a and other Japanese generals
were offered up as sacrifices by both the US and Japanese governments.
This was primarily to avoid looking too much into the real origins of
Japanese atrocities in a small group of plotters around the emperor
himself. This would have interfered with the occupation. To
this day, the Japanese view them as such sacrificial lambs, who
sacrificed their lives for Japan as much as any other soldier.

When it became clear that the war was lost, the Japanese had
prepared for this with an intricate plot involving such things as the
Kido diaries ( a major piece of evidence at the trials ) to deflect
responsibility.

The Australians ( whose soldiers had particularly suffered )
threatened to upset the scheme by calling for the trial of the emperor
himself. They were quickly brought into line. Interesting book
on all of this called "Japan's Imperial Conspiracy". The title
belies the book, BTW.

Not true. E.g., some German sabateurs were executed in WW2.

Yes it is true. See the 1907 Hague Conventions. THey are online.

International conventions are basically treaties which
countries sign on to. They are only enforceable in wartime by
common consent, E.g. "We won't torture your soldiers if you don't
torture ours." A country may announce it is will to abide by such
conventions, even if they don't sign them. In fact, the US did this
for long periods and may still do so, IIRC.

PHP