Jason


 * Re-read 54-59 complete the following Write a three paragraph reflection: Why do you think the Japanese were so cruel? How can ordinary Japanese soldiers commit such atrocities(cruel acts)? Be sure to copy and paste the prompt. You may post to the wiki.**

When you lose all capacity for kindness and remorse, killing becomes a simple task. During the Japanese attack on Nanking, killing became a normal activity, such as brushing ones teeth. When something, even something as cruel as beheading is seen and done so repetitively with joy or nonchalance, the cruelty of it is taken away and replaced with indifference.

What the Japanese soldiers were trained to do can be seen as a child who is arachnophobic being forced to hold a harmless spider in his hand every day. Although he dislikes doing so greatly, when he is forced to do it, no harm comes to him and no mental note is made subconsciously that increases the fear. Instead, the child becomes desensitized to spiders and slowly loses all fear of spiders. The interviews of past Japanese soldiers who served in Nanking describe the above occurring. Most were disgusted and reluctant to see any killing occur, but they admit that as time went on, they were the ones doing the killing and thinking that it is perfectly alright.

What the Japanese soldiers are told regularly also take a toll on their subconscious. When repeatedly told that Chinese are not people and that the Emperor and his descendants are the only actual people, a normal person will begin to think this. It is human nature to think such a thing when one has no thoughts against it, and this is what happened to the soldiers of Nanking. To the hardened mind of a Japanese soldier, the atrocities committed were nothing and justified because it was like stepping on a bug. Just as most of us think nothing of it when we kill an ant, a Japanese soldier felt nothing when killing a Chinese person.


 * Do countries have an obligation to compensate each other for injustices done in times of war?**

Countries have little to no obligation to compensate each other for injustices done in times of war. When in war, it is universally accepted that everything goes and if unable to accept the consequences that arise from this, war should be avoided no matter what. If each country compensated for every injustice done in war, no injustices would be committed and war would be utterly useless because there is no point in causing any damage to the other country. War is war and the things that happen during wars should not be looked back on and whined about. War is all about injustices and if those injustices are compensated, the very nature of war is taken and corrupted to its core.


 * Read today's article on Nogun-ri and write a half page reflection explaining how this is the same or different from Korea-Japan controversy. Note how the perceptions of the Koreans and Americans involved in this incident differ. Do you still have the same opinion about compensation? Why? If you believe this situation is different, how is it different?**

The killings that occurred on Nogun-ri are different from the Korea-Japan controversy because there were actual reasons for the killings according to the article. The Republic of Korea feared that the South Korean leftists would join forces with the North so they executed them in desperation. Due to the South Korean government being involved in the killings, the severity of it is lessened in the eyes of the public. It can also be seen as fighting against communism which some people feel very strongly about, which also changes people's perspectives on the matter. I still find that compensation for any of these types of events is useless. What will the people who receive the compensation do with it? The people who died cannot be brought back and even considering compensation for something other than material losses is absurd. Compensation to those who did no experience any of the events that the compensation is for, furthers the stupidity of the idea of compensating the lost lives.


 * Should Korea and China have a say in what Japan puts into its textbooks?**

Japan like every other country, has its own right to censor or support any books. Japan has its own government and because of this, menial matters such as textbooks are not and should not be international conflicts. Korea and China should have the exact amount of input on what Japan puts into its textbooks as Japan wants them to. This topic is not something that Korea and China should have a say on because Japan's textbooks are meant for the people of Japan. Although Japan does not want people to know about its militarism, it does not go around and tell other countries not to put information about the topic in their textbooks.

There is little reason to actually have the information that China and Korea want in the textbooks, actually inside of the textbooks. Everything that occurred in Korea is well known in most countries other than Japan so the information is already quite widespread. The Nanking incident that China wants in the textbooks is a smaller scale, and less well known incident, but because the Holocaust which was much larger in scale is so well known, the argument of, "History will repeat itself," is annulled. Other than to change the views of Japanese people on their own country, Korea and China's yearning for the information that they want in the textbooks have no real reason to be in textbooks if Japan does not want it to be.