> Among his list of things to do on his journey was to find “Onoda, a panda, and the Abominable Snowman”.
Genius!
The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
11–20 of 80 posts
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#12I love this story. I remember reading a very abridged version of it in one of my Super Fact Books when I was 8 or 9 (it omitted the fact that he murdered dozens of people, for instance). Still, he's an amazing (if very, very dumb) character.
Winners never quit and quitters never win but if you never win and never quit...
You get a ranch in Brazil.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#13Wow, first time reading about this. Absolutely insane.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#14Blind conviction to your country is nationalism. I don't see how he can be seen as a hero for that. Sure what he did was amazing, but I wouldn't encourage such patriotic behavior.
It wasn't just blind conviction though, he was a professional soldier. It was war time, and his commanding officer sent him in to conduct guerrilla warfare in the jungles. He was expected to be there for a long time and operationally independent.
"You are absolutely forbidden to die by your own hand. It may take three years, it may take five, but whatever happens, we’ll come back for you. Until then, so long as you have one soldier, you are to continue to lead him. You may have to live on coconuts. If that’s the case, live on coconuts! Under no circumstances are you [to] give up your life voluntarily."
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#15I love this story. I remember reading a very abridged version of it in one of my Super Fact Books when I was 8 or 9 (it omitted the fact that he murdered dozens of people, for instance). Still, he's an amazing (if very, very dumb) character.
With soldiers this dedicated to the cause though you have to think had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place.
"Had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place."
That is true, but for reasons that have nothing to do with Japan. As far as Japan is concerned, the theories about how they would have fought for every house, etc. are false. The Japanese were trying to negotiate a surrender even before the first atomic bomb fell.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
With soldiers this dedicated to the cause though you have to think had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place.
"Had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place." That is true, but for reasons that have nothing to do with Japan. As far as Japan is concerned, the theories about how they would have fought for every house, etc. are false. The Japanese were trying to negotiate a surrender even before the first atomic bomb fell.
Indeed so, but I read they were considering surrendering to the Russians, which is something the US really didn't want.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
With soldiers this dedicated to the cause though you have to think had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place.
Yes, but maybe in a different way than you'd think. There was a divide in Imperial Japanese politics - the Emperor wanted to end the war and was looking to surrender pre-Hiroshima. The heads of the military were split on a course of action - some wanted to fight to the end, but a more common position was trying to fight enough to get more favorable terms than just unconditional surrender. It's common enough to fight…
but then it works out that it becomes the most
prosperous place in Asia. Funny world.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place." That is true, but for reasons that have nothing to do with Japan. As far as Japan is concerned, the theories about how they would have fought for every house, etc. are false. The Japanese were trying to negotiate a surrender even before the first atomic bomb fell.
Indeed so, but I read they were considering surrendering to the Russians, which is something the US really didn't want.
I don't know where you read that but it makes no sense. The Russians could not have taken Japan if they wanted to, they had to go through the US navy to do that. The Soviet Navy at the time was not much to speak of and it also happened to be on the other side of the earth.
A big chunk of the Japanese army surrendered to the Russians (as they were stuck in China), and also, if I remember correctly, the Japanese tried to use the Russians as mediators in their negotiations with the Americans, but there was no chance of the Soviet Union taking over Japan. First, they could not get there even if they wanted, and secondly Stalin was not about to openly defy the US at that point.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#19I highly recommend his autobiography (linked in the article)-- No Surrender: My Thirty-Year War. I picked it up on a whim once, having never heard of the story, and was blown away by it.
Re: The Japanese Soldier Who Fought WWII for 30 Years
#20I love this story. I remember reading a very abridged version of it in one of my Super Fact Books when I was 8 or 9 (it omitted the fact that he murdered dozens of people, for instance). Still, he's an amazing (if very, very dumb) character.
With soldiers this dedicated to the cause though you have to think had there been no atomic bombs the world may have been a very different place.
The atomic bombs were devastating and impressive, but they didn't do much more actual damage than the B-29 fire bomb raids on Tokyo in terms of loss of life and property. When you can drop bombs at all, it doesn't really matter what kind of bombs they are. The atomic bombs were an excellent PR move of sorts, as a tool to convince the japanese to give up more than as a weapon of war.