Google has apologized for publishing a Google Doodle honoring a Japanese Go player on the 70th anniversary of D-Day, blaming a technical glitch. "We always intended to highlight a new exhibition of imagery and archive material commemorating D-Day on our homepage," the online ad-slinger said in a statement. "Unfortunately a …
Oh dear. That is a bad faux pas. Especially as for ex POW's the wounds ran very deep indeed. I have a lot of respect for the Japanese and Japan, but one beef I do have is, when you look at the history, it's clear the Japanese have never been able to fully acknowledge the extreme extent of their cruelty during the Second World War. This has to be modulated somewhat and set in context. Japan had only just emerged from Feudal rule and in Japanese culture, no respect was paid to the vanquished. Japan was a nation with very deep intellectual and spiritual culture married to extremely constrained and harsh notions of civilisation. They had no notion that greater civility is shown by respecting your enemy when they are captured. The upshot was very many low level ball-sacks in a uniform felt they were showing superior Samuri spirit and culture when they cruelly tortured and degraded the POW's in their charge (and I mean really, fucking horrendously, degraded and tortured the POWs in their charge).
The dawning realisation that greater civilisation is shown by respecting your enemy, even if they have been vanquished was very hard for the Japanese to process, especially since it was evidenced by brash, loud, beer swilling 'mericans who after beating them, handed them back the keys to their country and economy. And frankly, most who sensed the truth of it, recoiled at the face they then saw looking back from the mirror, swept the whole thing under the carpet, and started pigging out on Samuri fantasy escapism that later transformed into what we now know as Manga.
Succinct, harsh, and true. And now they've 'forgotten' to educate how *many* generations in the ugly details? Such that a warped view of history is uniquely one-sided. It is mind-boggling to think how little of anything self-culpable is mentioned to Japanese students.
I have no stomach for American triumphalism, but nationalist revisionism is a crime. Visiting La Cambe cemetery removed any remaining animosity for me. Would visiting Yasukuni Shrine do that? No. And that stain committed more than a generation later by unrestrained nationalists.
TL;DR: Santayana, education, yadayada.
>It is mind-boggling to think how little of anything self-culpable is mentioned to Japanese students.
Do you have anything to back up your impression of the Japanese education system?
All of the Japanese people I have spoken to about WWII since living here for the past part of a decade fully acknowledge that the Japanese did some pretty bad stuff. Of course there are crazy old guys that will start mumbling about Japan not losing WWII if they see a foreigner (I had this happen to me when I went to my local once) but I think you'd be surprised at the difference between what the BBC etc claim the Japanese think and what they actually think. I.e. On the BBC you see articles about various the Japanese refusing to apologize and compensate the comfort women. There are people that deny what the comfort women alleged happen of course but I don't think that's the majority. People I've talked to acknowledge it happened. The only thing they disagree with it the fact that South Korea makes out that Japan has never apologized or paid compensation every time they need to shift the public's view when there is some other political issue. This is much like Argentina and the Falkland islands.
It's very easy to claim that not teaching something is "doctoring of history" but I think you have to consider that you can't teach kids every single thing that happened ever. I can't remember being taught about all of the bad stuff the English/British did in India, China etc. I don't assume that there is some massive cover up there. In the UK you now have faith schools teaching kids complete bullshit alongside the standard curriculum. That worries me more a little more than not guilt tripping kids that are several of generations removed from the "crimes" committed by their ancestors.
There have been news reports about Japanese nationalists being influential enough to successfully demand changes to Japanese history textbooks.
Obviously, from our perspective, the only thing that would be acceptable is for history textbooks in Japanese schools, and references to World War II in the Japanese mass media, to be identical to what you would find in the United States.
At least what is taught in German schools and what appears in the German mass media is under the close scrutiny of neighboring France. Taiwan and South Korea really haven't been able to play the same role with respect to Japan - and while Japan spent some time under American occupation, for a number of reasons, such as "only" prisoners of war being treated inhumanly instead of the Holocaust also taking place in Japan, the forces of Imperial Japanese aggression do not seem to have been as thoroughly discredited in Japan as Nazism was in Germany.
Also, I'm not sure that the leaders of postwar Japan included men comparable to Konrad Adenauer and Willy Brandt.
> World War II in the Japanese mass media, to be identical to what you would find in the United States.
That only the US took part, they won the battle of Britain while cracking the enigma and inventing radar and the jet engine?
>There have been news reports about Japanese nationalists being influential
News reports and reality are often very different things. The news generally reports on that one guy that denies Japan ever did anything ever instead of the actions of the other few hundred politicians.
> to be identical to what you would find in the United States.
Do textbooks in the US clearly state all of the messed up shit the US has done all over the world? Do American children get constantly guilt tripped over the war in Vietnam? Will textbooks in the US correctly reflect all of the lies that the US used to justify the war in Iraq?
The US should be less worried about whether other countries are glossing over the bad patches in their history and more about loonies trying to push creationism into their schools IMHO.
That is a bad faux pas
If you say so.
Maybe coz they were too busy developing the atom bomb.?
And weren't the Germans well ahead in jet engine research?
Re: Gordon 10
".....And weren't the Germans well ahead in jet engine research?....." No, they weren't. It is a commonly-held misconception that the Allies were behind on jet engines due to the performance of the Me262. The reality is the Me262, like other such projects as the Me163, was a massive gamble on unproven and unreliable technology in an attempt to leapfrog Allied developments and re-gain air-superiority. The result was partially successful with the Me262, but at a massive cost in reliability. The axial-flow jet engines on the Me262 averaged only a seven-hour service life before they had to be stripped down and rebuilt or blew up. The Allies, who already had air-superiority with conventional designs, concentrated on technical developments that could (a) be implemented before the end of the War, and (b) could be reliably employed. The main Allied jet development of the day was in the simpler to develop and far more reliable centrifugal jet engines, the RAF's Meteor Mk1 jet fighter having less-powerful engines that had a life of over 120 hours between strip downs. Meanwhile, in the background, British engineers were already working on a secondary program for axial jets such as the Metrovick F1/F2, which was developed into the post-War Sapphire engine that powered, amongst others, the Hawker Hunter. It is a measure of German desperation that the F2 had already been tested in 1942 with more thrust than the BMW-003 jet of the Me262, and had a superior service life of over fifty hours between rebuilds, but was considered 'too unreliable' for service use.
"That only the US took part, they won the battle of Britain while cracking the enigma and inventing radar and the jet engine?" Whilst it is easy to point and laugh at Hollywood's take on history, it should in no way be used to belittle the actual sacrifices of the US servicemen (and women) on D-Day.
Re: Gordon 10
Having a jet engine which only requires an overhaul every 120 hour of flight time is perhaps over the top if the expected life time of the plane is considerably less than that.
From what I understand the ME262 engines where made pretty poorly but thre was an acknowledgment that they did not need to last long as the plane would be shot down before the engines needed overhauling. Did the Meteor really need engines so reliable that they only required an overhaul only every 120 hours?
I once worked on a TI system built into a tank and I was shocked when we had to change the barrel after it was worn out and becoming inaccurate after 40 rounds or so**. It was explained to me that he tank was not expected to survive long in combat and so it was considered better to make a highly accurate barrel that could kill its targets for the brief time the tank would be operational. Rather than a barrel that was less accurate but would still be within spec but now on a dead tank.
**The conditions in the desert really did not help here, it was like firing up a barrel lined with sandpaper.
Re: ridley Re: Gordon 10
"Having a jet engine which only requires an overhaul every 120 hour of flight time is perhaps over the top if the expected life time of the plane is considerably less than that...." The Germans certainly never planned for their aircraft to only have a service life of twenty hours, neither did the Allies. Many Allied pilots flew one aircraft through a whole tour and many German pilots, even in 1945, were confident enough in the length of time they'd be flying the same aircraft that they decorated them with personal emblems. I think you are confusing this with the short flying life of the average newly-qualified Luftwaffe fighter pilot in 1945, many of whom only got about twenty hours in before they died, were wounded too badly to fly again before the end of the War, or were captured. But again, the Germans certainly didn't plan for their contribution to be so limited.
".....I once worked on a TI system built into a tank and I was shocked when we had to change the barrel after it was worn out and becoming inaccurate after 40 rounds or so**....." Well, TBH, I don't know what stage your targeting system's development was at, but most such targeting systems have been capable of adjusting for wear for decades. Even the L30A1 gun on the Callenger2, which is a rifled design and so I would expect to suffer more from wear than the smoothbore M256 on the Abrams, still has an expected service life of 400 rounds. I suspect your team's need to change the barrel was because they wanted to measure accuracy of your system over as small a range of wear as possible. I have heard the German 120mm rounds use a propellant that is much more corrosive than UK rounds, but I'd be very surprised if they managed to drop barrel life so drastically as to make the tank need a new gun every time they bombed up.
Have You Really Been There?
It is a characteristic of most societies that one does not usually launch into a critical attack in normal conversation. The Japanese society does take this even further than most, perhaps because it is a relatively small land area area with a relatively high population density. In general contentious subjects are not raised and this applies to such as the WWII. By not speaking about something the space for argument is reduced. The modern Japan is rather more keen to look forward and get on than to look back and discuss.
I lived and worked there for sometime and had two children born there so I can add in a few words based on experience.
At work they get where they are going by agreement. They will all meet, agree on a plan and work to that plan. If there is a flaw in the plan it is not the totally back biting disaster that we produce. They meet, discus what new plan is needed, agree on the new plan and go on forward. While they respect the past and do so with reverence they are not constantly digging up its bones to see if there is any more flesh left to chew on.
Once I used the system to change a corporate plan within a 30 minute window, (afterwards those Japanese with whom I worked directly, jokingly asked me how I had blackmailed the company president - did I have something on him or his wife?) No I worked the system.
By the way whenever a change of plan was needed, there was NEVER a long post mortem asking why we had followed the advice of sales, or marketing or accounting or whatever. The attitude appeared was; "The original action had been a joint choice, perhaps we were all guilty. Now we need a new plan and to go forward with that."
Contrast that we what I have seen here as the bones of the past are constantly chewed over; while we are wasting time and energy discussing who did, or did not do in the past; the world moves on. I just love the way that those who were too young to know and too inexperienced to understand have an answer to everything. They skim the surface of a history they do not even know the first thing about. They look for bones to justify why some long past event would not have happened if they were in charge. History is always written by the victor, it is always an edited version. Yet still we have volumes written on Agent Orange, napalm, Mai Lai and all.
Do not forget, airbrushing history is not just for the vanquished, there are plenty who seek to deny that the mass murders of WWII never happened, that Stalin never killed anyone, etc.
So yes for those who wish to study recent history there are HUGE volumes available covering the US, the UK, Russia, et al. Equally there are huge volumes available for the lead up to the First World War. An event which had clear roots back beyond 1870 for anyone who cares to look. It was a part of my history studies an almost historical number of years back when history was taught in a structured way rather than as random dissembled facts on which to pontificate.
In short we should learn from the past but not dwell on it. We should revise our plans on the basis of clear need rather than navel gazing uselessly. Forward movement is needed not sideline standing stone and bottle throwers. We already have too many of them
Re: Have You Really Been There?
I agree with much of that, but also feel that you need to chew this stuff over to find out if it is what you're really interested in, academically, philosophically. In some areas I have much respect for the Japanese; in others very little. Certainly it has always been my impression that there is a lack of interest in why things happen; a lack of curiosity that is easy to - possibly mistakenly - equate with that glaring cultural travesty in existence there at least up to the middle of the 20th century; you give an example too small to count but that appears to coincide with general Western impressions of the Japanese throughout the latter half of the 20th century, that social standing still matters over pretty-much everything and that the culture still all but prohibits questioning or criticizing one's social superiors.
When certain types over here have highlighted the difference between British/US and Japanese industrial productivity and that we should adopt the same structures, the widely-perceived implication is that our workforce should be stripped of their dignity by doing what they're told, not asking questions, being happy to be little more than a company slave; like it used to be before unions (except without the 'being happy' bit).
It is not really possible to learn from the past without risking dwelling on it. It is not possible to ask questions about deep issues such as one's own country's culture without risking dwelling on it, unless the answers are short and pre-packaged for easy consumption, like history as a Powerpoint presentation or all you need to know to pass a multiple question exam before leaving school and never revisiting.
> Whilst it is easy to point and laugh at Hollywood's take on history, it should in no way be used to belittle the actual sacrifices of the US servicemen (and women) on D-Day.
There's a fair amount of mythology surrounding the US contribution to D Day too.
"such as "only" prisoners of war being treated inhumanly instead of the Holocaust" is ignorant rubbish. 10 million Chinese died in that war, 99% civilian.. even the Germans complained about the brutality (note to AC:that's a historical record).
Japan got of lightly, because in 1945 the CCCP had more troops and more tanks than the rest of the world, and they were in Germany. America needed the war to be over, the H-bomb wasn't ready and they didn't have enough material to make enough A-bombs.
The best of the commemorations yesterday was the warm reception for Frau Merkel from the veterans, who know (being there at the time) that more German civilians died in the war AFTER it was officially over( dysentery,cholera,typhus, starvation) than Brits died in it... commemoration is about honouring the dead, not celebrating the victors.
@ Yet Another Anonymous Coward
Oh come on, that's just a bunch of lazy anti-Americanism! Besides, we're too busy reliving the glories of the American Revolution to think about WW2!!
You do realise that the US was in the minority on D-day? British, Canadians and Free French outnumbered them. It was only later in the War that the US become the majority partner in European liberation in the West. For the US, WW2 was primarily about Japan. However, Hollywood has consistently represented the invasion of Normandy as a US operation.
Compared to American servicemen killed in the Pacific, the invasion of Normandy was a sideshow. But for some reason it gets all the publicity, unlike the invasions of North Africa, Italy, and the South of France. On D-day itself, the casualty rate would have been considered a very quiet day in the first phase of the Battle of Stalingrad.
D-day was perhaps the first technology-driven invasion, for which reason it is interesting, but as a military operation it wasn't actually that brilliant (says my father, who was there.)
Re: Gordon 10
"worn out and becoming inaccurate after 40 rounds "
Somebody should have told the T34 designers not to allow so much space for ammunition. They went into battle with about a hundred rounds.
It's true that it was expected that if WW3 broke out the average Challenger would get off only half a dozen rounds before being knocked out, but average is not maximum, and tanks get used in lower level conflicts than the final battle of Europe.
Re: Have You Really Been There?
Do not mistake what I saw and experienced for blind order following, at least not in the late 20th century Japan. Company plans were arrived at by consensus not by fiat. Their trick was to be inclusive not to exclude. The consensus contrast was huge when I returned to Europe. Back home decisions could never be made by consensus, rank was always being pulled, favours were called in and offered and the end result was considerably less pleasant.
Oh one point to consider, the Japanese did not work harder -though they did tend to work longer hours. (There was a reason offered for this in the 1980s, if they worked after 6:30 or so they had their evening meal bought by the company. Later this 'perk' came under pressure and hours were reduced.) What they all appreciated was the effect of working smarter, they wasted no energy in disagreement and knew that they could rely on team members to work with them. It was a two way trade, they worked with others who worked with them, higher productivity was the result of working together not carrying round resentments. I can tell you that being one of a ten man team working together is far nicer than being part of a ten man team of who never ore than 3 are facing the same way at any one time!
I can contrast this with scenes of 'mechanical handling' I saw in another country, a five man moving crew would lift the load on the back of one person who then carried the item while the others loafed. Not what I called team work and not what I ever saw in Japan.
One not given to forget Allies...
To the comment, "That only the US took part, they won the battle of Britain while cracking the enigma and inventing radar and the jet engine?"
I am from the States. It goes without saying that without the role Great Britain WWII could/would have been more catastrophic than it was. MI6, radar, Rolls-Royce Merlin engine for the P51 Mustang, Hedgehog for anti-submarine warfare and a stalwart will of the English people are but a few of the contributions and innovations that hastened the end of that world wide crisis - though a few did "benefit" from the blood letting.
All of that history is not forgotten, at least from this one voice. I understand that while there we did a lot of "rubbing the wrong way"; though the pill was bitter to swallow the cure was a bit better.
Thanks to that fading generation that stood so strong in the face of such desperate times.
Not to forget USA terrorism support against "friends"
Like the IRA, in a bit of nastiness that killed about 3000 people in mainland Britain and is still not completely finished. Remind me, how many IRA murderers have been extradited from USA to Britain?
No, we do not need Americans preaching to us about peace or claiming the credit after entering WW1 two years late and WW2 only after the Japanese hurt them directly (while many still influential USA families/businesses made a lot of money supplying Nazi Germany and the decent, if dull, USA ambassador in Berlin in the 1930s had to contend with a staff of monied buffoons who admired the Nazis and were not averse to some nasty anti-semitism themselves(Ambassador Dodd, book by Erik Larson, “In the Garden of Beasts,” 2011.), It should come as no surprise that they still make this kind of "faux pas".
Why is "identical" good?
So which particular part of "our textbook being identical" is good?
Trumpeting the sinking of the Bismark as a great victory of the Home Fleet? When junior had that lesson (it was being drilled into him in primary school as a "glorious day" repetitively several years in a row) I told him: count the ships on one side, count the ships on the other side, count the casualties, assess the engagement efficiency (how much exactly did it take to sink the HMS Hood), use your brain. If in doubt, repeat.
The despicable behaviour of lord "Do not Do it" Dudley on direct (and plausibly deniable) orders from Churchill when he withdrew the immediate escorts of PQ-17 (a destroyer group), the secondary escort group (two american heavy cruisers, a british heavy cruiser, an aircraft carrier and destroyer squadron) at the mere wiff of the Bismark sistership leaving port? That for some reason if memory serves me right is not in the history textbooks. Neither is the heroism of several crews of drafted Scottish fishermen and teachers on fishing boats with a "corvette" sticker and an Erlicon instead of the net crane. They told Lord Dudley exactly where he can stuff that order and did not abandon their charges. They also succeeded in escorting them through - to be rewarded by repeated denial of every single government ever since (inclusive of the current one) in getting their campaign medals. Is that in the textbook?
I do not recall the textbook containing anything about the Channel Dash (operation Cerebus) clown show either.
This is just off the top of my head, if I give it a thought ~ 10-20% of our own textbooks is revised or edited material (mostly by intentional omission). Russian (and prior to that USSR) are actually even worse - to ~ 40% or so in places. Glancing over the real reasons for Hitler successfully massacring the Red Army at Kiev in 1941 and Harkov in 1942. Completely erasinbg the treatment of POWs including Hatyn and treatment of "subversive nationalities" from the textbook. Skipping over the fact that Stalin actually started WW2 on HItler side gobbling a chunk of Poland as a reward. You name it.
In order to speak from a high moral ground about "the horrors of historical revisionism" one should not try to revise history themselves. That is not something we do not do. In fact we are probably way worse than the Japanese (or the Germans). As the saying goes: "history is written by the winners".
Re: uniformed tosh
Lets not forget that the Japanese invaded China (yet again) several years before WW II and that was also pretty abysmal in terms of civilian deaths. Also them testing biological agents on the Chinese; there is still a swathe of China which is contaminated with Japanese anthrax spores.
Mainly the Japanese army top brass was culpable for this invasion rather than the civilian components of government which held little sway at the time.
Re: Why is "identical" good?
You may want to get better textbooks.
...And Japanese politicians paying visits to the shrines of the warlords and generals who were responsible for the horror...
Re: Gordon 10
Great post and from the evidence I have read in German and English pretty well spot on. The Jumo had a realistic in service life of 10 to 12 hours. If they had used the energy and scare materials making lots of Panthers and dumping the Tiger the war might have finished on the right side of the Oder. But if you have a manic as a leader and you follow him rationale goes out f the window.
@Matt Bryant - Again I agree, but I would add that we must understand what the Russians in the East were doing. On the 22nd of June Operation Bagration started. Quoted by most 2nd WW specific historians as the single biggest operation in WW2 (and thus history) and the single biggest contribution to the destruction of the German army.
Re: Gordon 10
"They went into battle with about a hundred rounds."
No space for that amount. The inside is really cramped. Yes experienced crews did overload the compartment but IIRC the stored was about 30, lying around was about 18 and stuck where the wireless operator sat about 10. But they know if they were hit there was no second chance
But as you say 40 rounds for an 85mm gun, laughable. There was no chance of replacing them as they advanced the workshops were often 100s of Kms behind. They just kept firing and the ZIS just threw in more shells.
@SuccessCase Wow, you sure said a mouthful dude.
Re: nationalist revisionism is a crime.
Yet all nations engage in such activity. In fact, of all the current nation states, the only ones who haven't white washed a dark period of their history are the Germans, and even that is only because it was imposed on them from outside.
While I concur with most of what SuccessCase wrote, it is also important to remember that Japan is to date the only country on which atomic weapons have been used. It has also had a lasting impact on their psyche. I don't regret that the US dropped those bombs. I think that not only did it save millions of allied lives, on net it probably saved as many Japanese lives as well. That doesn't mean it is without consequences.
Re: ridley Gordon 10
Err I was working for a UK firm supplying a Chinese company who were refurbishing T59's for the Pakistani army.
We were in a competative shoot out in Bahawalpur between the Americans, French, UK and the Chinese. I was working for the Chinese. I suppose they wanted the accuracy to be absolutely spot on and it was we "killed" over 99% of moving targets. I would say that the desert was particularly hard on the systems.
In terms of performance we won the shoot out comprehensively. However.
The Americans could not hit a barn door from a few hundred yards. I think I could of aimed better than them looking down the barrel, it was embarrasing. I think it was because of this that the Americans decided to bring out the big guns and offer Pakistan the Abrams at a very discounted price. I believe that is was on the way back from a demonstration of the Abrams in Bahawalpur that the plane with the president and the American ambassador in it crashed. All onboard died.
AFAIA no one won the contract following the crash.
Re: ridley Gordon 10
This was decades ago, 26 years. Eeek!
Re: Getriebe Re: YAAC
".....but I would add that we must understand what the Russians in the East were doing...." Having friends in low places, I was once witness to an extraordinary tantrum from a Royal Navy officer when he overheard a young cadet mention that 'Russia won the War'. The old fish-head had a quite interesting theory along the lines that the Royal Navy won the War (Lewis will love it). It went as follows.
Hitler was defeated because he had to fight on so many fronts and lost so much resources in having to fight multiple enemies. If he had been able to defeat Britain in 1940 then he would have been able to give undivided attention to Soviet Russia. He would not have needed to waste resources fighting Italy's battles in the Med, including not having to lose 50% of his crack paratroopers in Crete plus 200+ transport aircraft and their valuable crews (sorely missed at Stalingrad); not have needed the whole U-boat program; not have faced the RAF strategic bombing at night, and if America had still joined the Allies there would not have been the bases in the UK for the 8th Air Force to use to pound Germany by day. And if he had defeated Britain in 1940 then he would not have had to deal with the massive shipments from the Allies to the Russians. In short, Hitler lost the War when he failed to defeat Britain in 1940.
But 1940 was an RAF victory in the Battle of Britain? Yes, said the fish-head, but the reason Hitler had to fight the Battle of Britain, the reason he couldn't just send a small army over in the ships he had available, was because the Royal Navy saved the Army's arse when they brought back 300,000 troops from Dunkirk, meaning Hitler needed more troops to fight the Army in Britain than could be carried in transport aircraft alone, so he had to plan a naval invasion. And because the Royal Navy would have sunk any German invasion fleet in the Channel, he needed to sink or keep the Royal Navy out of the Channel. The reason Hitler had to fight the RAF in the BoB was because he needed control of the air to hold the Royal Navy at bay so he could get enough troops and equipment across the Channel to stand a chance of defeating what was left of the British Army. If the RN hadn't pulled off Dunkirk then the Germans could have invaded with a much smaller force immediately after the fall of France, which would have knocked Britain out of the War and meant no distractions from concentrating on invading Russia in April 1941 (the Greek and Yugoslavian campaigns postponed the German attack on Russia for several vital weeks) and no aid for Russia to replace the massive losses of 1941.
So, there you go - the Royal Navy won the War!
Re: One not given to forget Allies...
It was more a comment on the Hollywood fondness for re-branding a historical event to involve only Americans.
FFS, Samuri -> Samurai. Damned auto-regret. I do know the correct spelling, I assure you.
meanwhile, in the Asia-Pacific theater …
On 6th June 1944, Japan was executing Operation Ichi-gō (Operation № 1) against the Chinese in Hunan, trying to capture Changsha, as well as Operation U-gō (Operation C) in eastern India, still besieging Imphal despite their lack of supplies. The Allied amphibious invasion force headed for Saipan had left Pearl Harbor the previous day — they wouldn’t land until the 15th.
Re: meanwhile, in the Asia-Pacific theater …
There were armies numbering millions on both sides, a fact that explains why the Japanese expansion in the Pacific theatre ran out of steam in 1942. The Chinese war effort could not hope to match that of the more developed states, but it dominated the administrative and economic spheres in China, while condemning tens of millions of Chinese to high levels of deprivation and hunger throughout the conflict. Mitter does not add to the debate about deaths, occasioned by the obvious absence of reliable statistics, but suggests the current estimates of between 15 and 20 million dead may not be wide of the mark; at the least, more than 90 million Chinese became refugees in their own country.
Yeah? So what.
70th anniversary of D-Day
"Japan" has nothing to do with "D-Day".
Well, I guess one is always offending SOMEONE. Especially the ones who are professionals in it.
Re: Yeah? So what.
Apart from the fact they were fighting a different front in, you know, the same war. Also I don't think anyone is really offended, they just think it's mildly inappropriate, clutzy and lacking in awareness and people do feel uncomfortable if something is said which may be offensive to others (few of them are actually alive now, when I was younger however there were quite a few veterans I met who *would* have found it highly offensive, very highly offensive). So your logic is a bit like saying, this second rapist in this same football team isn't the one who actually had anything to do with raping your sister, so why find it offensive if he turns up at her wedding?
Not parochial enough?
So Google is apologising that an international Doodle was shown instead of a local one? Local to where? UK, UK+USA, Europe? Surely the Doodle is a little, "you might find this interesting", not a list of the 365/366 of "The Most Important Things Ever". Perhaps showing a non-local doodle (and that means both a Honinbo Shusaku doodle outside of Japan as much as a D-Day doodle outside of Europe/N.America) can bring us together more. Trying to attach some sort of blame for WWII atrocities to a man who died tending cholera patients 80 years earlier is ridiculous.
This is what happens ...
when your company is staffed by self-absorbed techies so young they may have but the haziest awareness that something called World War II even happened.
Re: This is what happens ...
They could be educated by several magnificent documentaries about that event and about other countries in general (some starring Ben Affleck or Tom Cruise). Or just watch "The Simpsons".
Google "Normandy landing" pages....
I follwed the link referenced in the story. Please will someone tell Google that the British took part in the Normandy landings too.
Re: Google "Normandy landing" pages....
I think you meant to say that British and Commonweath troops were the majority participants in D-Day?
Re: Google "Normandy landing" pages....
Including my father, who didn't come back, being killed on D-Day, day 1. The resultant pages that Google put up to "commemorate" D-Day were just as much an insult to participants as the earlier Page "put up in error".
VJ Day / D day
We will all look forward with interest to see Google's "doodle" on VJ day.
Some one has to say it
Google were following the instructions from that well known documentary.
"Don't mention the war!"
- iPad? More like iFAD: We reveal why Apple ran off to IBM
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're making ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Analysis Nadella: Apps must run on ALL WINDOWS – PCs, slabs and mobes
- Yorkshire cops fail to grasp principle behind BT Fon Wi-Fi network