Banzai Charge

All hating on the Japanese here but its called bravery and honor and heroism. Death before dishonor. Allies should have shown the same kind of bravery and honor instead of surrendering.

Ah yes, such an honorable race

*executes prisoners of war*

>enemy combatants should be shown mercy
GAIJIN DETECTED

>death before dishonor
>gets everyone killed in a useless banzai charge instead of engaging in guerilla warfare or just fucking digging in

Keep in mind neither side saw each other as remotely human in that war. The Americans saw the Japs as "monkeys with machineguns," literal subhumans trying to conquer all of Asia. The Japs saw Americans as savage barbarians, who would literally rape their women to death and kill their children.

Plus, what is even wrong with executing your prisoners of war? They tried to fight you with weapons, they're an enemy, and they lost. You would have killed them five minutes ago, and it's suddenly worse to do it now that you've got every conceivable advantage and they have nothing?

If your forces are poorly trained and equipped, as the Japanese often found themselves, a simple charge might be a valid option, particularly if the other guy is also poorly trained and equipped.

It's failed WW1 tactics used in WW2. Jap being behind as per usual.

They didn't execute pows, they starved to death because of allied blockade.
It's Japanese culture you wouldn't understand.

Anyone have webms of Banzai Charges from "The Pacific" miniseries?

spies were executed everywhere

of what, comfort women and using untold vietnamese slaves to die of exhaustion building bridges, invading neutral countries' territories without a declaration of war, Nanking, the utter slaughter in the Phillipines, or the part where POWs were used as biological experiments? Japanese bravery and honor is certainly impressive to behold

>muh Nanking
>muh comfort women
>muh death march
>muh Unit 731
Fuck off chink, nobody cares how many of your insectoid commie subhuman race have died. Asia as a whole would be much better off under Japanese rule than shitty and corrupt native governments.

spot the weeaboo

For my honoru!

*Bayonets infant*

The biggest thing that always sucked to me was the whole samurai thing they forced to make them fanatical. Even if they didnt want to fight I feel as though the crazies would kick your ass if you didnt or the guilt made you fight, no dishonor.

better off for the Nips, and better off for jaded weaboos with severe autism (and no real friends) who care more about delusions of grandeur and map autism than human dignity.

Go play with your legos

Would have worked better if they had adequate artillery and armor support.

Just one fact. Do you know which parts of Asia were the most developed in for example 1940 (besides Japan itself)? That's Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan, and exactly these territories by some strange coincidence were Japanese vassal states or colonies.

Whether or not Japanese vassals had economic development in the 1940s does not discount all the horrible shit they did to occupied territories from China to the Philippines. If the cost of economic development is brutally killing and enslaving people as you go, then those people are probably not fond of that economic development and the ethical cost is too large. If you weren't an edgy child who spent too much time on Veeky Forums when growing up nobody would have to explain this to you, as most healthy and well adapted adults don't have deficits in empathy.

Now go make a nice map on EU4 and share it with your internet friends, you'll make your mommy proud.

If they had artillery and armor support, there wouldn't be a need for banzai charges.

All the horrible shit you are talking about is called ***war*** crimes for a reason - it only happens in wartime. Their civil administration was much better and that could really help elevating every Asian country out of poverty. Sacrificing .1% of population once for better future for every generation after war ends could be a right choice even from ethic point of view.

except everything about the japs were true, not to mention they were the ones doing the raping

japan got even more developed following ww2 after america bombed the shit out of them and rebuilt their country so losing the war is the best thing that ever happened to them

For Japan yes, but there are plenty of Africa-level shitholes in Asia and their future could have been much better in case Japan had won.

>All the horrible shit you are talking about is called ***war*** crimes for a reason - it only happens in wartime.
That's why between a quarter and three quarter million Korean and Manchurian slave workers between 39 and 45 happened, when you're an invading force seeking to consolidate your power you stop caring about the life of your new subjects.

> Sacrificing .1% of population once for better future for every generation after war ends could be a right choice even from ethic point of view.

That 1% for the Chinese was between 17 and 22 million civilians. People aren't percentage points, and turning them into a proportion of the population is how edgy internet sociopaths like you disingenuously pretend you're being morally reasonable to yourself.

And no, "sacrificing" (brutally murdering in cold blood) 1% of the population is not ethically justifiable—nor is it a necessity to improve the lives of populations, as you know well. The Nips weren't slaughtering chinamen like cattle and experimenting on them because they wanted to improve their miserable lives and you know this behind the layers of cognitive dissonance you bury your fondness for genocidal megalomaniacs in. Another thing that wouldn't have to be explained to you if you didn't have an empathy deficits. Perhaps, by your arithmetic, your family and community might be better off if you put a barrel in your mouth and pull the trigger, given there will be one less jaded edgelord surviving off the undue compassion of his mother and father, who are not at fault for their child turning into a sedentary little monster from going to the wrong side of the internet.

t.nip

t. literal retard

pigskins occupying asia and enforcing imperialism and murdering millions of chinks deserve whatever they get, I wish the Nips gave captured amerimutts and brits the same treatment they did to captured Chinese guerillas. Bayonetted on sight. But fuck the Japanese for killing captured asiatic peoples. They executed the wrong prisoners.

>that doujin

I purposely choose to ignore your personal attacks most of your post consist of since they aren't really strengthening any of your arguments. Anyway, you should probably stop wasting your time on meaningless insults.
Addressing the rest of your post, China had big population losses more than once in its history, most of which happened due to internal strifes. These internal conflicts are naturally avoided if country comes under foreign rule Adding to that, China could probably avoid famines resulting from shitty Maoist policies had Japan won. That alone could potentially save more lives than Japan had ever taken in China.
>The Nips weren't slaughtering chinamen like cattle and experimenting on them because they wanted to improve their miserable lives
That's partially true, every country does everything for it's own benefit. Japan badly needed markets for it's booming industry and for that you need to help developing countries in your sphere of influence, it's just reasonable thing to do.
>nor is it a necessity to improve the lives of populations
I never said improving the lives was a direct consequence of sacrificing other lives. First one comes from Japanese peace-time benevolent rule while second one is just bad and undesired effect of all-out mass warfare.

>I purposely choose to ignore your personal attacks most of your post consist of since they aren't really strengthening any of your arguments. Anyway, you should probably stop wasting your time on meaningless insults.
You know they're not meaningless. Your position is based on a mixture of cognitive dissonance, disingenuous thought, and lack of empathy for people, which, if you're like most of your kind in these parts, comes from too many years browsing /b/ and sharing your edge with other teenagers.

>China had big population losses more than once in its history, most of which happened due to internal strifes.
The plight brought about by Chinese imperial warlords doesn't excuse or diminish the plight brought about by Japanese imperial warlords

>These internal conflicts are naturally avoided if country comes under foreign rule
In exchange for the strife of 17 to 22 million dead civilians.

>Adding to that, China could probably avoid famines resulting from shitty Maoist policies had Japan won
Japan wasn't trying to save China from Mao, nor could it have foreseen the harm inflicted by Mao. Again, the plight brought about by Chinese warlords does not excuse or diminish the plight brought about by Japanese warlords

>That's partially true, every country does everything for it's own benefit. Japan badly needed markets for it's booming industry and for that you need to help developing countries in your sphere of influence, it's just reasonable thing to do.
And what you're doing for your own benefit includes the deaths of tens of millions of men women and children, and the rape of hundreds of thousands, you're being a megalomaniac monster for your own benefit. It's reasonable if you're a warlord without any regard for human dignity and with an aptitude for cruelty, or a jaded imageboard dweller who justifies those people because the only thing stronger than his contempt for different people is his passion for big maps and imperial fantasies.

>I never said improving the lives was a direct consequence of sacrificing other lives
Whether it's a direct or an indirect consequence does not refute the point, the rape and murder of men, women and children by the millions is not a necessary side effect of developing a country and you know this well.

t. literal faggot

> Your position comes from too many years browsing /b/ and sharing your edge with other teenagers.
And that's where you are wrong. My position comes from general Japanophilia (weeabooism if you prefer to call it that way) coming from appreciation of Japan's culture and history. Also, I think people on this board are not being neutral when talking about Japan, rather, they're actively hating it so I have to assume radical position to counterweight their biased opinions.
>the plight brought about by Chinese warlords does not excuse or diminish the plight brought about by Japanese warlords
But we can compare which warlords do less harm and choose the lesser evil.
>And what you're doing for your own benefit includes the deaths of tens of millions of men women and children
These actions didn't benefit Japan in any way, they were (and still are) actually extremely harmful for its international image. Like I said, they were unintended consequence of total war. We both perfectly know every major country in WWII committed atrocities, why people focus only on Japan while ignoring or sweeping under the carpet actions of others?

Japanese Army was a WW1 esque army fighting mainly pre-WW1 esque armies.

Banzai Charge on forces without machine gun positions is very effective, if you break their line and get guys behind them criminally effective.

>My position comes from general Japanophilia (weeabooism if you prefer to call it that way) coming from appreciation of Japan's culture and history.
And yet most weaboos don't devote themselves to war crime apologism. You, on the other hand, are an edgelord with impaired empathy.

>But we can compare which warlords do less harm and choose the lesser evil.
And yet the Japs weren't giving Chinese civilians the lesser evil, they were actively and sadistically murdering them. The notion that the "lesser evil" was somehow "chosen" when the Japs accomplished their goals by violent subjugation is intentionally misleading on your part. But even if such a choice was to be made, and Japs were the "lesser evil," they would remain unexcused for killing 17 to 22 million Japanese civilians

>These actions didn't benefit Japan in any way, they were (and still are) actually extremely harmful for its international image.
And yet the Japanese soldiers who committed them were as lucid and conscious of their actions as the officials who abetted them. If it benefits them or doesn't benefit them it's still an atrocity that deserves no apology, even though this contradicts your notion that it's "reasonable" in their part to be slaughtering Chinese civilians.

> Like I said, they were unintended consequence of total war.
It's a consequence that Japan was aware of and partook willingly, so it was not unintended. It's also unparalleled among any parties, even the Nazis with industrialized genocide fall short of anything the Japanese accomplished. It was also not necessary to partake in global war to kill millions of civilians, especially women and children that could not have provided anything resembling a convincing resistance. That brings into question whether it was rational to kill them and use them as lab rats, but not whether they were cruel assassins. If you can, with a straight face, defend the murder of these people, it speaks to your impenetrable cognitive dissonance and disregard for the very people you pretend Japan was trying to help, perhaps for victims of war in general. I take comfort in knowing sociopaths like you are destined to these places and will not be placed in positions of being able to inflict harm under the false flag of "being reasonable" in the developed world so long as nuclear deterrence keeps our world order in place.

>never in a million years has anyone who closed their eyes in a war lived
>says the all-knowing frog poster