English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-18 10:07:56 · 9 answers · asked by Lakers 2010 Champs!!!! 4 in Arts & Humanities History

9 answers

"Many speculated about whether the Emperor would be punished as a war criminal."

At a historic imperial conference on August 9, 1945, just hours after the bombing of Nagasaki, the Emperor made clear his determination to “endure the unendurable” his opinion was in favor of surrendering to the Allies. Although his top ministers of war wanted to continue the struggle even "with sharpened bamboo", on Aug 14, 1945, the Japanese agreed to an unconditional surrender. Japan formally surrendered on September 2, 1945. Many speculated about whether the Emperor would be punished as a war criminal. Hirohito also wondered what would happen to him. He frequently expressed his willingness to abdicate as a token of his responsibility for the war. But American authorities, including General Douglas MacArthur, decided that it would be easier to stabilize and reform Japan if they let him remain as ruler but not a Shinto deity. On January 1, 1946, the Emperor once and for all gave up any claims to being a sacred monarch by issuing a rescript that denied his divinity as a descendant of the sun-goddess.

FOR ADDITIONAL READING
http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b3hirohito.htm

2007-06-18 10:19:43 · answer #1 · answered by . 6 · 1 0

You make a very valid point except when making comparisons between Hitler and Hirohito, as others have said Tojo was the man more responsible for the atrocities that the Japanese committed during WWII. I think it depends on what part of the world your from as to who is viewed as being worse the Germans or Japanese, in China the Japanese would be seen as the worse evil of the two but in Europe it would be Germany. Both the Nazis and Japanese were equally horrible but who the atrocities were committed against will determine who thinks which one is worse than the other.

2016-05-19 00:01:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Hirohito was only peripherally involved in the war. He rarely left the palace, and was immersed in his marine biology studies. It would have been like blaming the queen if Britain lost the war. The allies were delighted that Japan surrendered, and were willing to accept japan's one condition, that Hirohito remain on the throne. But he was forced to concede for the first time that the Emperor of Japan is not divine. To Hirohito and Japan, that was quite a humiliating loss.

2007-06-18 10:17:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because the Americans chose to shield and excuse him. He was obviously guilty, of permitting, if not ordering the war, and the many atrocities committed during it.

The excuse given is that the Japanese people would not have accepted peace if their emperor, supposedly considered divine by them, were reduced to the status of a mortal. It is an empty excuse. We would have tried Hitler and hung him, had he not killed himself, and he was certainly revered by the Germans.

We should have tried him, hung him, and told the Japanese to get over it, or we should have dropped one of the bombs on Tokyo and removed the question.

I think part of it also depended upon MacArthur's recommendations; I don't know why, the Marines won the war in the Pacific; and MacArthur was always a snob and an elitist and certainly no great soldier, as proven many times, but he relished the position of American king in a conquered Japan and having the emperor kowtow to him, as it were.

2007-06-18 10:35:22 · answer #4 · answered by LodiTX 6 · 0 1

It was part of the surrender agreement. The USA was done with seeing tens of thousands of its soldiers killed, so peace was more important than retribution. Besides, most people saw that he was the one who called an end to the fighting and he may not have been very much involved in starting it.

2007-06-18 10:31:37 · answer #5 · answered by John B 7 · 1 0

Because the Americans were afraid of a civil revolution if the emperor was charged with war crimes and the outcome might be a communist regime.

2007-06-18 17:42:41 · answer #6 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0 0

well he never had any actual power to begin with, so there wasn't much reason to punish him. he was little more than a figurehead for the japanese people, but he was the one person that commanded instant and universal respect, so attacking him would have made an occupation much harder. and he was the driving force behind the faction that sued for peace

2007-06-18 10:20:10 · answer #7 · answered by C_Millionaire 5 · 0 0

The real criminal was General Hideki Tojo.

2007-06-18 11:14:26 · answer #8 · answered by redunicorn 7 · 1 0

You don't get the puppet. You get the puppeteer.

2007-06-18 10:40:43 · answer #9 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers