Desecration of Remains

Hi All,

I'm reading the book, "Japan's War" by Edwin P. Hoyt which I am finding to be awesome.

However, I do question something discussed in this book.

The Japanese were very respectful of the dead and often gave the dead credit which would have been better spent giving to the living. Considering this, the Japanese were extremely hateful of the desecration of Japanese bodies by Americans. (I have seen a picture of a tank in which a Japanese head was used as a hood ornament and another in which a skull was used as a candle holder.)

According to the author, Japanese bones were sent to the home front as souvenirs!

I'm wondering though? Was it possible to send home any packages from the war front?

I certainly understand the need to send letters home but wouldn't the sending of packages to the homefront be a waste of recourses?

Regards,

Bob Guercio

 

I'm sure that some Americans did commit atrocities, just as I know that a much larger percentage of Japanese routinely did so from Nanking China to Wake Island to Bataan, to the DEI to Singapore, Hong Kong, the Burma Railroad and in every Japanese Prisoner of War camp in the empire. It was institutionalized violence combined with racial and cultural hatred with the added plague of forced, slow starvation that killed tens of thousands of Allied POWs.

Repatriated, well fed, Japanese POW's returned to Japan following the war, weighing more and in a better state of health than at any time of their lives. Whereas, repatriated Allied POW's sometimes needed weeks or months of full hospitalization to regain even a percentage of their lost health. Many of them never recovered and died within years of the end of WWII.

 

My mistake. I read too much into your quotations from that book. I have a hard time dealing with revisionist America-bashing historian who seek to portray the US' involvement in WWII in the worst possible light. My apologies.

 

I'm not talking about individual soldiers committing atrocities. I'm talking about institutional acceptance of the desecration of human remains by the United States.
I found this photo in wikipedia at
American mutilation of Japanese war dead - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Arizona war worker writes her Navy boyfriend a thank-you note for the Jap skull he sent her. This skull of a Japanese soldier bears the inscription: "Here is a good Jap -- a dead one!" Life Magazine, May 22 1944.

However, the neutrality of this article in wikipedia is disputed.

I have also found a reference to this photo on ebay where, apparently, this magazine was for sale. Life Magazine May 22 1944 WWII Hatfields & McCoys - eBay (item 200348173699 end time Jun-07-09 20:28:08 PDT)

I have mentioned in my first post of this thread that it is stated in "Japan's War" by Edwin P. Hoyt that Japanese remains were sent home. From what I can tell so far, this is a very reputable source.

At this point, it seems to me that the mailing of Japanese body parts was a war crime committed by the United States. However, I still wonder about the logistics of this!

Bob Guercio

 

I have NEVER heard of any institutional acceptance by any US military organization of the desecration of human remains. Indeed, I cannot conceive of it happening. I suggest that any authority to the contrary is poppycock!

 

US propoganda in WWII was as important as Germany or Japan's. The US needed it's civilians to hate the Germans, and the Japanese. The more they hated the enemy the more hours they'd work, the more bonds they'd buy. Isn't new. I have no doubt that photo is a fake though.

 

I am not passing any judgment on any of this which would be quite wrong since I wasn't there and I have never been subjected to the horrors of combat. Also, I have not implied in my post that the Americans initiated the atrocities! I'm just stating what I have come across!

I have no other information or sources to cite. However, based upon what I have presented, it seems possible that Japanese bones did find their way to the American home front, thus making the atrocity go beyond the crazed soldier in the field.

Regarding the phase that I used, respect for the dead, I wasn't talking about American dead but Japanese dead. As far as their own was concerned, the Japanese had no respect for each other when alive. They were very sadistic with each other as was evidenced throughout their military forces. Physically abusing those of lower ranks seemed to be a way of life. However, once a Japanese died for the war effort, he became a hero and couldn't be revered enough!

The term "institutional acceptance", does not mean a written policy signed by FDR. It means acceptance by society. Perhaps societal acceptance is a more appropriate term.

Bob Guercio

 

In my opinion, Edwin P. Hoyt is a very biased (in favor of Japan) historian who habitually states only one side of the case, and frequently ignores data with which he does not agree. I do not consider him a reliable source on any aspect of the Pacific war.

Having said that, there is no doubt in my mind that there were several cases of mistreatment of Japanese remains perpetrated by Americans during the war. I have seen mention, in more than one source, that a US Congressman, upon returning from a tour of the Pacific combat zone, presented Roosevelt with a letter opener, allegedly fashioned from the thigh bone of a dead Japanese soldier. Roosevelt, ever the statesman, politely declined the gift.

Your assertion that this constitutes a "war crime" is, as far as I know, incorrect. I have searched the relevant conventions and treaties and can find no clause which deals with such behavior. There is no doubt that mistreatment of Japanese bodies did anger them, but the conduct of the Japanese themselves was such that desecration of enemy dead hardly qualified as an "atrocity"; the Japanese frequently mutilated Allied bodies, sometimes even before they were dead. It is my opinion that the low standards of conduct exhibited in the Pacific fighting were deliberately set by the Japanese themselves through their behavior that was evident from at least 1931.

As for the logistics involved, I believe that US military personnel were allowed to mail packages home from the combat zones. Ships and aircraft returning from the Pacific to their home ports in the US frequently did so empty, or nearly so, as there wasn't much that needed to be shipped to the US from the Pacific. I know my father, who served on a carrier for most of the war, sent back a number of items from the Pacific, including a pair of Japanese binoculars recovered from a crashed Japanese aircraft.

 

Devilsadvocate,

I must admit that I have not yet done enough reading on World War II to determine the veracity of Hoyt as a historian for myself. I hear what you are saying and I intend to study this in more detail.

I also agree that the word "war crime" was hyperbolic.

However, you have answered this thread very nicely and, unfortunately, confirmed what I thought.

Bob Guercio

 

I don't think I adequately articulated my thoughts.

It's my belief that you are judging the feelings and actions of people who were alive during WW II by present day standards, which is neither wise, nor fair.

At a time when both the Japanese and Allies were doing their level best to literally tear the bodies of their living enemies limb from limb, dismember them, incinerate them, or better yet, virtually vaporize them, people, whether in combat, or on the home front, could hardly be expected to engage in hand-wringing over disrespect shown to a handful of the fallen bodies of a brutal, inhumane enemy.

All over the world, in 1942-45, the mortal remains of civilians and combatants alike were being lost at sea, shoveled into mass graves, burned on improvised pyres, buried without ceremony in heaps of rubble, or simply left to rot where they fell. This situation was not conducive to arousing disapproval of the practice of displaying the bones of Japanese war dead, even among those who had no direct experience of such things.

 

Other than presuming that I was judging the feelings and actions of the people during World War II, I agree with everything that you have said.

I have tried to present and respond to this thread solely in a historical and nonjudgmental manner. If I have sounded otherwise, it was not intended.

Considering the times, I tend to think that I would have been a "Japanese Hater" had I been through World War II, either as a soldier in combat or a citizen on the home front.

Bob Guercio

 

Jack,

My hat is off to all you guys that visited hell and returned!

I want to salute your post but I am not able to. I presume that there is a computer glitch causing this but expect my salute shortly.

Bob Guercio

 

I did presume you to be judging the attitudes and actions of Americans engaged in WW II, based on the tone of the words you wrote. I believe you were doing so, however, if I am mistaken, I do sincerely apologize for that mistake.

I was just trying to relate, and explain to an extent, the feelings of that generation of Americans, as related to me by my parents who saw many of the things I described. I know I myself would have shared those attitudes had I been alive during the war. Even today, I experience a sense of anger when I read about the senseless Japanese atrocities and find it difficult to forgive them. My wife's family is Chinese and her parents and siblings experienced the Japanese occupation of Borneo (although she was not born until after the war); I showed her this thread and asked what her family would think. Her response was that they, in fact, did not think the WW II American indifference to Japanese war dead was any "big deal"; an attitude most people I know, would share today.

 

This is a problem with forums. Judgments are made based upon the isolated verbiage, which is presented with no body language, or tones and inflections.

Recently someone mentioned that I should be a little bit more careful with the facts and my first reaction was "What a nerve!". I quickly realized that this guy was joking.

I have an idea for a forum! Instead of reading words, we would view videos. This is certainly not to hard to implement and we may see forums of this type in the future.

Bob Guercio

 

I am a big believer in first hand accounts for this reason. Tom Brokaw's book, "The Greatest Generation" used this format which is why I dwelled on what I was reading.

Bob Guercio