I really liked both parts of this episode. It was surprisingly educational. It made a lot of the concepts presented much more relatable apposed to just hearing some pundits yammer on about stuff I have no tangible association with. Maybe you guys will do more stuff like this in the future?
Mention was made of how, until Iraq, the world never had the situation of a conquering nation moving in, taking over, and then planning on leaving and handing over power without making the defeated nation a subject/slave/colony. I wonder how you compared the Iraq situation with what happened to Japan after WWII?
—
Sam Crider crider@lthenia.com
There is enough material in making an accurate comparison for a book, but painting in fairly broad strokes, I’ll say this:
-Japan was utterly exhausted by June of 1945 and when considering how they might continue hostilities, they leaned heavily towards a conventional all-out defense rather than guerilla operations. Iraq by contrast knew that they were asymmetrically outclassed and almost immediately (despite orders from Saddam to hold their ground) large portions of the army began ‘melting away’ to plan an insurgency. Far from being exhausted militarily and despite more than a decade of crippling sanctions, there were weapons caches crisscrossing Iraq, literally in the thousands, from which militants could draw supplies. I recall reading that the existence of these stockpiles were even noted during Desert Storm.
-While Japan did surrender, there was an attempted coup, known as the kyujo incident, in which several high ranked military officials attempted to overthrow the government with the intention of continuing the war. It failed, and the ringleaders, who could very well have formed the backbone of the resistance, chose instead to take the Japanese route of suicide. There were, of course, a number of holdouts elsewhere, on various islands and (previously) colonial territories, but they never formed anything that could be called an organized resistance. Some of them may have refused to surrender out of pride, while others just never got the message because communications had been severed in the conflict. Indeed, the most famous holdouts, hung around waiting for orders for decades (the last one was repatriated in 1974, if I recall).
-Japan, being a island country, has a good bit of distance between itself and its nearest neighbors, none of whom share that much cultural simularity with them and all of whom had recently been occupied (and just wanted to be left alone). Iraq is flush with regional troublemakers Syria and Iran and has an incredibly porous border and cultural leanings towards both riven through their society. Both regimes have vested interest in certain outcomes and found it relatively easy to project their power within Iraq. This alone, I think, makes it pretty dissimilar from the Japanese surrender. The United States could assert its rules within Japan’s borders and nobody could meddle too easily (well, Russia certainly tried (they wanted Hokaido) but they weren’t, strictly speaking, locals). If Iraq had been some island somewhere, that could well have made all the difference.
-There was one relatively unified culture in Japan, whereas the Iraqis, Sunni, Shia, Kurd (and to a lesser extent Assyrian, Alawite, Druze, Yazidi and a whole bunch of other sects I’m probably not even aware of) have, to a greater or lesser extent depending on the time period, lived in opposition to each other. You can talk accurately about a Japanese nation, with a national identity, whereas Iraq is less a nation than a big group of tribes which nominally followed a strongman for a while because he had the biggest stick. When the Japanese emperor spoke, the Japanese populace listened and obeyed the government. Most Iraqis put tribal and family affiliations first, and government loyalties second. There is some preliminary evidence to suggest this is changing, and a real national identity is forming there, but in Japan, that had existed solidly since the Meiji period and weakly for at least a few hundred years into the Tokugawa era.
So, all that said, I don’t think there are many similarities at all. To top it off, there was a horrific famine in 1946 that basically made the Japanese totally dependent on US aid. I have heard descriptions of conditions that GIs encountered when first arriving there as part of the reconstruction… and it is as horrifying as anything I’ve ever heard. I think this aspect of post-war history gets glossed over a little in deference to Japanese complicitness with the occupation. That is to say, history remembers the United States wrote them a constitution, there’s no need to rub their noses in the fact that they were reduced to subhuman conditions and forced to rely on their enemies for salvation. Sometimes a little selective memory goes really far in smoothing things over…
…just like the Iraqis, if they ever get their act together (and it seems as though they may), will talk about how they ‘kicked out the U.S.’ and we’ll quietly hold our tongues. There’s a reason they call them ‘founding myths’ after all. It turns out, sometimes, in order to win, it has to seem as though you lost. Fascinating stuff, I tell you.
All this is true, but I don’t think it answers the original point, which is the idea that before Iraq you never had a country invade with the idea of eventually leaving before. Sure, the specifics of the invasions and occupations were/are different, but the basic idea is the same; we did not intend to occupy Japan indefinitely and we do not (I hope) intend to occupy Iraq indefinitely.
Interesting information about post-war Japan, but as the poster above mentions, I was really wondering more about comparing US attitudes towards Japan and towards Iraq as far as their post-occupation status. All the individual differences in the respective situations may add up to results that cannot be easily compared, but as soon as the US invasion of Iraq started I was wondering about what lessons the occupation of Japan might offer as far as what our next steps would be.
I haven’t studied a whole lot about Japan immediately after World War II, but I think there are a couple of important differences. First, Japan was an actual military aggressor towards the United States. While Iraq was certainly a threat in the area (and to U.S. interests), the case is less clear. Second, the war in the Pacific, while unique in many ways, was still basically two states battering at each other with conventional military forces (whereas we crushed Iraq’s conventional military in no time). Third, the devastation of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki really broke the fighting spirit of Japan as a nation and as a state. Fourth, Japan’s reasons for fighting in World War II were completely entrenched in nationalism, whereas Iraq has never been a nation. Saddam Hussein tried to create a nationalist spirit centered around himself, but the chaos after his removal shows just how much he failed.
Anyway, I think Noah’s main point was that traditionally conquering powers don’t just go in, rebuild stuff, and then hand things back over to the conquered peoples. Even Americans have a hard time believing this to be the case, despite the fact that, as you point out, we did actually do that with Japan (although I wouldn’t use the word “conquered” in that context; more like “defeated”).
Sounded like a total dink to me. I haven’t read the post you’re talking about, so maybe he goes over this; but his “simple solution to piracy” involves nations essentially declaring war on Somalia. Actually, it sounds like his idea is that nations are just going to give up on international standards and just go with might makes right again. It’ll be pre-United Nations time. Does he think that the major nations of the world are going to look back at that time and conclude that it was better than what we have now?
Hello. everyone.
I saw a site, they selling this Great Forum!Great offer: [url=http://www.jakkemoncler.org/moncler-men/483-moncler-men-s-v-neck-classic-white-wool-sweater.html]2011 Moncler Men’s Sweater for women[/url]
,is it a good site?
I really liked both parts of this episode. It was surprisingly educational. It made a lot of the concepts presented much more relatable apposed to just hearing some pundits yammer on about stuff I have no tangible association with. Maybe you guys will do more stuff like this in the future?
Conquering nations
Mention was made of how, until Iraq, the world never had the situation of a conquering nation moving in, taking over, and then planning on leaving and handing over power without making the defeated nation a subject/slave/colony. I wonder how you compared the Iraq situation with what happened to Japan after WWII?
—
Sam Crider
crider@lthenia.com
Re: Conquering nations
There is enough material in making an accurate comparison for a book, but painting in fairly broad strokes, I’ll say this:
-Japan was utterly exhausted by June of 1945 and when considering how they might continue hostilities, they leaned heavily towards a conventional all-out defense rather than guerilla operations. Iraq by contrast knew that they were asymmetrically outclassed and almost immediately (despite orders from Saddam to hold their ground) large portions of the army began ‘melting away’ to plan an insurgency. Far from being exhausted militarily and despite more than a decade of crippling sanctions, there were weapons caches crisscrossing Iraq, literally in the thousands, from which militants could draw supplies. I recall reading that the existence of these stockpiles were even noted during Desert Storm.
-While Japan did surrender, there was an attempted coup, known as the kyujo incident, in which several high ranked military officials attempted to overthrow the government with the intention of continuing the war. It failed, and the ringleaders, who could very well have formed the backbone of the resistance, chose instead to take the Japanese route of suicide. There were, of course, a number of holdouts elsewhere, on various islands and (previously) colonial territories, but they never formed anything that could be called an organized resistance. Some of them may have refused to surrender out of pride, while others just never got the message because communications had been severed in the conflict. Indeed, the most famous holdouts, hung around waiting for orders for decades (the last one was repatriated in 1974, if I recall).
-Japan, being a island country, has a good bit of distance between itself and its nearest neighbors, none of whom share that much cultural simularity with them and all of whom had recently been occupied (and just wanted to be left alone). Iraq is flush with regional troublemakers Syria and Iran and has an incredibly porous border and cultural leanings towards both riven through their society. Both regimes have vested interest in certain outcomes and found it relatively easy to project their power within Iraq. This alone, I think, makes it pretty dissimilar from the Japanese surrender. The United States could assert its rules within Japan’s borders and nobody could meddle too easily (well, Russia certainly tried (they wanted Hokaido) but they weren’t, strictly speaking, locals). If Iraq had been some island somewhere, that could well have made all the difference.
-There was one relatively unified culture in Japan, whereas the Iraqis, Sunni, Shia, Kurd (and to a lesser extent Assyrian, Alawite, Druze, Yazidi and a whole bunch of other sects I’m probably not even aware of) have, to a greater or lesser extent depending on the time period, lived in opposition to each other. You can talk accurately about a Japanese nation, with a national identity, whereas Iraq is less a nation than a big group of tribes which nominally followed a strongman for a while because he had the biggest stick. When the Japanese emperor spoke, the Japanese populace listened and obeyed the government. Most Iraqis put tribal and family affiliations first, and government loyalties second. There is some preliminary evidence to suggest this is changing, and a real national identity is forming there, but in Japan, that had existed solidly since the Meiji period and weakly for at least a few hundred years into the Tokugawa era.
Re: Conquering nations
So, all that said, I don’t think there are many similarities at all. To top it off, there was a horrific famine in 1946 that basically made the Japanese totally dependent on US aid. I have heard descriptions of conditions that GIs encountered when first arriving there as part of the reconstruction… and it is as horrifying as anything I’ve ever heard. I think this aspect of post-war history gets glossed over a little in deference to Japanese complicitness with the occupation. That is to say, history remembers the United States wrote them a constitution, there’s no need to rub their noses in the fact that they were reduced to subhuman conditions and forced to rely on their enemies for salvation. Sometimes a little selective memory goes really far in smoothing things over…
…just like the Iraqis, if they ever get their act together (and it seems as though they may), will talk about how they ‘kicked out the U.S.’ and we’ll quietly hold our tongues. There’s a reason they call them ‘founding myths’ after all. It turns out, sometimes, in order to win, it has to seem as though you lost. Fascinating stuff, I tell you.
Re: Conquering nations
All this is true, but I don’t think it answers the original point, which is the idea that before Iraq you never had a country invade with the idea of eventually leaving before. Sure, the specifics of the invasions and occupations were/are different, but the basic idea is the same; we did not intend to occupy Japan indefinitely and we do not (I hope) intend to occupy Iraq indefinitely.
Re: Conquering nations
Interesting information about post-war Japan, but as the poster above mentions, I was really wondering more about comparing US attitudes towards Japan and towards Iraq as far as their post-occupation status. All the individual differences in the respective situations may add up to results that cannot be easily compared, but as soon as the US invasion of Iraq started I was wondering about what lessons the occupation of Japan might offer as far as what our next steps would be.
Iraq vs. Japan
I haven’t studied a whole lot about Japan immediately after World War II, but I think there are a couple of important differences. First, Japan was an actual military aggressor towards the United States. While Iraq was certainly a threat in the area (and to U.S. interests), the case is less clear. Second, the war in the Pacific, while unique in many ways, was still basically two states battering at each other with conventional military forces (whereas we crushed Iraq’s conventional military in no time). Third, the devastation of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki really broke the fighting spirit of Japan as a nation and as a state. Fourth, Japan’s reasons for fighting in World War II were completely entrenched in nationalism, whereas Iraq has never been a nation. Saddam Hussein tried to create a nationalist spirit centered around himself, but the chaos after his removal shows just how much he failed.
Anyway, I think Noah’s main point was that traditionally conquering powers don’t just go in, rebuild stuff, and then hand things back over to the conquered peoples. Even Americans have a hard time believing this to be the case, despite the fact that, as you point out, we did actually do that with Japan (although I wouldn’t use the word “conquered” in that context; more like “defeated”).
End of States guy
Sounded like a total dink to me. I haven’t read the post you’re talking about, so maybe he goes over this; but his “simple solution to piracy” involves nations essentially declaring war on Somalia. Actually, it sounds like his idea is that nations are just going to give up on international standards and just go with might makes right again. It’ll be pre-United Nations time. Does he think that the major nations of the world are going to look back at that time and conclude that it was better than what we have now?
Generations of War
What would be some other examples of 3rd Generation warfare? Would the attack on Pearl Harbor count?
anime love
I wuv you ninja’s
Regan Strongblood
Uhhh that was me who wuvs you!
J lo glow gift set
Acqua di gio gift sets
Neal s yard gift sets
:-0
[url=http://afrodit.no-ip.org/nrqe.html]Tigi bed head gift sets[/url]
wipsebece Gardening gift sets
Tocade perfume
Male perfume reviews
Ted lapidus perfume
π
[url=http://sithe.no-ip.biz/qhc.html]Black star perfume[/url]
appealish Lulu perfume cacharel
Best new perfume 2010
Compare perfume prices uk
Online perfume shop uk
~~:-(
[url=http://sited.hopto.org/afdkyn.html]Discounted designer perfume[/url]
RADYGREANNY Discounted designer perfume
Perfume with patchouli
Le lys angel perfume
Buy perfume on line
:-)-8
[url=http://sited.hopto.org/hdlv.html]Casual perfume for women[/url]
aiderly Shiseido relaxing perfume
Perfume pizazz kansas city mo
Perfume free samples
Miniature bottles of perfume
:-C
[url=http://sited.hopto.org/ijn.html]Perfume buy online[/url]
totophy Best perfume for women 2011
Mariah carey perfume m
Jil perfume by jil sander
Faith hill perfume review
>:->
[url=http://strooner.hopto.org/uvo.html]Touch perfume[/url]
acingiquivisync Solid perfume sticks
hello,anyone arrogate me over here?
Hello. everyone.
I saw a site, they selling this Great Forum!Great offer: [url=http://www.jakkemoncler.org/moncler-men/483-moncler-men-s-v-neck-classic-white-wool-sweater.html]2011 Moncler Men’s Sweater for women[/url]
,is it a good site?
ΠΡΠ΅Π½Ρ ΠΊΠ»Π°ΡΡΠ½Π°Ρ Π΄Π΅Π²ΡΡΠΊΠ°
Π½Π°Π΄ΡΠ±Π°Π» ΠΆΠ΅ Π² ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΡΠ½Π΅ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΎΠΉ ΡΠ°ΠΉΡ, Π³Π΄Π΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΡΡΡΡΠ²ΡΡΡ ΡΡΠΏΠ΅Ρ ΠΊΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠ΅ Π΄Π΅Π²ΡΡΠΊΠΈ ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈ! Π Π²ΠΎΡ ΡΠ΅ΠΏΠ΅ΡΡ Π²ΠΊΡΡΠΈΡΡ, ΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΠΌΠ½Π΅ Π΅ΠΆΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΡΠ½ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π±Π½ΠΎΡΡΡ Π² ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΌΠΎΡΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΎΡΠΎ + ΠΌΠ½Π΅ ΡΠ΅ΠΏΠ΅ΡΡ Π½Π΅ΠΎΠ±Ρ ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠΌΠΎ Π΅ΠΆΠ΅Π΄Π½Π΅Π²Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠΈΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΡΠΎΡΠΎ ΡΡΠΈΡ ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»Π΅ΠΉ! Π£ ΠΌΠ΅Π½Ρ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠ°Ρ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ, ΡΡΠΎ ΠΌΠ½Π΅ Ρ ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ ΡΡΠΎ Π±Ρ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈΠ΅ ΠΊΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠ΅ Π΄Π΅Π²ΡΡΠΊΠΈ Π±ΡΠ»ΠΈ ΡΡΠ΄ΠΎΠΌ ΠΈ Π΅ΠΆΠ΅ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ½Π΄Π½ΠΎ + Π²ΠΎΡ ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΌΠΎΡΡΠ΅ΡΡ ΡΡΠΎΡ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ°Π», Π³Π΄Π΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΡΡΡΡΠ²ΡΡΡ [url=http://stolichnyi.com/girls]Π΄Π΅Π²ΡΡΠΊΠΈ ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈ ΡΠΎΡΠΎ[/url]
.
ΠΠΊΡΠΊΠ»ΡΠ·ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅
ΠΡΠ» ΡΠ΄ΠΈΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ» ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈΡΡΡΡ Ρ ΠΠ°ΠΌΠΈ, ΡΡΠΎ Π½Π°Π΄ΡΠ±Π°Π» ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΎΠ±ΡΡΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π² ΠΌΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠΉ ΡΡΡΠ°Π½Π΅ Π£ΠΊΡΠ°ΠΈΠ½Π°! ΠΠ΅Π»ΠΎ Π±ΡΠ»ΠΎ ΡΠ°ΠΊ – ΠΈΡΠΊΠ°Π» ΠΏΠΎ ΡΠ°ΠΉΡΠ°ΠΌ ΠΆΠΈΠ»ΡΠ΅ ΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΆΠΈΠ» ΠΎΠ±ΡΡΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ [url=http://rols.com.ua/kiev/kvartiry_prodazgha_kiev/280-prodam-2-komnatnuyu-kvartiru-kiev-vid-na-maydan-centr.html]ΠΏΡΠΎΠ΄Π°ΠΌ ΡΠ²ΠΎΡ 2 ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠ½Π°ΡΠ½ΡΡ ΠΊΠ²Π°ΡΡΠΈΡΡ ΠΠΈΠ΅Π²[/url]
Ρ ΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΡΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠΎΡΠΊΠ°ΠΌΠΈ. ΠΌΠ΅Π½Ρ ΡΠΎΠΊΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π»Π° ΡΠ΅Π½Π° Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΡΡΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ + Π²ΠΎΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΠΌΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΎ ΡΡΠΎΠΉ Π½Π΅Π΄Π²ΠΈΠΆΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΠΈ.
Π‘ΡΠΎΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΆΠΈΠ»ΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎ
ΠΡΠΎ Π½Π΅Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎ! Π― Π½ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ³Π΄Π° Π΄Π°ΠΆΠ΅ ΠΈ Π½Π΅ ΠΌΠΎΠ³ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠΈΡΡ ΡΡΠΎ ΡΡΠΎΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π°ΡΠ΅Π½Π΄Ρ ΠΊΠ²Π°ΡΡΠΈΡ Π² ΠΠ΄Π΅ΡΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠ°Ρ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡΡΠ°Ρ + Π³ΠΈΠΏΠ΅Ρ ΠΌΠ΅Π³Π° Π΄ΠΎΡΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΈ ΡΠ°Π½ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ Ρ Π΄ΡΠΌΠ°Π»! ΠΠΎΡ Π²ΠΎΡ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΊ Π½Π° [url=http://realtyodessa.ucoz.ua]ΠΊΠ²Π°ΡΡΠΈΡΡ Π² ΠΠ΄Π΅ΡΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎ[/url]
Ρ Π²ΠΈΠ΄ΠΎΠΌ Π½Π° ΠΌΠΎΡΠ΅.
ΠΡΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π½Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ° Π½Π΅Π΄Π²ΠΈΠΆΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΊΡΡΡΠΎΠ΅
ΠΠ΅ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π» ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅ΠΉΡΠΈΠΉ! ΠΠΈΠΏΠ΅Ρ ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ±ΡΡΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π²ΡΠΏΠΈΡΡΠ²Π°ΡΡ Π½Π°ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅Π»ΠΎΠ²Π΅ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²ΠΎ + Π²ΠΎΡ ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΠΊΠΎΠΌΡΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΎΠ±ΡΡΠ²Ρ [url=http://rentrealtycrimea.com]ΡΠ΄Π°ΠΌ Π½Π΅Π΄Π²ΠΈΠΆΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΡ Π‘ΠΈΠΌΡΠ΅ΡΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»Ρ[/url]
ΠΈ ΡΠΊΠ°ΠΆΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ²ΠΎΡ ΡΠ²ΠΎΠΈ ΠΌΡΡΠ»ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎ ΡΡΠΎΠΌΡ Π΄Π΅Π»Ρ! ΠΠ½Π΅ ΠΌΠ΅Π½Ρ Π½Π°Π²ΠΈΠ³Π°ΡΠΈΡ ΡΠΌΡΡΠΈΠ»Π° ΠΈ ΠΊΠ²Π°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ°.