Historic Japanese WWII photo's

[Volker62]

Hello friends

 

start this new topic and ask for actice paticipation!!!!

 

 

found again after more than 20 years.....

 

original rare photo  shows "General Yamashita Tomoyuki" the "Tiger of Malaya" at surrender in the Philippines.....

[mdiddy]

1 hour ago, Volker62 said:

"General Yamashita Tomoyuki" the "Tiger of Malaya" at surrender in the Philippines.....

 

Great topic!

 

I always found these photos of Yamashita's initial contact and surrender really cool. They are from Fred Lohman's site here and he obtained them from the servicemen that took the photos. I wish the photos were larger but it looks like the links to larger photos are now broken from the site.

 

[Smee78]

Great pictures, thanks for sharing. I look forward to this thread growing with more pictures and explanations. 

[PNSSHOGUN]

Additional photos (and purported swords) of Gen. Yamashita here:

 

 

[Ontario_Archaeology]

I am honestly torn on my opinion of his execution for war crimes. I find his case really interesting since the United States had to make a law to ensure his guilt. From his Wikipedia, "The court eventually found Yamashita guilty and he was executed in 1946. The ruling against Yamashita – holding the commander responsible for subordinates' war crimes as long as the commander did not attempt to discover and stop them from occurring – came to be known as the Yamashita standard."

 

I belive there is also a few YouTube biographies on him as well thst go into more detail about how he disciplined his troops thst were caught committing crimes or disobeying orders. 

 

I think I have to say that I'm not defending him or the actions, it's just an interesting case that isn't black and white. 

[Death-Ace]

On 6/29/2023 at 11:00 PM, Ontario_Archaeology said:

I am honestly torn on my opinion of his execution for war crimes. I find his case really interesting since the United States had to make a law to ensure his guilt. From his Wikipedia, "The court eventually found Yamashita guilty and he was executed in 1946. The ruling against Yamashita – holding the commander responsible for subordinates' war crimes as long as the commander did not attempt to discover and stop them from occurring – came to be known as the Yamashita standard."

 

I belive there is also a few YouTube biographies on him as well thst go into more detail about how he disciplined his troops thst were caught committing crimes or disobeying orders. 

 

I think I have to say that I'm not defending him or the actions, it's just an interesting case that isn't black and white. 

General Yamashita was definitely one of those "unusual" figures in terms of the higher Chain of Command of the IJA. He was a brilliant tactician, one of the few higher ranking Army members that had seen combat in earlier conflicts (against the Germans in China during WWI). Seems many describe him as a good man in and out of uniform, with sympathy to fellow humans. His actions against those responsible during the Sook Ching and Alexandra Hospital massacres seem to validate those thoughts.

 

He's definitely a controversial figure in circles though. As part of a GHQ, some argue he had advanced knowledge of massacres, although he ordered his troops not to partake in such actions or others of the populace. Even though he was a member, and a large one at that, of the radical Kodoha, he doesn't seem to have shared a belief in complete subjugation of conquered/occupied territories, and had gotten under Tojo's skin for implying other Asians were the same as them.

 

Seems it was these sympathies that he was sent to the Philippines. Even though he was an excellent choice for the defense, the general thought was that he was sent there to "do his duty and die," in the same way General Kuribayashi was sent to to Iwo Jima, among others in the IJA/IJN, as it was thought to take out those whose thought process wasn't in line with prevailing belief system.

 

The main issue that's controversial is that it is believed General Yamashita did not declare Manila an open city prior to the inevitable Allied advance, and didn't do anything to protect the Philippine citizens from a vengeful IJA/IJN. Many conclude he was (or did), but communication was worsened during that stage of the campaign, and troops not loyal to him or other the command of other fanatical leaders simply ignored him. Without concrete evidence in the shape of an approved order, it cannot be said for sure, although it was argued in the post-war trial he should not be charged for these terrible, horrible massacres. 

 

I believe he should be declared innocent. However, the Yamashita Standard set afterward would still have argued he was responsible, as our armed forces should and would be now. But under those circumstances, could any one person, or even a few, stop what had happened? The thought process of the time is far different than it is now, thankfully.

 

He fought, because that's what any soldier would do. He shed blood in the name of his country in WWI, when Japan was not yet radicalized under fascist belief. Some may argue if his case was ever reviewed and declared him innocent, it would act the same way the "Clean Wehrmacht" myth would in Germany (which we know many were indeed that, but many were not, or orders or not, war crimes are terrible). 

 

Just my two cents! Do not mean to turn this into a political post. General Yamashita is an interesting figure. Nothing is ever black and white!

[Ontario_Archaeology]

1 hour ago, Death-Ace said:

General Yamashita was definitely one of those "unusual" figures in terms of the higher Chain of Command of the IJA. He was a brilliant tactician, one of the few higher ranking Army members that had seen combat in earlier conflicts (against the Germans in China during WWI). Seems many describe him as a good man in and out of uniform, with sympathy to fellow humans. His actions against those responsible during the Sook Ching and Alexandra Hospital massacres seem to validate those thoughts.

 

He's definitely a controversial figure in circles though. As part of a GHQ, some argue he had advanced knowledge of massacres, although he ordered his troops not to partake in such actions or others of the populace. Even though he was a member, and a large one at that, of the radical Kodoha, he doesn't seem to have shared a belief in complete subjugation of conquered/occupied territories, and had gotten under Tojo's skin for implying other Asians were the same as them.

 

Seems it was these sympathies that he was sent to the Philippines. Even though he was an excellent choice for the defense, the general thought was that he was sent there to "do his duty and die," in the same way General Kuribayashi was sent to to Iwo Jima, among others in the IJA/IJN, as it was thought to take out those whose thought process wasn't in line with prevailing belief system.

 

The main issue that's controversial is that it is believed General Yamashita did not declare Manila an open city prior to the inevitable Allied advance, and didn't do anything to protect the Philippine citizens from a vengeful IJA/IJN. Many conclude he was (or did), but communication was worsened during that stage of the campaign, and troops not loyal to him or other the command of other fanatical leaders simply ignored him. Without concrete evidence in the shape of an approved order, it cannot be said for sure, although it was argued in the post-war trial he should not be charged for these terrible, horrible massacres. 

 

I believe he should be declared innocent. However, the Yamashita Standard set afterward would still have argued he was responsible, as our armed forces should and would be now. But under those circumstances, could any one person, or even a few, stop what had happened? The thought process of the time is far different than it is now, thankfully.

 

He fought, because that's what any soldier would do. He shed blood in the name of his country in WWI, when Japan was not yet radicalized under fascist belief. Some may argue if his case was ever reviewed and declared him innocent, it would act the same way the "Clean Wehrmacht" myth would in Germany (which we know many were indeed that, but many were not, or orders or not, war crimes are terrible). 

 

Just my two cents! Do not mean to turn this into a political post. General Yamashita is an interesting figure. Nothing is ever black and white!

Thanks for more detail and adding to this discussion! The grey area is one reason I enjoy history, especially axis history since on pop culture and main stream history sources it is usually portrayed as good guy vs bad guy and in the end the bad guy gets his. 

 

I think when to touch on his involvement with the radical Kodoha, it maybe a political move in order to gain favor and influence to try and stay in good fortunes with those above him. There are many instances of good men being apart of the Nazi party for similar reasons. I am sure he had written down his thoughts somewhere. I'm curious if they are published or have been lost to history. I know we get a glimpse of his character in his trail, where although he defended himself and his actions, he appears to have accepted the decision to sentence him to death. I'd just like to pick his brain without the added pressure of a death penalty hanging over him. I know there is a similar book from an admiral where his thoughts of Japans ability to fight is on full display, I have a the book, I just need to set aside a day or two and read it. 

 

It's a very interesting, but touchy topic. I'm happy to discuss more, and I think this forum is appropriate for it as we all recognise we arnt trying to deny that war crimes occurred. 

[Volker62]

 Yamashita's mission to Hitler in Berlin and Mussolini, Italy

[Bruce Pennington]

I read James M. Scott's "RAMPAGE, MaCARTHUR, YAMASHITA,and the BATTLE af MANILA"  Sadly, Scott didn't do much to address this topic.  The book's emphasis was mostly devoted to the horrors of the war crimes, secondly with MacArthor, and only rudimentary outlines of Yamashita's career involvement.  

[Ontario_Archaeology]

8 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

I read James M. Scott's "RAMPAGE, MaCARTHUR, YAMASHITA,and the BATTLE af MANILA"  Sadly, Scott didn't do much to address this topic.  The book's emphasis was mostly devoted to the horrors of the war crimes, secondly with MacArthor, and only rudimentary outlines of Yamashita's career involvement.  

This is the book I was thinking of Fading Victory: The Diary of Admiral Matome Ugaki, 1941-1945