Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nailbiter; Smokin' Joe; narby; NewLand
After searching through 10 boxes of books, I finally found my copy of "The Wartime Journals of Charles A. Lindbergh. It's around a 1000 pages, which didn't leave me much time to find relevant passages and type them by hand.

Many of the accounts have the same rationalization as I've seen on this thread. That the Japs were evil, so it was OK for us to do whatever we wanted with them. The following is by no means all of the things Lindbergh witnessed. But as you can see from the page numbers and dates, there were many days that he spent flying in combat where he witnessed no crimes. He flew an amazing number of combat missions in P-38s, P-47s, and Marine Corsairs.

[Wednesday June 21, 1944 visiting General Paul B. Wurtsmith. Page 853]]

General’s account of killing a Japanese soldier: A technical sergeant in an advanced area some weeks ago complained that he had been with combat forces in the Pacific for over two years and never had a chance to do any fighting himself – that he would like the chance to kill at least one Jap before he went home. He was invited to go out on a patrol into enemy territory.

The seargeant saw no Jap to shoot, but members of the patrol took a prisoner. The Jap prisoner was brought to the sergeant with the statement that here was his opportunity to kill a Jap.

“But I can’t kill that man! He’s a prisoner. He’s defenseless.”

“Hell, this is war. We’ll show you how to kill the son of a bitch.”

One of the patrol members offered the Jap a cigarette and a light, and as he started to smoke an arm was thrown around his head and his throat “slit from ear to ear.” The entire procedure was thoroughly approved by the general giving the account. I was regarded with an attitude of tolerant scorn and pity when I objected to the method and said that if we had to kill a prisoner I thought we ought to do it in a decent and civilized way. “The sons of bitches do it to us. It’s the only way to handle them.” ……………..

[June 26, 1944 (page 856) visiting the 475th fighter group, spending the night with Colonel Charles H. MacDonald. Spent evening talking about the war with several officers.]

There were three silk Japanese flags hanging on one wall of the hut we were in,k taken from the bodies of Japanese soldiers. The souvenir value of one of these flags was about [$33.00 US], one of the officers told me. Someone who has a Japanese officer’s sword is asking [about $1000 US] for it. The talk drifted to prisoners of war and the small percentage of Japanese soldiers taken prisoner. “Oh, we could take more if we wanted to.” One of the officers replied. “But our boys don’t like to take prisoners.”

“We had a couple of thousand down at [deleted], but only a hundred or two were turned in. They had an accident with the rest. It doesn’t encourage the rest to surrender when they hear of their buddies being marched out on the flying field and machine guns turned loose on them.”

“Or after a couple of them get shot with their hands up in the air,” another officer chimed in.

“Well, take the [deleted]__th. They found one of their men pretty badly mutilated. After that, you can bet they didn’t capture very many Japs.” …………..

[Wednesday, June 28 still with the 475th, page 859] Supper and evening with the 475th officers. Talk again turned to war, prisoners, and souvenirs. I am shocked at the attitude of our American troops. They have no respect for death, the courage of an enemy soldier, or many of the ordinary decencies of life. They think nothing whatever of robbing the body of a dead Jap and call him a “son of a bitch” while they do so. I said during a discussion that regardless of what the Japs did, I did not see how we could gain anything or claim that we represented a civilized state if we killed them by torture. “Well, some of our boys do kick their teeth in, but they usually kill them first,” one of the officers said in half apology.

Later in the evening, as I was getting ready for bed, another officer showed me his souvenirs. Several Japanese soldiers had walked into the camp at about two hours after midnight. (There was argument among the officers as to whether the Japs had come to steal food or to surrender.) The officer who was showing me the souvenirs woke, saw the Japanese, grabbed his .45, and shot two of them. Another officer accounted for a third.

I don’t blame them for what the did. After all, one can hardly afford to ask questions when he sees Japanese soldiers in camp during the darkest hours of morning. What I do blame them for is the attitude with which they kill and their complete lack of respect for the dignity of death. The souvenirs consisted of a silk Japanese flag containing the usual characters, a number of Japanese bills, including invasion money, a name stamp, a postal savings book, a number of postal cards already written and addressed, several other articles, and a photograph of several Japanese soldiers, including the one from whose body the “souvenirs” were taken – a young boy of about fifteen to seventeen years of age. ……………

[Thursday, July 13, 1944. In Australia to discuss his status flying as a civilian with the army. Saw Generals Kenney and MacArthur. Page 875] Supper with Phil La Follette, Phil cooked supper. We discussed the war, old times, and the political situation back home [Roosevelt had just announced his run for a fourth term]. At one point, the conversation turned to the atrocitites committed by the Japanese and by our own men. It was freely admitted that some of our soldiers tortured Jap prisoners and were as cruel and barbaric at times as the Japs themselves. Our men think nothing of shooting a Japanese prisoner or a soldier attempting to surrender. They treat the Jap with less respect than they would give to an animal, and these acts are condoned by almost everyone. We claim to be fighting for civilization, but the more I see of this war in the Pacific the less right I think we have to claim to be civilized. In fact, I am not sure that our record in this respect stands so very much higher than the Japs’. ……………

[With Major {Claude} Stubbs and several other officers, drove in Jeep over to the Mokmer west caves. Monday, July 24, 1944 Page 883]

At the center and far end of the cave the Japs had set up huts similar to those in the first cave we entered, but in better condition, since they were far enough in to escape the flame thrower. One of them had apparently been used for a hospital. One of the bodies on the floor was still lying, partially covered, on a stretcher. This is the cave where the Japs reportedly tried to surrender and were told by our troops to “get the hell back in and fight it out.” The far end of the cave opened into a second pit, also littered with dead bodies.l We could stand it no longer and turned back to our jeep. Drove to the shore and bathed in the cool and clear water of a small spring, which the Japs in those caves had probably used only a few weeks previously. ………….

[Flying as flight leader with the 433rd. Friday August 11, 1944. Non flying day to inspect the aircraft (P-38s) Page 902]

Sitting on boxes and the edge of bunks in the rather poorly lighted tent, we discuss the question of Japanese prisoners. I said I felt it was a mistake not to accept surrender whenever it could be obtained; that by doing so, our advance would be more rapid and many American lives would be saved. If the Japanese think they will be killed anyway when they surrender, they, naturally, are going to hold on and fight to the last – and kill American troops they capture whenever they get the chance. Most of the officers agree (not very enthusiastically) but say that our infantry [doesn’t] look on it that way.

“Take the 41st, for example; they just don’t take prisoners. The men boast about it.”

“The officers wanted some prisoners to question but couldn’t get any until they offered two weeks’ leave in Sydney for each one turned in, Then they got more than they could handle.”

“But when they cut out giving leave, the prisoners stopped coming in, The boys just said they couldn’t catch any.”

“The Aussies are still worse. You remember the time they had to take those prisoners south by plane? One of the pilots told me they just pushed them out over the mountains and reported that the Japs committed hara-kiri on the way.”

“Well, you remember when our troops captured that Jap hospital? There wasn’t anyone alive in it when they got through.” “The Nips did it to us, though.”

[On Tarawa island, Wednesday, August 30 1944 on jeep tour with an officer]

The officer I was with, who came in soon after the first landing, told me that our Marines seldom accepted surrender of the Japanese troops on the island. It had been a bitter fight; our men had lost heavily; the general desire was to kill and not take prisoners. Even when prisoners were taken, the naval officer said, they were lined up and asked which ones could speak English. Those who were able to speak English were taken for questioning. The other “simply weren’t taken.” ………….

[Apparently on Roi island, Monday Sept 4, 1944] One of the doctors on the island tells me that some of the Marines dug up Japanese bodies to get gold-filled teeth for souvenirs. ………….

[Apparently still on Roi island, Saturday, September 9, 1944 page 919]

Before the bodies in the hollow were “bulldozed over,” the officer said, a number of our Marines went in among them, searching through their pockets and prodding around in the mouths for gold-filled teeth. Some of the Marines, he said, had a little sack in which they collected teeth with gold fillings. The officer said he had seen a number of Japanese bodies from which an ear or a nose had been cut off. “Our boys cut them off to show their friends in fun, or to dry and take back to the States when they go. We found one Marine with a Japanese head. He was trying to get the ants to clean the flesh off the skull, but the odor got so bad we had to take it away from him.” It is the same story everywhere I go. ………….

[Arriving at Oahu Hawaii, September 14 1944 page 923] Colonel [John S.E.] Young and several Marine officers happened to be at the NATS station when I arrived. He invited me to spend the night with him at Ewa. Cleared customs and we drove out to the base. (The customs officer asked me if I had any bones in my baggage. He said they had to ask everyone that question because they had found a large number of men taking Japanese bones home for souvenirs. He said he had found one man with two “green” Jap skulls in his baggage.) ………………

264 posted on 03/11/2007 10:30:33 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies ]


To: narby; Smokin' Joe; NewLand; IncPen; BartMan1
The problem in this argument is the following.
People in the war all had person el experiences. I was not alive when this taking place. Therefore I must rely on written history.

I have read many accounts about what were considered atrocities during the Pacific war.
Many can be attributed to two disparate cultures meeting on the battlefield.
The Japanese considered surrender dishonorable, they consider friend or foe as dishonorable for surrendering.
The Allies considered surrender honorable, if the alternative was annihilation for no apparent gain.

Therefore the Japanese had no moral prohibition in allowing or committing the Bataan Death March, executing the left behinds of Carlson's Makin island raid (I believe was 9 Marines executed because Japanese did not want prisoners),not marking POW ships as such, or shipping POW's on merchant ships, which tended to be torpedoed by Allies. There are many more examples, but my library is at home. Which I am not.

The Americans would take prisoners, but in many cases those surrendering would attack after surrendering. Made it tough to determine who was genuinely surrendering

Did Americans commit atrocities, perhaps. But if they did was in context of the battle. Also I was not there so I cannot second guess their decisions.
Were they prevalent, I do not think so, because Americans soldiers have always been held to higher standard, and held themselves to higher standard
However if you are fighting an enemy that has no regard for surrendering troops, might color thinking when fighting said enemy.

Finally the purpose of the link about Guy Gabaldon was 2 fold.
First he should be honored and remembered for his service to his country.

But also I posted for a different reason, there were few Japanese as second language troops. Most were not allowed into combat but were used for intelligence or code intercept work. (Unable to attribute with link, something from my past research)

As a consequence , if no common language it is difficult to communicate surrender..
In Europe the problem was less prevalent as many Americans had smattering of German, Italian, french , therefore were able to convince enemy combatants to surrender.
Also enemy combatants in European theater for most part would surrender when to continue fighting was not sensible.
Since most countries in Europe were signatories of Geneva conventions most POWs were accorded rights listed there in.
And were more likely to surrender than fight to the death.
There were exceptions I am sure, but they were not the norm.

The Japanese were not signatory of Geneva convention ( Convention May 1929) , therefore did not abide by the conventions.
Since POWs (surrenders) were less than human, Japanese did not consider anything wrong with working them to death. Using for experimentation and so on.

Faced with this possibility later in war, explains why there were fewer prisoners on both sides.
The Japanese were told by their leaders that we killed and ate babies, that we did not take prisoners. Also was dishonorable to surrender. Since it was death penalty in Japanese Armed forces to surrender, the average soldier would fight to the death, unless could be convinced otherwise. See Guy Gabaldon.
The Allies knew of the cruelty of Japanese towards prisoners, therefore Allies were more likely to fight than surrender.

From the few entries that you posted from Chas Lindbergs diaries appears that he was comparing apples and oranges.
He was comparing how the war was prosecuted in Europe, to how should be prosecuted in Pacific, especially regarding prisoners.

But if you understand what I have tried to explain above may indicate the disparity of opinion on this subject.

One cannot judge the Pacific War by what was happening in Europe.
Since American combatants and European combatants have a shared heritage, we treated each other in more gentlemanly fashion. ( If one can say that about war)

In Pacific we were fighting an opponent that had no shared heritage with US and its allies.


As to the writings of Charles Lindberg, I am sad to say that I was unaware of this part of history.
I will endeavor to correct in the future.

In closing.
I would not dishonor anyone who served in this war or any other fighting for America.
The above observations are my own.
If you find that they are incorrect please correct.
268 posted on 03/12/2007 12:47:58 AM PDT by Nailbiter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson