User talk:AussieSoldier

Welcome!

Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal &mdash; and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my talk page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.  Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log.
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language.

Happy editing! &rarr; Jarlaxle Artemis   04:01, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

Nanjing Massacre
I kindly request that you do not accuse people of things and not declare them having a hidden agenda or anything. Please dont discuss other parties in the discussion but discuss the article material. Present your cases, you will create a hostile enviorment if you refer to what is explained in WP:No personal attacks. --Cool Cat My Talk 07:00, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NPOV suggests different versions of events beeing presented. You realise that japaneese goverment does not accpet this as a massacre right? I believe they have an explanation. Now while that info maybe false as far as you and many others are concerned NPOV dictates them be mentioned. Otherwise the POV tag cannot be removed. Please understand that NPOV suggests significant other views be heard. I understand you feel strong about your views, I can understand that, but please cite verifiable sources for material. That way we can place that as solid facts, other wise it is no more than POV. I am not sure how factual all existing material is, some may be products of propoganda. That is why my job is very difficult to make this article NPOV if you or no one else cites sources. Thanks. --Cool Cat My Talk 07:00, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please realise that I cannot agree or disagree with you due to my position as acting mediator. I am not here to proove disproove the Nanjing Massacre, some material on it does not abide by NPOV. I need sources sited for certain material I will mention. --Cool Cat My Talk 07:07, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * AussieSoldier, it's good to see that some balance has finally been restored to the Nanjing Massacre section. When I was reading the discussion page, however, I noticed that you seem to have something of a down on the Japanese (which has been pointed out by others as a POV issue). I'm curious whether you are a serving Aussie soldier or served at the time of WWII. I'm also Australian, but I've never served in the armed forces and have no experience of the realities of combat or anything even remotely like it. I have lived in Japan for an extended period of time.


 * Anyway, I'm posting this to bring to your attention a book that you might be interested in (if you haven't heard of it already). It's called 'Time of Fallen Blossoms' by Allan Clifton. The book is quite critical of the behaviour of the Australian troops during their Occupation of Japan after the war. I believe it is out of print now and quite hard to get.


 * I had the opportunity to read this book back in the 1970s. I remember being startled when it started out something like: 'Let's not talk about atrocities. There were plenty of atrocities on both sides, like captured Japanese being pushed into the turning airscrews of aeroplanes.' (I don't remember exactly what it said, it was a very long time ago).


 * It came as something as a shock to me to read that there was another side to events. I had been in Japan for some years but I had always had difficulties reconciling my life among the Japanese with the events of WWII that I had heard of. This book didn't change anything, but it did give me another perspective.


 * It also prepared me for what happened some years later, in the 1980s, when I struck up a conversation with a couple of Japanese men in a restaurant in Tokyo. They were quite friendly until I told them I was Australian, when they suddenly became very hostile. It turned out they were from Kure, where the Australian Occupation forces were based after the war. My Yugoslav friend dispatched them with a few choice comments about the A-bomb and I didn't ever get to discuss anything with them. But the point was, there is an unexpected, hidden side of events that we don't hear of. No Australians today would ever have an inkling that their country's performance was less than sparkling during the war. The critical aspects of the Occupation have been quietly forgotten...


 * By mentioning this I'm not trying to drag the reputations of Australian soldiers in the mud or tar Australians with the same brush as the Japanese during WWII. That would be ridiculous and frankly insulting. I'm citing the book merely because I believe it helps give a sense of balance -- there is always a subtly different side, a slightly different angle to every story.


 * I do feel you are being somewhat unfair to the Japanese when you try to link sadistic modern day manga with the behaviour of Japanese troops during WWII. I don't think it's possible to generalise like that. Do you think the alleged preference for being spanked among public-school graduates in the UK (Eton, etc), due to sado-masochistic practices among boys at the schools, tells us something deep about British culture? Does it make any sense to generalise from that?


 * I personally feel that the brutality endemic in the Japanese Imperial Army from top to bottom might have had a lot to do with it. And that brutality was, or course, deeply connected with some of the doctrines of Imperial Japan (bushido spirit, Emperor worship, superiority of the Japanese race, etc.). But that is different from saying that it is something innate in the Japanese character. It was actually an ideology deliberately cooked up in the 19th century. Bushido as embraced by Meiji Japan was something quite different from how real samurai behaved in the Japanese middle ages. And also don't forget, the Japanese Imperial Army was not only composed of Japanese; it also had Koreans and Taiwanese serving in its ranks. I would not be surprised if some of the mistreated non-Japanese were not up there with the best of them when it came to atrocities....


 * Anyway, I hope you can get hold of that book. Whatever you might feel about it, it makes for an interesting read.


 * (I'm posting this here because I can't figure out how to contact you otherwise).


 * Bathrobe 13:24, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

self-styled 'mediators'
Hi there; Nanjing Massacre has recently been heavily, ah, 'mediated' by a 'neutralizer'. You may be interested to know that this same approach has been tried at Armenian Genocide with great disruptive effect. This would seem to be the intent. I will be joining the talk at Talk:Nanjing Massacre and thought I'd introduce myself. I'm not Japanese, Chinese, Turkish, Kurdish, or Armenian; I find denial of historic events such as these, offensive. Sincerely, Davenbelle 09:06, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)