In the Name of Liberty and Justice
In the Name of Liberty and Justice
Japan is no longer safe! This was the sentiment of most Americans after The Doolittle Raids; America’s first bombing attack on mainland Japan. These raids had a profound effect on American morale during WWII. The supposedly impregnable island of Japan had been ruptured and The U.S. was now on the Offensive. Initial perceptions of American people’s the support of these raids would reflect an unwavering dedication to the complete annihilation of the Japanese foe. Though it is true that nearly all Americans supported the war, some did have reservations. The damage done to the Japanese people as well as the welfare of U.S. soldiers was and issue for many. Destination Tokyo, a wartime film, depicts the issue of the pure necessity to fight the Japanese as far outweighing any loss of life or property. Also the April 19, 1942 New York Times editorial “The Attack on Japan” casts the raids as the only effective, meaningful response to the coldhearted Japanese enemy. How are these claims related to one another? Is this a valid justification for war? More broadly, what do these claims speak about human nature in general?
Destination Tokyo, like any other Hollywood film, was made to entertain. It also tried to deal with some of the feeling and thoughts of American soldiers and their families during the war. The film tried to reflect many of the attitudes and emotions of average Americans. One of these attitudes was that American soldiers were not violent warmongers like the Japanese. The record Mike would play of his wife showed how he missed her and longed for home. Captain Cassidy’s stories of his wife and son reflected what he valued above all else. When asked what his most memorable moment was, Captain Cassidy did not respond with a tale of a military victory, but with a simple anecdote of taking his son for his first haircut. The stuffed doll Wolf carried around brought humor to the ship. It lightened the crew’s spirits by reminding them of their everyday lives back home. Other than Tin Can perhaps, most of the crewmen would much rather not be fighting. A longing for home and fear of death pervaded the minds of many soldiers. Mike, a soldier killed in the film, was described as a peace loving man. In the words of Captain Cassidy, “Mike was fighting to put more roller skates in the hands of five years olds in America and roller skates rather than daggers in the hands of five year olds in Japan.” Why would such a kind hearted man and crew be fighting in one of the bloodiest war in human record?
In the eyes of Mike and millions of other Americans during WWII, there was no alternative. The Japanese threatened American values of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness to the core. The United States was one of the most affluent and powerful nations in the world. The American government and citizenry would not relinquish there ideas, principles and lifestyle easily. The American military leaders were willing to sacrifice a great deal of lives both military and civilian, Japanese and American to curb the Japanese threat. Many political and military leaders justified the war as a means to achieve a greater good. Americans saw themselves as freeing the rest of the world and the Japanese people from a regime that oppressed its people and alienated those under its control from higher values, morals and ideals; namely those of the United States. Although casualties were unavoidable, Americans believed the lives lost would not be in vain. These lives would serve to usher in prosperity and peace for the Japanese and Americans. A peace based on the supposedly superior principles of American society. Sacrificing some now to create a better life for many later was a main justification for the American involvement in WWII.
“The Attack on Japan” NYT editorial presents a similar discontent with the casualties suffered by the Japanese citizenry. The author admits that many Japanese civilian lives have been lost. He describes the bloodshed as “unhappy business, but necessary business.” The author seems to have the attitude that as long as the war is won by American forces any damage done is simply collateral. The editorial depicts the conflict between the American and Japanese militaries as fighting fire with fire. The author writes, “We cannot and shall not shrink form giving the heaviest blows we can deliver.” The severity of the bombing raids on Japan are in direct response to the severity of the Japanese bombing raids on Pearl Harbor and other U.S. military outposts. The Japanese are described as, “an enemy whose greed and plunder know no bounds.” The author goes on to state that, “The Japanese stooped to the lowest depths of treachery in their attack upon us…Offensive power on land, sea and in the air must be totally destroyed if we are to live in peace and safety.” The brutality of the U.S. forces is,