re: #431 J.S.

Of course not. However, there is a problem which is recognized by academic historians — it’s called “presentism.” What can happen is that someone will read a historical account of event X, then exclaim: “Why, that is utterly unacceptable!” (especially when viewed by today’s standards.) Imperial Japan never signed the 1929 Geneva Conventions with regard to POWs…British, Canadians, Americans, etc., who were captured by the Japanese were routinely tortured, starved, beaten, and used for medical experiments, etc. That was “par for the course.” (and even the POW treatment of those interned by the Japanese in no way compares to what the Jewish population of Europe underwent.) Given this context a moaning about the “horrors” of any American run camp, really, just pales by comparison…

Hmmm, so the civilians held by the Japanese faced starvation, non existent medical care, death by over work, rapes (in the case of women), forced prostitution, beatings, etc. The only difference was that the Japanese didn’t engage in GENOCIDE/MUDERS, except on the Chinese. Sounds a whole lot like went on in the death camps run by Europeans.

What we did was unacceptable for our society and EXCEPT for the genocide/murders our camps were run like those holding the Jews. Suggest you read up on how civilians held by the Japanese were treated.