Saguri-chan Tankentai - Vol. 4 Ch. 33 - Hiroshima prefecture, Okunoshima
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Yo I don't wanna be that guy but they really aren't doing justice to the gravity of the history of the island of Okunoshima. While rabbits are indeed cute, the gitty excitement at the start of the chapter is pretty tasteless. The plant was hidden from maps because producing poison gas is against the rules of the GENEVA CONVENTION, it produced more than six kilotons of gas which by some estimates ended up being used to kill 80.000 people, mostly Chinese civilians. Hatsuichi Murakami, who worked at the plant as a teenager and later was curator of the small poison gas museum on the island said:
"Both poison gas manufacturing and the atomic bombing happened in Hiroshima prefecture during the war," [...] "My hope is that people will see the museum in Hiroshima City and also this one, so they will learn that we were both victims and aggressors in the war. I hope people will realize both facets and recognize the importance of peace."
Feels weird. Bet you the author wouldn't have this tone if the characters were visiting the Peace Memorial Museum instead...
That said, thanks for the translation. Not much left, appreciate you guys for deciding to translate it all to the end!
"Both poison gas manufacturing and the atomic bombing happened in Hiroshima prefecture during the war," [...] "My hope is that people will see the museum in Hiroshima City and also this one, so they will learn that we were both victims and aggressors in the war. I hope people will realize both facets and recognize the importance of peace."
Feels weird. Bet you the author wouldn't have this tone if the characters were visiting the Peace Memorial Museum instead...
That said, thanks for the translation. Not much left, appreciate you guys for deciding to translate it all to the end!
Supporter
- Joined
- May 12, 2018
- Messages
- 2,971
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2020
- Messages
- 72
@MrGoose unfortunately the Japanese government refuses to adress the atrocities performed by Imperial Japan in the 1930s and 1940s. As an extension most Japanese students get a very glossed over education about that dark period of their nation's history.
My 1st year in college my roomate was an international student from Tokyo. He was confused by Remebrence Day (Pear Harbor). Talking with him about it, the most he knew was that Japan was in WW2 and left after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.
My 1st year in college my roomate was an international student from Tokyo. He was confused by Remebrence Day (Pear Harbor). Talking with him about it, the most he knew was that Japan was in WW2 and left after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2018
- Messages
- 5,156
I'm very glad that there will be an alternative to the @SteamingPileExtrusion upload.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 52
@MrGoose
You might want to check up on the Geneva Protocol first (the Conventions, for that matter, focused on the treatment of POWs and civilians, rather than rules of warfare). The research on, production or stockpiling of chemical weapons wasn't prohibited by that treaty. Every major military was doing the same, including the god-bless-a-murica. Shocking, I know.
Nor was prohibited even retaliation using chemical weapons, or their use within internal conflicts, and non-signatories were downright free game.
You might want to check up on the Geneva Protocol first (the Conventions, for that matter, focused on the treatment of POWs and civilians, rather than rules of warfare). The research on, production or stockpiling of chemical weapons wasn't prohibited by that treaty. Every major military was doing the same, including the god-bless-a-murica. Shocking, I know.
Nor was prohibited even retaliation using chemical weapons, or their use within internal conflicts, and non-signatories were downright free game.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 2,156
@MrGoose
First google search clearly states that USAGE of poisonous gasses is banned. Not production or storage.
The bad thing about Okunoshima was that everything on the island was done in secrecy, to the point of removing the island from maps and even burning any documents regarding activities on the island after the war. Hell, US and European countries were still developing those gasses...
Also, many of them (such as tear gas) are banned nowadays in warfare, but perfectly legal in some countries (like US) for purposes of riot/crowd control used by police forces.
First google search clearly states that USAGE of poisonous gasses is banned. Not production or storage.
The bad thing about Okunoshima was that everything on the island was done in secrecy, to the point of removing the island from maps and even burning any documents regarding activities on the island after the war. Hell, US and European countries were still developing those gasses...
Also, many of them (such as tear gas) are banned nowadays in warfare, but perfectly legal in some countries (like US) for purposes of riot/crowd control used by police forces.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2020
- Messages
- 226
Spoiled myself with the last chapter since there's just one more chapter. Can't wait for 34 to be scanlated
@Nanaca https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Protocol
"It prohibits the use of "asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices" and "bacteriological methods of warfare"."
"Methods of warfare" sure sounds like rules of warfare to me. That's also ignoring the fact that, as I mentioned, most of the 80.000 deaths attributed to chemical attacks by the Japanese were civilians, who do fall under that definition.
Solid what-about-ism there my dude. I am not American and in no way support America but excusing blatant use of war crimes by any nation based on the actions of another nation is ludicrous. Plus both Japan and China were signatories so I don't understand what your point is there.
@Abedeus I would argue that the lack of an inclusion of a ban on stockpiling was most likely an oversight or a tactic to make sure as many countries as possible, which some most likely already had stockpiles, would sign the protocol. That being said, yes if the island was used solely to stockpile gas that was never used I wouldn't criticize it but as I said, the Japanese military used it during the war, blatantly breaking the protocol they were signatories of and committing war crimes. But yeah, let's just focus on the fact that they were producing tear gas there rather than the only other gas listed on Wikipedia, that being mustard gas.
I am not complaining that they were stockpiling poison gas, nor that all other countries during WW2 were innocent, I am criticizing them for USING poison gas against CIVILIANS and committing war crimes. I think media has a responsibility to reflect and acknowledge atrocities committed in the past and not gloss over them.
"It prohibits the use of "asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices" and "bacteriological methods of warfare"."
"Methods of warfare" sure sounds like rules of warfare to me. That's also ignoring the fact that, as I mentioned, most of the 80.000 deaths attributed to chemical attacks by the Japanese were civilians, who do fall under that definition.
Solid what-about-ism there my dude. I am not American and in no way support America but excusing blatant use of war crimes by any nation based on the actions of another nation is ludicrous. Plus both Japan and China were signatories so I don't understand what your point is there.
@Abedeus I would argue that the lack of an inclusion of a ban on stockpiling was most likely an oversight or a tactic to make sure as many countries as possible, which some most likely already had stockpiles, would sign the protocol. That being said, yes if the island was used solely to stockpile gas that was never used I wouldn't criticize it but as I said, the Japanese military used it during the war, blatantly breaking the protocol they were signatories of and committing war crimes. But yeah, let's just focus on the fact that they were producing tear gas there rather than the only other gas listed on Wikipedia, that being mustard gas.
I am not complaining that they were stockpiling poison gas, nor that all other countries during WW2 were innocent, I am criticizing them for USING poison gas against CIVILIANS and committing war crimes. I think media has a responsibility to reflect and acknowledge atrocities committed in the past and not gloss over them.
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2020
- Messages
- 334
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention
This treaty states that production of chemical weapons is also banned. I'm sure the geneva conventions allows production, but not use. CWC does not allow the production of Schedule 1 weapons like Sarin and VX. Schedule 2 being dual use, military and civilian use.
This treaty states that production of chemical weapons is also banned. I'm sure the geneva conventions allows production, but not use. CWC does not allow the production of Schedule 1 weapons like Sarin and VX. Schedule 2 being dual use, military and civilian use.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 52
@EV-8371_kk Not sure how a 1997 treaty is relevant to this discussion tho.
@Nanaca I would argue that they hid it from maps because they were producing poison gas for the purpose of using it, which they did. At this point your entire argument relies on semantics since you also ignored every other point I made.
You seem eager to criticize the US's actions during WW2, at least as a defence of Japan. Is it really that hard to accept that the Japanese military committed atrocities during WW2?
@EV-8371_kk Yeah that treaty wasn't enacted until 1997, but it was basically only enacted to fix the loophole existing in the original treaty.
You seem eager to criticize the US's actions during WW2, at least as a defence of Japan. Is it really that hard to accept that the Japanese military committed atrocities during WW2?
@EV-8371_kk Yeah that treaty wasn't enacted until 1997, but it was basically only enacted to fix the loophole existing in the original treaty.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 52
@MrGoose You sure are adept at putting words into people's mouths, from mine to the long-dead treaties authors'. All I did was to point out that, contrary to your outburst of RIGHTEOUS ANGER, the production of chemical weapons wasn't prohibited in the slightest and was, in fact, the norm of the day. Oh, and also that it has nothing to do with Geneva Conventions - I know, reading every word is difficult, but Geneva Protocol is neither the same, nor even related, being a part of Hague Conventions instead. Is it really that hard to accept that you've posted nonsense?
Similar threads
