This "documentary" leans more towards a fictional alternative universe that conforms with some US-centric narrative, because it is rife with inaccuracies and seems to think that the US mattered more in these wars than any other country. As a historian of East Asia, I can down-right say that nearly everything said about Japan was inaccurate. These were not nit-picky mistakes. For example, in episode 2, the narrator claims that:
"In 1937, the Emperor of Japan approves an invasion of Northeastern China. A dedicated soldier is chosen to lead the troops. His name is Hideki Tojo. After overseeing a series of successful battles, Tojo is names Japan's Minister of War and is now responsible for the state of the Japanese military."
I don't know where to begin: 1) The Japanese invasion of Northeastern China (Manchuria) was on September 18, 1931 and was completed by 1933. It was not July 7, 1937 as they stated. July 7, 1937 is the date of the Marco Polo Bridge incident, a bridge just outside Beijing (just down the street from where I live) where a small clash between a Chinese warlord and the Japanese Imperial Army occurred and quickly grew into a total-war between China and Japan. It is generally taken as the beginning of World War II in China.
2) The Japanese emperor never approved of any invasion of northeastern China. The consensus is that the invasion was begun unapproved by anyone in the central government, and instead was undertaken by renegade officers in the colonial (not imperial) Kwantung Army – particularly Seishiro Itagaki and Kanji Ishiwara – and then taken further by Shigeru Honjo. In fact, the Minister of War, Jiro Minami, was trying to have Seishiro removed fearful that he would provoke a conflict. Once the invasion begun, however, the invasion proved to be popular with the public and politicians didn't want to admit they couldn't control their own officers, so they retroactively (many months later) approved.
3) Hideki Tojo wasn't involved in the invasion of Northeastern China at all. He was a colonel in the 1st Regiment of the Imperial Japanese Army, which didn't see action then. It wasn't until 1935 he served as a Kempeitai officer in Manchukuo (the puppet state set up by the Japanese in northeastern China). The invasion of Manchuria was run by several officers, but Shigeru Honjo probably did more. Since there was no central plan, no one really was in control, so no one was leading it. It was often mid-ranking officers taking the initiative to gain promotions and celebrity status in the media – in fact, the central government was trying to contain the conflict.
4) Tojo wasn't made the Minister of War until 1940, and of course he was Prime Minister a year later.
These are mistakes that could be revealed with simple checks on Wikipedia. My undergraduate students do a better job than this on their mid-term papers, which shows the un-professional quality of the writing of this film.
Not to mention: Why are John McCain, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney doing on a "history" program? They don't seem very knowledgeable on the subject. As far as I know, they didn't serve in any positions of leadership or witness any of the events they comment on. It also seems odd (and suspicious) that they only have these right-wing politicians – granted I don't think there are any politicians in a position to really be able to comment on this. You'd get just as accurate a response by pulling a random stranger off the street.
"In 1937, the Emperor of Japan approves an invasion of Northeastern China. A dedicated soldier is chosen to lead the troops. His name is Hideki Tojo. After overseeing a series of successful battles, Tojo is names Japan's Minister of War and is now responsible for the state of the Japanese military."
I don't know where to begin: 1) The Japanese invasion of Northeastern China (Manchuria) was on September 18, 1931 and was completed by 1933. It was not July 7, 1937 as they stated. July 7, 1937 is the date of the Marco Polo Bridge incident, a bridge just outside Beijing (just down the street from where I live) where a small clash between a Chinese warlord and the Japanese Imperial Army occurred and quickly grew into a total-war between China and Japan. It is generally taken as the beginning of World War II in China.
2) The Japanese emperor never approved of any invasion of northeastern China. The consensus is that the invasion was begun unapproved by anyone in the central government, and instead was undertaken by renegade officers in the colonial (not imperial) Kwantung Army – particularly Seishiro Itagaki and Kanji Ishiwara – and then taken further by Shigeru Honjo. In fact, the Minister of War, Jiro Minami, was trying to have Seishiro removed fearful that he would provoke a conflict. Once the invasion begun, however, the invasion proved to be popular with the public and politicians didn't want to admit they couldn't control their own officers, so they retroactively (many months later) approved.
3) Hideki Tojo wasn't involved in the invasion of Northeastern China at all. He was a colonel in the 1st Regiment of the Imperial Japanese Army, which didn't see action then. It wasn't until 1935 he served as a Kempeitai officer in Manchukuo (the puppet state set up by the Japanese in northeastern China). The invasion of Manchuria was run by several officers, but Shigeru Honjo probably did more. Since there was no central plan, no one really was in control, so no one was leading it. It was often mid-ranking officers taking the initiative to gain promotions and celebrity status in the media – in fact, the central government was trying to contain the conflict.
4) Tojo wasn't made the Minister of War until 1940, and of course he was Prime Minister a year later.
These are mistakes that could be revealed with simple checks on Wikipedia. My undergraduate students do a better job than this on their mid-term papers, which shows the un-professional quality of the writing of this film.
Not to mention: Why are John McCain, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney doing on a "history" program? They don't seem very knowledgeable on the subject. As far as I know, they didn't serve in any positions of leadership or witness any of the events they comment on. It also seems odd (and suspicious) that they only have these right-wing politicians – granted I don't think there are any politicians in a position to really be able to comment on this. You'd get just as accurate a response by pulling a random stranger off the street.
Tell Your Friends