Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RiddlingTea t1_iy14oc4 wrote

Reply to comment by kdogg2077 in On April 2, 1941, a Japanese foreign minister asked Pope Pius XII to speak to U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, so as to avert "a war of mutual destruction” by marketrent

Tojo only became PM in Oct 41 though. I think the existing civilian administration at this time would have been amenable to peace talks, but the question is how much power the civilian administration had as opposed to the will of the army.

99

Scerus t1_iy17ck2 wrote

The previous government was hardly led by civilians, Prince Konoe preceded Tojo and transformed Japan further into a totalitarian state. Kanoe had also overseen the invasion of China in 1937 during his previous spell in office. Tojo deposed him because Kanoe's government had failed to reach an agreement with the Americans.

82

RiddlingTea t1_iy18xfi wrote

I mean civilian as in not actively part of the military—Churchill made plenty of decisions regarding war without being a military man.

And my point was more that peace with the US was genuinely desired on good terms. That Tojo deposed Konoe for failure in peace talks implies success was desirable.

5

ATNinja t1_iy19hio wrote

>Churchill made plenty of decisions regarding war without being a military man.

Churchill did serve in the british military. Pretty sure he was in south Africa for the boer wars.

But maybe you meant active duty military?

41

panchampion t1_iy1gory wrote

He was also war secretary or something similar during WW1 but he resigned after Gallipoli

16

TheMadT t1_iy2e9de wrote

And went on to serve for the remainder of WWI if I recall correctly.

4

RiddlingTea t1_iy1ao1e wrote

Yeah. What I mean is holding the position of a general concurrently, as in involved in the military at that present moment. Sorry for the imprecision.

10

-heathcliffe- t1_iy25l2i wrote

Regardless Churchill was not at the helm of a totalitarian state, so his decisions were by no means absolute, military or civilian.

8

prentiz t1_iy2l2pt wrote

And fought in the trenches in WW1

1

ATNinja t1_iy2lv2n wrote

Damn I did not know that. Left a safe leadership position too.

It's crazy to me how many leaders in ww2 fought in ww1 and were still willing to commit their young people to another war like that.

3

IBAZERKERI t1_iy70b6z wrote

churchill was a military man

0

RiddlingTea t1_iy7dze4 wrote

He wasn’t a general at the same time as being a politician though, in contrast to the Japanese, that was more my point.

1

ComradeGibbon t1_iy1omeq wrote

Matsuoka like I think most Japanese politicians and military leaders that spent time in the US all thought war with the United States would be a disaster. And also really really stupid because mostly the American interest in the far east was in selling stuff. But none of them had the power to stop the Army and Navy from starting a war.

20

Initial_E t1_iy1b859 wrote

If the only way the imperialists could be tamed is through abject failure then things don’t bode well for the future of humanity. Can you imagine raising an army to fight an internal war to overcome your own countrymen to prevent the army going to war?

8

Dreshna t1_iy2cm5q wrote

I could have the time frame off, but the Japanese military definitely was the tail that wagged the dog during at least part of the war, including launching attacks the civilian administration told them not to.

8

dutchwonder t1_iy6g2kl wrote

Japan was already very committed to extreme expansionist policies by this point with the invasions of China and French Indochina. More than that, Japan had already allied itself with the Axis, though somewhat loosely.

If the US wanted peace, they would have to essentially entirely abandoned Asia.

1