QA問答：一錘定音擊敗日本的明明是美國，為什么中國要慶祝二戰(zhàn)日本戰(zhàn)敗80周年？

Jamin
Because the US is arguably no more qualified (if not less qualified) to celebrate defeating Japan, when it wasn’t interested in holding Japan accountable for what it did.

因為從某種意義上來說，美國其實（甚至比其他國家）更有資格（或至少不更沒資格）來慶祝戰(zhàn)勝日本嗎？可事實上，美國并不真正關(guān)心追究日本的責(zé)任。

No seriously, look it up.

別不信，你去查一查就知道了。



This guy’s name is Shiro Ishii: a renowned Japanese doctor, medical researcher and microbiologist who spent the last years of his life running a clinic and providing medical treatment to his fellow citizens for free.

這個“壞種”叫石井四郎（Shiro Ishii）：一位著名的日本醫(yī)生、醫(yī)學(xué)研究者和微生物學(xué)家，他在晚年開了一家診所，免費為當(dāng)?shù)鼐用裉峁┽t(yī)療服務(wù)。

Ishii was also a valuable contributor to American knowledge on biological warfare, having traveled to the US and lectured officials there on the subject. And the reason he was able to do so in the first place is because he had a lot of knowledge about how bioweapons work on humans, based on his experience working for Imperial Japan in WW2. Experience like playing around with bioweapons. Or plotting a biological attack against the US. Or opening up a lab somewhere in northeastern China where he could test them on captured local civilians and POWs.

但同時，他也是美國在生物戰(zhàn)領(lǐng)域的重要知識來源之一。他曾前往美國，并向美國官員講授有關(guān)生物武器的知識。而他之所以能這么做，是因為他擁有大量關(guān)于生物武器如何作用于人體的知識，這些知識來源于他在二戰(zhàn)期間為日本帝國軍隊工作時的經(jīng)驗。比如，他曾經(jīng)進行過生物武器的實驗，策劃過對美國發(fā)動生物攻擊，還曾在東北中國建立了一個實驗室，在那里用被俘虜?shù)钠矫窈蛻?zhàn)俘進行實驗。



There’s a lot of graphic literature out there about what exactly Ishii was doing in his lab, but let’s just say it wasn’t nice, having killed at least 10,000 people directly and up to 300,000 if you count those who died from diseases coming from the lab (to put this into perspective, the estimated death toll in the Nanking Massacre was about as high).

關(guān)于石井四郎的實驗室里到底發(fā)生了什么，有很多非常血腥的文獻資料，但我們可以這么說：那絕不是什么好事。直接死在他手上的就有至少一萬人，如果算上因他實驗室釋放的疾病而死亡的人數(shù)，可能超過三十萬（作為對比，南京大屠殺的死亡人數(shù)估計也差不多是這個數(shù)字）。

After the US “ultimately defeated the Japanese,” Ishii was arrested by the US authorities and was supposed to be turned over to the Soviet unx, where he would presumably be tried as a war criminal and shot.

在日本“最終被美國擊敗”之后，石井四郎被美軍逮捕，原本應(yīng)該移交給蘇聯(lián)，在那里他很可能會被當(dāng)作戰(zhàn)犯審判并槍決。

Either way, Ishii was in deep shit.Or so it seemed.

總之，石井當(dāng)時處境非常糟糕。看起來似乎是這樣。

Someone in the US was aware that Ishii knew a thing or two about bioweapons that no one else did, owing to his years of experimenting on other people. Sure, he did a lot of horrible stuff, but what must the US do?

但有人在美國意識到，石井掌握著關(guān)于生物武器的寶貴知識，這些是其他任何人都沒有的。畢竟他多年以來一直在拿人做實驗。雖然他做了很多可怕的事，但美國該怎么做？

Shoot the guy (and lose out on all the knowledge he had for good, just to make the victims happy?)
Turn him over to the Soviets (and risk handing over all that knowledge to what was now a Cold War adversary?)
Or…keep him in US custody, where he could teach the Americans everything he knew about how weapons work on people so that the US could potentially do the same thing in future wars? ˉ\\\\_(ツ)_/ˉ
So the US made Ishii an offer that basically went something like this:

殺了他（從而失去所有這些知識，只為讓受害者滿意？）
把他交給蘇聯(lián)（冒著把這些知識送給冷戰(zhàn)對手的風(fēng)險？）
或者……將他留在美軍控制之下，讓他教美國人關(guān)于生物武器的一切，以便美國在未來的戰(zhàn)爭中也可以使用類似手段？ˉ\\\\_(ツ)_/于是美國給石井提出了一個幾乎無法拒絕的條件：



Normally, when someone is caught and tried for war crimes, evidence of their crimes comes out and is memorialized before the world. But in Ishii’s case, the US took all that he knew about bioweapons and sat on it, so it could argue that there wasn’t enough out there to lock him up.

通常情況下，當(dāng)某人因戰(zhàn)爭罪行被抓獲并受審時，相關(guān)的罪證會被公開并記錄在案。但在石井的案例中，美國卻把他的所有生物武器知識據(jù)為己有，并掩蓋了這些信息，以證明沒有足夠的證據(jù)將他定罪。

Apparently that worked, and Ishii eventually walked free, lecturing US officials about bioweapons while opening up his own clinic (this time serving Japan and not northeastern China, and hopefully without any human experiments). Ishii kept a diary, but was smart enough to not write about his wartime activities. He continued living as a free man until he died in 1959.

顯然，這招奏效了，石井最終獲得了自由，不僅向美國官員講授生物武器知識，還在日本開設(shè)了自己的診所（這次服務(wù)對象是日本人而不是中國東北的平民，希望也沒有再進行人體實驗）。石井還寫日記，但他足夠聰明，從未在日記中提及自己在戰(zhàn)爭期間的行為。他一直作為一個自由人生活，直到1959年去世。

Pretty much everyone else who was involved in Ishii’s lab were quietly released back into society, knowing that their knowledge of what they were doing to civilians was what ironically protected them from criminal prosecution.

石井實驗室的其他大部分參與者也都被悄悄釋放回社會，他們的罪行反而成了保護他們免于起訴的護身符。

Most Americans probably don’t know who Ishii is, which illustrates my point. You have folks claiming modern-day Russia can’t commemorate WW2 because it invaded Ukraine or because the former Soviet unx was allegedly allied with Nazi Germany before the war broke out, or that modern-day China can’t commemorate WW2 because “it was actually the KMT that fought Japan” (as if modern-day Taiwan is in a position to talk about WW2). Or because it wasn’t China that carried the Pacific Theater, but the Enola Gay. 

大多數(shù)美國人可能根本不知道石井是誰，這也正好說明了我的觀點。現(xiàn)在有些人聲稱，現(xiàn)代俄羅斯不能紀(jì)念二戰(zhàn)，因為它入侵了烏克蘭；或者前蘇聯(lián)曾與納粹德國結(jié)盟；又或者現(xiàn)代中國不能紀(jì)念二戰(zhàn)，因為“當(dāng)年抗日的是國民黨，（好像現(xiàn)在的臺灣（地區(qū)）有資格談?wù)摱?zhàn)一樣），或者說太平洋戰(zhàn)場的主要功績不在中國，而在“恩諾拉·蓋號”轟炸機上（Enola Gay，投下原子彈的飛機）。

If this is the logic we’re working off on to deny sext governments the “right” to commemorate WW2, then should I be able to argue just as convincingly that Americans lack bragging rights with respect to the Pacific Theater?

如果我們用這種邏輯來剝奪某些國家紀(jì)念二戰(zhàn)的“權(quán)利”，那么我是不是也可以同樣有力地論證：美國人也不配在太平洋戰(zhàn)場上自夸呢？

I can bring up Shiro Ishii, and it’s not just him — it is public knowledge that most of the Japanese leadership (including the emperor) remained in power even after the US occupation.

我可以提起石井四郎的例子，而且不只是他一個人。大家都知道，大部分日本戰(zhàn)時領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層（包括天皇）在美國占領(lǐng)后依然保留權(quán)力。

I can bring up how the US wasn’t officially allied with China the moment Japan invaded in 1937 (I’ll be generous and not say 1931).

我也可以指出，美國并不是在中國1937年遭到日本入侵時就正式與中國結(jié)盟（我會慷慨一點，不提1931年滿洲事變）。

Or I can bring up how the US, instead of letting Korea cook with its own government after the war, decided it was okay to divide the place into half and prop up an unpopular and incompetent government in the south — with the help of former Japanese collaborators.

或者我可以提到，美國在戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束后，并沒有讓朝鮮人民自己組建政府，而是決定將其一分為二，并在南部扶持了一個不受歡迎且無能的政權(quán)，甚至還借助了一些昔日日本合作者的力量。

And that’s not even getting into Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or all of the US’s invasions/military actions after 1945.

這還沒說到廣島和長崎，以及美國在1945年之后發(fā)起的所有入侵和軍事行動。

We can dig up all of the Allies’ failings during and after WW2 and throw it at modern governments. Or we can be at peace with the fact that the Allies were not (and are still not) superheroes, and just commemorate how 80 years ago, the deadliest war in human history ended the preferable way.

我們可以不斷挖掘同盟國在二戰(zhàn)期間及之后的各種錯誤，并將這些歷史問題扔給現(xiàn)代政府?；蛘呶覀円部梢越邮苓@樣一個事實：同盟國從來都不是超級英雄，也永遠(yuǎn)不會是超級英雄，然后只是單純地紀(jì)念80年前這場人類歷史上最致命的戰(zhàn)爭以較為理想的方式結(jié)束了。

Because if we want to go down the former rabbit hole, then there’s plenty of stuff in the US file that should preempt a question like this. Not that this presents a major problem, since I suspect most Americans are Eurocentric to the point that they don’t associate WW2 with defeating Japan anyway.

因為如果我們真的要深入挖掘這些問題的話，美國的歷史檔案里還有很多材料足以讓人質(zhì)疑它是否真有資格提出這類問題。不過這倒也不是大問題，因為我懷疑大多數(shù)美國人對二戰(zhàn)的認(rèn)知都是以歐洲為中心的，根本不覺得二戰(zhàn)與擊敗日本有什么關(guān)系。

Everything China
Once again USA winning is a claim by the USA and the west. It is a fantasy. History is written mainly by the Anglo Saxon Caucasian that gloats every success to themselves. These are western narratives. Little is true. What is true is that China sacrificed and suffered 27 million deaths to prevent the Japanese from defeating it completely at the darkest of times for China. There were some help by the Americans but frankly from 1920–1940 or so the amount of help the US provided support toJapan to do harm on China far exceed that of the help US gave to China to fend off Japan from 1940–1945.

美國聲稱自己是戰(zhàn)勝日本的主力，這只是美國和西方的說法。這是一個幻想。歷史主要是由盎格魯-撒克遜白人書寫的，他們總是把每一次成功都?xì)w功于自己。這些只是西方的敘述，其中很少是真實的。真實的情況是：中國在最黑暗的時刻奮起反抗，犧牲了2700萬人的生命，才阻止了日本徹底征服中國。雖然美國人也給予了一些幫助，但坦率地說，在1920年到1940年之間，美國對日本的支持遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了它在1940年至1945年間對中國抵抗日本的幫助。

In truth the USSR did far more to push Japan out of China while the US did nuke Japan but that is more to do with a racist act of killing yellow perils. And they did helped themselves with the spoilts of war sharing them with the Japanese. That is the reason the Japanese never has a proper closer like the Germans. China has every reason to celebrate the victory and Americans can join in if they wanted. No one stop USA from claiming anything but facts will bear us out.

事實上，真正將日本趕出中國的更多是蘇聯(lián)，而美國投下原子彈的行為更像是一種種族主義行為——屠殺“黃禍”。而且美國還與日本人分享戰(zhàn)爭勝利果實。這就是為什么日本從未像德國那樣進行真正的戰(zhàn)后清算的原因。中國有充分的理由慶祝這場勝利。如果美國愿意，也可以加入慶祝。沒有人阻止美國提出任何主張，但事實終將證明一切。

4Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty
The US did not defeat Japan, China and the Soviet unx did.

美國并沒有打敗日本，真正打敗日本的是中國和蘇聯(lián)。

China had been at war with Japan since 1937 and the Chinese Theatre of War was the most important for the Japanese, that is where their best troops were.

中國自1937年起就與日本交戰(zhàn)，中國戰(zhàn)場對日本來說最為重要，那里駐扎著日本最好的部隊。

The troops mobilized in 1941 were those who had been rejected for conscxtion twice.

1941年被派往太平洋戰(zhàn)場的日軍，是那些曾兩次被征兵拒絕的士兵。

The Japanese only took the Pacific War seriously in 1944, before that it was a side show where the US fought to conquer empty ocean.

日本直到1944年才認(rèn)真對待太平洋戰(zhàn)爭，在此之前，那不過是一場邊角戲，美軍只是在空曠的海洋中作戰(zhàn)。

China fought the bulk of the Japanese air and land forces.

中國牽制了日本絕大部分的空軍和陸軍力量。

In 1945, it was the Soviet entry into the War that brought an end to it, not the atomic attacks. The minutes of the Imperial Household meeting where the acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration is discussed don’t even mention the atomic attacks.

1945年結(jié)束戰(zhàn)爭的關(guān)鍵是蘇聯(lián)參戰(zhàn)，而不是原子彈。在天皇御前會議討論接受《波茨坦公告》的記錄中，甚至都沒有提到原子彈。

The Soviet entry meant no more food imports and thus the Japanese could be starved into submission. This is what they feared most, not having a last final battle on Japanese soil.

蘇聯(lián)的參戰(zhàn)意味著日本無法再進口糧食，這使他們面臨被餓死的風(fēng)險，這才是他們最害怕的事情，而不是在日本本土進行最后決戰(zhàn)。

Fresh Look at World War 2 · 
The Chinese had a major role in defeating Japan. They served as a punching bag, tying down well over a million Japanese soldiers, and straining Japan’s logistics. The Chinese did not win many significant military victories (they did win a few) against the Japanese, but by hanging in there and putting up fierce resistance, the Chinese made it easier for the US to take out the Japanese. Anybody who fails to acknowledge the Chinese contribution is blind. And the Chinese paid the price, losing millions of people to the war, mostly civilians.

中國在擊敗日本的過程中發(fā)揮了重大作用。他們就像一個“沙袋”，牽制了超過一百萬的日軍兵力，并嚴(yán)重消耗了日本的后勤資源。雖然中國軍隊沒有贏得多少重要的軍事勝利（但也贏得了少數(shù)幾場），但他們堅持戰(zhàn)斗、頑強抵抗，使得美國能夠更容易地?fù)魯∪毡尽Ｈ魏魏鲆曋袊暙I的人都是盲目的。中國人為此付出了沉重代價，數(shù)百萬人在這場戰(zhàn)爭中喪生，其中大多數(shù)是平民。

Also, countries completely flattened by Nazi Germany in WWII also celebrate the defeat of Germany, which resulted in the liberation of those countries. Why wouldn’t they celebrate? To some extent, this is partially true as to China. Large parts of the country were liberated by the defeat of Japan. Should they be criticized for celebrating the end of Japanese occupation and brutality?

另外，二戰(zhàn)期間被納粹德國完全摧毀的國家也會慶祝德國的失敗，因為這意味著他們的解放。難道中國不應(yīng)該慶祝嗎？某種程度上，中國也是如此。大片領(lǐng)土在擊敗日本后獲得了解放。難道應(yīng)該批評中國慶祝結(jié)束日本占領(lǐng)和暴行的歷史時刻嗎？

Brian Charboneau
Ya know, the Chinese fought the Japanese a lot longer than the U.S. and the other Allies did in WWII. The Japanese occupation of parts of China was barbaric, with many, many Chinese being slaughtered by the Japanese. So China has good reason to celebrate the defeat of Japan in WWII.

要知道，中國人民抗擊日本的時間比美國和其他盟國要長得多。日本對部分中國的占領(lǐng)是極其殘暴的，大量中國民眾被日本人殺害。所以中國有充分理由慶祝日本在二戰(zhàn)中的戰(zhàn)敗。

While the Chinese really did not do much effectively to defeat the Japanese in WWII the Chinese did something very good and at great cost in lives and property: The Chinese did not lose to the Japanese, but kept on fighting to the end of the war. And in doing so the Chinese kept an enormous number of Japanese soldiers tied down in China, so those soldiers (and seamen and aviators and their equipment and supplies) could not be elsewhere, through the Japanese conquests in Pacific or in Japan itself.

雖然中國軍隊在二戰(zhàn)中未能有效把日本侵略者趕出去，但他們做了一件非常重要且代價巨大的事情：他們沒有向日本投降，而是堅持戰(zhàn)斗到戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束。在這個過程中，他們牽制了大量日本軍隊，使得這些部隊（以及海軍和空軍及其裝備補給）無法部署到其他地方去侵略太平洋地區(qū)或防守日本本土。

Because Japan had so many troops in China the Japanese were always short on manpower everywhere else - which helped the U.S. and Australians and New Zealanders in their eventual victory. Without the continued Chinese military fight against Japan,  the Allied road to victory would have been much more difficult, by an order of magnitude. So the Chinese were a big factor in the Allied victory over Japan.

由于日本必須長期在中國保持大量駐軍，他們在其他戰(zhàn)場上的兵力始終短缺——這大大幫助了美國、澳大利亞和新西蘭最終取得勝利。如果沒有中國持續(xù)對抗日本的軍事斗爭，同盟國的勝利之路將會困難得多，幾乎是一個數(shù)量級的差距。因此，中國是同盟國戰(zhàn)勝日本的重要因素之一。

Fresh Look at World War 2 · 
In all fairness, about a third of the 75 million-plus deaths from World War II were Chinese deaths, and China was in the fight against invading Japanese forces since the early-mid 1930s. Granted, it was the American effort that contributed most toward the [official] surrender of the Empire of Japan in September 1945.

公平地說，二戰(zhàn)中全球死亡人數(shù)超過7500萬，其中約三分之一是中國人的生命。中國自上世紀(jì)30年代初就開始抗擊日本入侵。當(dāng)然，最終促使日本帝國在1945年9月正式投降的主要力量是美國的努力。

Alan Dicey
Now there’s an example of a leading question if I ever saw one.

這簡直就是一個引導(dǎo)性問題的典型例子。

China is celebrating because they were the target of much of Imperial Japan’s empire building ambitions. Being liberated from your opressors is worth celebrating, don’t you think? Or should the Dutch, for instance, not have special feelings for the Canadians who liberated them or the RAF and USAAF that fed them (Operations Manna and Chowhound - look it up).

中國之所以慶祝，是因為他們是日本帝國擴張野心的主要目標(biāo)。從壓迫者手中獲得解放是一件值得慶祝的事，你不這么認(rèn)為嗎？難道荷蘭人不該感激加拿大軍隊的解放，或者感激英國皇家空軍和美國陸軍航空隊通過“曼納行動”和“ 甘露-獵狗行動”給他們空投食物嗎？

Chinese forces fought Imperial Japan from 1931 until 1945, latterly divided into two forces. Nevertheless they were at war and fought Japan all the way. China was the fourth of the “Big Four” Allied powers.

中國軍隊從1931年一直戰(zhàn)斗到1945年，后期分為兩支力量。但無論如何，他們始終處于戰(zhàn)爭狀態(tài)，并與日本作戰(zhàn)到底。中國是“四大盟國”之一。

Finally, it was not “the USA who ultimately defeated the Japanese”. It was the Allies, with China fighting as I’ve already mentioned, Russia heading for Manchuria and British and Commonwealth armies in Burma, Malaya and ANZAC forces in New Guinea and Borneo. The British Indian Army, some two million strong by the end, formed part of the xiVth Army that defeated Imperial Japan at Kohima and Imphal - the most hard fought hand-to-hand battles of the war - and harried and decimated them back through Burma to Malaya and Singapore, until the war was ended. The Indian Army consisted mainly of Indian and African regiments, with some British regiments in the xiVth Army as well. George MacDonald Fraser - of Flashman fame - has written several books about his experiences as one of the “Forgotten Army”.

最后，請不要再說“是美國最終打敗了日本”這種話。真正打敗日本的是整個同盟國陣營：包括中國如前所述的持久抗戰(zhàn)、蘇聯(lián)進軍滿洲、英聯(lián)邦軍隊在緬甸、馬來亞的戰(zhàn)斗，以及澳新軍團在新幾內(nèi)亞和婆羅洲的作戰(zhàn)。英屬印度陸軍最終發(fā)展到兩百萬人規(guī)模，成為第十四集團軍的一部分，在科希馬和因帕爾戰(zhàn)役中重創(chuàng)日軍，這是戰(zhàn)爭中最激烈的手對手近戰(zhàn)之一，并一路追擊日軍穿過緬甸、馬來亞，直到新加坡戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束。這支軍隊主要由印度和非洲軍團組成，也有一些英國軍團參與。喬治·麥克唐納·弗雷澤（以《弗拉希曼》系列聞名）寫了幾本關(guān)于他作為“被遺忘的軍隊”一員的經(jīng)歷的書籍。

No doubt you are about to splutter “but… nukes!” The Manhattan Project was based on the British Tube Alloys developments and had siginificant assistance from British and Canadian scientists and technicians, along with Canadian uranium. Britain had a veto power on the target sextion too. And, had the B-29 not managed to overcome its initial teething troubles, British Lancasters, or possibly Lincolns, would have undertaken the missions. The Bomb release mechanism developed for the British Grand Slam was already being used for the Silverplate B-29’s because it worked.

你可能馬上會說：“但是……還有原子彈！”請記住，“曼哈頓計劃”是基于英國“管合金計劃”的成果，并得到了英國和加拿大科學(xué)家和技術(shù)人員的重大協(xié)助，以及加拿大的鈾礦資源。英國甚至擁有選擇核打擊目標(biāo)的否決權(quán)。而且，如果B-29轟炸機未能克服其初期的技術(shù)問題，執(zhí)行任務(wù)的將是英國的蘭開斯特轟炸機，甚至是林肯轟炸機。用于英國“大滿貫炸彈”的釋放機制，其實也被用在了銀盤版B-29上，因為它效果很好。

I suggest you wind your neck right in, mate. History is not as simple as you’ve been led to believe by Hollywood.

我建議你冷靜一點，伙計。歷史遠(yuǎn)比好萊塢告訴你得復(fù)雜得多。

Gene Hennig
China did a great job of tying down huge numbers of Japan’s troops. And bleeding them white. By the late 30’s Japan knew they had a tiger by the tail. But didn’t know what to do (other than slog on). China’s job was to tie down & divert Japan’s attention from the US who was attacking from the other direction.

中國成功地牽制了大量日本軍隊，并使其陷入疲憊不堪的狀態(tài)。到了30年代末，日本已經(jīng)意識到自己騎虎難下，卻不知道該怎么辦（除了繼續(xù)拖下去）。中國的任務(wù)就是牽制并分散日本的注意力，讓美國可以從另一個方向發(fā)起攻擊。

They did their job well, and their contribution to winning the war against Japan was essential.

他們出色地完成了自己的任務(wù)，為擊敗日本作出了至關(guān)重要的貢獻。