Life magazine did a story on it moron.
Life magazine published a picture of someone owning a skull. The response to it was overwhelmingly negative both from the general public and US military.
Everyone knew what was happening.
I have yet to see you indicate anything resembling this.
Nothing as such is mentioned in the wikipedia article you linked. "On May 22, 1944 Life Magazine published a photo[44] of an American girl with a Japanese skull sent to her by her naval officer boyfriend.[45] " "On June 13, 1944, the press reported that President Roosevelt had been presented with a letter-opener made out of a Japanese soldier's arm bone by Francis E. Walter, a Democratic congressman.[4] Supposedly, the president commented "This is the sort of gift I like to get," and "There'll be plenty more such gifts"" "News that President Roosevelt had been given a bone letter opener by a congressman were widely reported in Japan. The Americans were portrayed as “deranged, primitive, racist and inhuman”. "
And yet nothing to indicate what you claimed.
Are you saying the media lied?
What? Huh? You've gone from far out bullshit to straight up nonsense. Did you not even read what you're posting?
Accepting and playing with war trophies is a war crime moron.
I don't see anywhere under the Geneva convention (which Japan did not ratify) about receiving gifts being a warcrime.
Why would japan sign up to a convention dominated by the west?
I dunno. Why would anyone want to agree to an international convention regarding the ethical treatment of prisoners? Why would one not do so? Austria. Belgium. Brazil. Bulgaria. China. Czechoslovakia. Egypt. Estonia. Poland. India. Serbia. Thailand. Turkey. Germany.
They all not only signed but ratified it.
Can you name one american who was charged for the war crimes of the firebombings and nukes?
Perhaps because they weren't warcrimes.
No German was ever charged with warcrimes as a result of aerial bombardment either. And the were the real serious bad guys who started the whole thing.
Well, one guy was. But that was a pretty cut and dry case.
It produces a lot more WIA than 100 or so. Out of 22K, only 100 captured is statistically impossible unless it was an active genocide
Or unless the Japanese had some kind of doctrine of not surrendering.
But they did surrender...
Yes. Sometimes they did surrender. Many times they didn't. Especially was the case for the war on the pacific which was very different from the land war against Russia.
Yes moron. You make it sound like "banzai" charges are uniquely japanese
They were.
Europe did a lot of "banzai" charges as well.
Offensive maneouvres between trenches and even the "human wave" concept is different from a banzai charge. Trench assaults, even large ones, were done for a specific purpose- to try and take and land. Banzai charges are a final suicidal attack, there is no tactical or strategic victory in mind. While "going over the top" often seemed hopeless, victory was always in mind and not just honour before death.