In Japanese culture it is a disgrace to surrender they are taught that is an honor to die for your country and they don't understand why we would surrender.
Japanese and most German prisoners remained confined to Allied camps. Many Italian prisoners were allowed out to work on farms in Britain and Australia and in many cases left the camps for the duration of the war. As for Allied prisoners in Axis hands, the Japanese and to a lesser extent the Germans required prisoners to work, in the case of the Japanese, often to death.
Yes tousands did in horrible conditions.
Allied prisoners of war
Approximately 500 Allied POW's were rescued.
Aside from things like living conditions, food provisions and killing of prisoners of war, a big difference was the issue of forced labor. Nazi Germany never introduced forced labor for its (Western) Allied prisoners-of-war, while Japan did. A major cause of the very big difference in the general treatment was, that Germany treated captured soldiers simply as people who had fought and lost, while japan considered and treated Allied soldiers who had surrendered as people who had lost their honor and in consequence, any right to humane treatment. This shows in the fact that Germany had signed and largely adhered to the Geneva Convention regarding prisoners of war, while Japan never signed it, except for the treatment of wounded prisoners, the only kind of prisoners who in their view had retained their honor.
Japanese and most German prisoners remained confined to Allied camps. Many Italian prisoners were allowed out to work on farms in Britain and Australia and in many cases left the camps for the duration of the war. As for Allied prisoners in Axis hands, the Japanese and to a lesser extent the Germans required prisoners to work, in the case of the Japanese, often to death.
Yes tousands did in horrible conditions.
Try this book for information: "Prisoners of the Japanese-POWs of World War in the Pacific." (1996); By Gavan Daws. ISBN 0-6881-4370-9.
When the war ended.
Japanese made extensive use of labor forces composed to both prisoners of war and local peoples.
That is your own opinion people could make an argument either way.
Allied prisoners of war
They were treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention. Australian prisoners of the Japanese were not.
far diferantly. Western Prisoners captured during WW II by the Germans or Italians were generally treated fairly well according to the Geneva Conventions. As the war advanced and supplies got scarcer, treatment became worse. The Japanese purposely went out of their way to mistreat POWs. Watch the movie "Bridge on the River Kwai", The real treatment was much worse. It is also a fact that the Japanese didn't surrender, they died en masse, because of their devotion to the Emporer. Very few of the Japanese forces surrendered & became prisoners. Sadly their treatment of Allied prisoners was unworthy of them. With regard to the Europen War I have just finished reading 'The Last Escape' by John Nichol & Tony Rennell about the repatriation of Allied prisoners at the end of WW2... Most enlightening.
Generally it was transported to & fro (In Europe at least) by the Red Cross. This applies to British & US forces. The Red Cross did much to ensure the safety and survival of hundreds & thousands of prisoners. There is then a vast contrast between on one hand the treatment of German & Italian prisoners held by the Allies & the Russian prisoners of the Nazis and the German prisoners of the Russians & similarly the Japanese Allied prisoners: The conditions were appalling. There were very few Japanese prisoners: Surrender wasn't an option.
An allied power during that war.
Approximately 500 Allied POW's were rescued.