Post: #26

What I find most disturbing about the situation is how utterly powerless the citizens are. What Abe did was clearly NOT what the majority of the population wanted. I've never seen such massive scale demonstrations in Japan as the ones the last few weeks. This is a very, very unpopular move. The rallying protesters, and the fistfights and screaming in the Diet show how vehemently opposed most Japanese people are to fucking around with Article 9.

And so what? What good was all that opposition and demonstrating? Abe signed it anyway.

Not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it.

Post: #27

(09-19-2015 10:21 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  Also name one country around China that likes China. Taiwan has batteries of missiles pointing their way. Vietnam hates them. Hong Kongers hate them. South Korea has them to blame for the humanitarian evil to their north that their own ethnic group has to endure. Lets also not mention Tibet, which is current.

China is not very popular among it's neighbors at the moment. The speculations on the immigrant invasion thread seem to leave the far east out of consideration in a WW3 scenario. In fact China and the far east will factor greatly in a WW3 scenario.

Even if the Japanese people are opposed to rebuilding their military, IMO, it's the right thing to do. China is behaving without any degree of restraint these days. Look at the shit storm brewing in the South China Sea. China is claiming almost all of it as their own. They're building islands in it to further their claims. $5 trillion in international trade moves through those waters every year. And in addition to trade routes, the area is believed to have large quantities of gas and oil. When there's that much money at stake, you better believe people are going to be willing to fight over it.

Post: #28

(09-21-2015 03:07 AM)porscheguy Wrote:  Even if the Japanese people are opposed to rebuilding their military, IMO, it's the right thing to do.

It's not about rebuilding the military. They already have one but they call it part of the 'police', i.e. if a large number of 'illegal immigrants' who are 'breaking gun laws' arrive, these 'police' can 'arrest them using whatever force is necessary'. That's pretty much the limit of what Article 9 can possibly be construed to allow.

What the prime minister has done is simply declare it means something else. According to him, so long as you talk long enough about the topic, the word 'duck' can mean 'a device you use to eat ice-cream'.

He has declared that the Article permits "collective self-defence". Kind of like "substantive due process", or "a red green-light". This involves defending an ally if it is attacked. So basically, so long as at least one soldier of an allied expeditionary force is shot at, they can attack. It's as close as they can possibly get to simply having a conventional military with full offensive capabilities but without the right to fire the first shot themselves (they need a belligerent allied soldier to get shot at first).

He knows full well that what he's doing is unconstitutional, but that the only mechanism the constitution has to stop him is a soldier suing the government on deployment, and the case going all the way to the Supreme court and getting struck down. He also knows that it will take something like 4 years to happen, and that the court is so impotent it will probably let it slide in spite of its constitutionally mandated duty to strike it down. So he doesn't care, kind of like how the US government doesn't care about the 4th amendment and there is no way to force them to comply. All the legal scholars agree that it's blatantly unconstitutional, but those scholars have no power to put anyone in handcuffs.

Post: #29

(09-19-2015 05:52 AM)H1N1 Wrote:  My father, born just after the war, still won't buy Japanese products due to the depth and strength of his feeling about their inhumanity during the war years, for which they have never apologised, and which is whitewashed in their history books.

Come on man, get your facts straight. The Japanese have apologized on countless occasions. The number of apologies issued is almost comical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wa...d_by_Japan

Also, the history is far from being whitewashed. Education in Japan is incredibly leftist, to an almost sickening extent. Make no mistake, Japanese war crimes are taught at all public schools in Japan.

The controversial textbooks that China takes issue with are used by a tiny percentage of schools (something like 0.05%), almost all of which are private. For the record, Japan also allows North Korean schools to operate, openly spreading propaganda for that evil regime. Commies are far more welcome in Japanese education than right wingers.

(09-19-2015 05:52 AM)H1N1 Wrote:  The Japanese military was responsible for inhumanity of a kind that no other power during the war could match, and it's time they took full responsibility. If I were Chinese, I would not forgive, and I would never allow it to be forgotten.

In what way was the Japanese military more inhumane than the Germans?

As terrible as the Nanking massacre was, it pales in comparison to what the Nazis did to countless Soviet POWs and civilians during their march eastward.

Post: #30

(09-19-2015 12:37 PM)Menace Wrote:  Complex feelings about this. I love Japan and had a strong emotional reaction to it when I was there, but during WW2 they were certainly as bad (or worse) than the Nazis, which has been forgotten by the West (but not the East).

Guys, you really need to back these statements up with some facts. Tell me how the Japanese were as bad or worse than the Nazis.

Post: #31

Unit 731
Bataan death march
Nanking
Use of phosgene and chlorine gas during the second Sino-Japanese war
The attack on Pearl Harbor
Comfort Women
Forced Labor
Cannibalism of Indian POWs
Perfidy at Guadalcanal

They were so shitty at Nanking, that German Nazis had to help US and British missionaries and businessmen set up a "safe" zone to try to offer the Chinese citizens some degree of relief from Japanese abuses.

Post: #32

I've been to Nanking and went to the museum. Quite impressive and left an impression, even compared to places like Hiroshima and the killing fields in Phnom Penh I've seen. There are a lot of crazy pictures (most taken by the Japanese) and stories at Nanking. For example the two soldiers having a contest who could behead the most Chinese boys, or some of the stories about mass rape. Surely, more stuff in ww2 was bad, but it's a grimm place.

Not too sure about your percentage of schoolbooks but I don't have a source to back that up. I do know there is a substantial amount of people in Japan downplaying or just denying any wrongdoing.

Post: #33

(09-21-2015 01:43 PM)Thaitanium Wrote:  Not too sure about your percentage of schoolbooks but I don't have a source to back that up.

In terms of total % of schoolbooks issued:

0.05% as of 2001
http://www.y-okabe.org/pdf/050624.pdf (page 2)

0.4% in 2005
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%89%B6%...1%E7%A4%BE (original source is down)

As for the details of what was changed, we are talking about only a few paragraphs that are controversial. There is no denial of Nanking even in this far right alteration of the text.

Quote:Full-Scale War with China

In August 1937, two Japanese soldiers, one an officer, were shot to death in Shanghai (the hub of foreign interests). After this incident, the hostilities between Japan and China escalated. Japanese military officials thought Chiang Kai-shek would surrender if they captured Nanking, the Nationalist capital; they occupied that city in December. *But Chiang Kai-shek had moved his capital to the remote city of Chongqing. The conflict continued.

*At this time, many Chinese soldiers and civilians were killed or wounded by Japanese troops (the Nanking Incident). Documentary evidence has raised doubts about the actual number of victims claimed by the incident. The debate continues even today.
http://www.bakumatsu.ru/lib/New_History_...Nation.pdf

As noted above, there is still disagreement as to the number of casualties, which is actually true. The Chinese Communist party originally claimed 300,000 dead which was an obvious fabrication for propaganda purposes.

Not to downplay the horror of the Nanking massacre, but guys need to understand more about the region power dynamic at play here.

The Chinese use this "textbook problem" for ongoing propaganda against the Japanese. This strategy achieves two things:

1. It gives the Chinese populace a common enemy to riot against (and takes away negative attention from the government - oldest trick in the book).
2. It allows China to continue to play the victim card while they build up their military presence in Asia. We all know the power of being the eternal victim.

China also continue to claim (principally to the Chinese people but also foreign media) that Japan hasn't apologized for its war crimes. This is an outright lie, as I linked to above. It surprises me that guys on this forum are buying into this lie without verifying the facts first.

(09-21-2015 01:43 PM)Thaitanium Wrote:  I do know there is a substantial amount of people in Japan downplaying or just denying any wrongdoing.

This isn't really an argument. There are fascists in the USA too. So what?

Post: #34

(09-21-2015 01:32 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Unit 731
Bataan death march
Nanking
Use of phosgene and chlorine gas during the second Sino-Japanese war
The attack on Pearl Harbor
Comfort Women
Forced Labor
Cannibalism of Indian POWs
Perfidy at Guadalcanal

Sure these are some bad things. Nobody would disagree. I'm in no way condoning or denying any of it.

But was any of the above equivalent to or "worse" than the Holocaust? Or worse than the mass execution of Soviet POWs and civilians to the tune of millions? I don't think so.

The list of Nazi war crimes is much, much longer and deeper. And yet for some reason people still want to believe that the Japanese were "worse". I believe this comes from the racist attitudes of those times. The Germans were whites who went wrong, but the Japanese were seen as animals.

Post: #35

It would be a good thing if Japan rebuilds its military. Right now, the country can't really defend itself adequately. They are in a rough neighborhood. You have North Korea and China with their own ancient axes to grind.

I've worked with the JSDF (Japan Self-Defense Forces) in the early 1990s in the Aibano training area, Japan. It was called Operation Forest Light.

They are very professional, even if a small force. Some of the old spirit is definitely still there. I can tell you that they are incredible experts at camoflage. I had never seen an entire helicopter camoflaged with sticks and branches before, but they did it.

And some of those guys are hard as hell. Short, muscular, and tough as nails.

Peace comes when there is a balance of power. America can't and shouldn't be everywhere. The best thing for Asia would be a balance of power, where all countries know that the other can bite. Right now, Japan has no deterrence against North Korea and China without America. It needs its own deterrence capability.

.

Post: #36

(09-21-2015 02:37 PM)dreambig Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 01:43 PM)Thaitanium Wrote:  Not too sure about your percentage of schoolbooks but I don't have a source to back that up.

In terms of total % of schoolbooks issued:

0.05% as of 2001
http://www.y-okabe.org/pdf/050624.pdf (page 2)

0.4% in 2005
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%89%B6%...1%E7%A4%BE (original source is down)

As for the details of what was changed, we are talking about only a few paragraphs that are controversial. There is no denial of Nanking even in this far right alteration of the text.

Quote:Full-Scale War with China

In August 1937, two Japanese soldiers, one an officer, were shot to death in Shanghai (the hub of foreign interests). After this incident, the hostilities between Japan and China escalated. Japanese military officials thought Chiang Kai-shek would surrender if they captured Nanking, the Nationalist capital; they occupied that city in December. *But Chiang Kai-shek had moved his capital to the remote city of Chongqing. The conflict continued.

*At this time, many Chinese soldiers and civilians were killed or wounded by Japanese troops (the Nanking Incident). Documentary evidence has raised doubts about the actual number of victims claimed by the incident. The debate continues even today.
http://www.bakumatsu.ru/lib/New_History_...Nation.pdf

As noted above, there is still disagreement as to the number of casualties, which is actually true. The Chinese Communist party originally claimed 300,000 dead which was an obvious fabrication for propaganda purposes.

Not to downplay the horror of the Nanking massacre, but guys need to understand more about the region power dynamic at play here.

The Chinese use this "textbook problem" for ongoing propaganda against the Japanese. This strategy achieves two things:

1. It gives the Chinese populace a common enemy to riot against (and takes away negative attention from the government - oldest trick in the book).
2. It allows China to continue to play the victim card while they build up their military presence in Asia. We all know the power of being the eternal victim.

China also continue to claim (principally to the Chinese people but also foreign media) that Japan hasn't apologized for its war crimes. This is an outright lie, as I linked to above. It surprises me that guys on this forum are buying into this lie without verifying the facts first.

(09-21-2015 01:43 PM)Thaitanium Wrote:  I do know there is a substantial amount of people in Japan downplaying or just denying any wrongdoing.

This isn't really an argument. There are fascists in the USA too. So what?

Well, I can't disagree with the facts/numbers you state. Perhaps I am too influenced by some documentaries I've seen about former Japanese soldiers explaining what happened and the fact that they got threatened after by right wing extremists in Japan. Also seeing some of the images in Nanking itself left quite an impression. On the other hand, there is some controversy on the matter and sincerity of the apologies given.

I agree with what you say about the situation in the region, and with the bullying tactics the Chinese are using a stronger Japan is probably a good idea.

I have been to both China and Japan a few times and enjoy being in both countries. Thanks for the data though, learned something from it

Post: #37

It doesn't matter if the Japs were horrible during WW2. Fact of the matter is, there is no reason to believe the Chinese or Koreans or anyone else in the area wouldn't have been just as monstrous had they the amount of power the Japs had.

In order to promote peace, you need a regional stability of equal powers. To this end Japan must be strong to offer sufficient resistence against any Chinese aggression.

Post: #38

(09-19-2015 10:21 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  Also name one country around China that likes China. Taiwan has batteries of missiles pointing their way. Vietnam hates them. Hong Kongers hate them. South Korea has them to blame for the humanitarian evil to their north that their own ethnic group has to endure. Lets also not mention Tibet, which is current.

Pakistanis hail ironclad friendship with China ahead of Xi's visit

Quote:ISLAMABAD, April 19 (Xinhua) -- Days before Chinese President Xi Jinping's state visit to Pakistan, his first trip to the South Asian nation since he assumed presidency in 2013, Pakistanis have been immersed in a festive atmosphere.

In Islamabad, huge signboards printed with portraits of Xi and Pakistani leaders, as well as national flags of China and Pakistan, stood along the main roads of the city, catching the eyes of local residents.

"Pakistan-China friendship is higher than mountains, deeper than Oceans, sweeter than honey, and stronger than steel," read the signboards in both Chinese and English.

Pakistan is the first stop of Xi's first overseas trip this year. The Chinese president is to visit the country Monday and Tuesday before traveling to Indonesia for an Asian-African summit and activities commemorating the 60th anniversary of the Bandung Conference.

In a signed article published Sunday by Pakistani press on the eve of his visit, Xi called for advancing cooperation with Pakistan in various areas.

"This will be my first trip to Pakistan, but I feel as if I am going to visit the home of my own brother," said the Chinese president.

He noted that the friendship between China and Pakistan is deeply felt in the hearts of the two peoples.

"Over the years, thanks to the nurturing of generations of leaders and people from all sectors of both countries, the China-Pakistan friendship has flourished like a tree growing tall and strong," he said.

China and Pakistan have long been "iron friends" and all-weather partners of strategic cooperation. Chinese people have even coined a special term for Pakistan -- "Iron Pak", a vivid description for the special, friendly and unshakable ties between the two countries.

In Chinese, the phrase "iron friends" means trustworthy friends whose friendship is as solid as iron.

Akram Zaki, a former foreign secretary of Pakistan, said China, through its friendly relations with its neighbors, has been stressing on the concept that "the real partnership is sharing with others, not taking advantages of other countries."

"China and Pakistan have developed multidimensional, comprehensive and everlasting relationship and the link that was established ... is becoming stronger and stronger," he said.

Post: #39

The Japanese and Chinese are far more integrated then a lot of people realize. Its impossible to miss it when visiting manufacturing regions, or when looking around the financial centres like Shanghai.

It seems better for government business by having the people think that Japan and China are at odds, but the fact remains that Japan built much of modern China, and therefore dependent on Japanese business contracts for the foreseeable future.

Korea will be an interesting region to watch, as they caught on much faster than people expected and will likely be the first country to balance with Japan. The racism of Korea will die down some as the next generation of affluent kids interact more in the region.

Personally I dont think that it would take long at all to rev up the Japanese war machine. Like QC said about the Japanese being camouflage experts, I think that the Japanese have essentially 'camouflaged' their ability from the public.

As much of a wild card as North Korea is, I think that little Vietnam would be the first to strike back against China.

Post: #40

@Walter

Isn't the Pakastani-Chinese friendship really more based around mutual hatred of India though (another country which hates China)?

Post: #41

(09-21-2015 05:50 PM)Laner Wrote:  Korea will be an interesting region to watch, as they caught on much faster than people expected and will likely be the first country to balance with Japan. The racism of Korea will die down some as the next generation of affluent kids interact more in the region.

I can’t see the level of racism changing any time soon with Koreans. I went to grad school in the US and the Koreans never gave a flying fuck about interacting with non-Koreans. They even kept their distance from Korean-Americans. I went to an event for international students from colleges all over the US, and just about all them said the same thing about Koreans.

(09-21-2015 06:27 PM)Repo Wrote:  @Walter

Isn't the Pakastani-Chinese friendship really more based around mutual hatred of India though (another country which hates China)?

I guess so...China and India had a very brief war in 1962

Post: #42

(09-21-2015 07:11 PM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 05:50 PM)Laner Wrote:  Korea will be an interesting region to watch, as they caught on much faster than people expected and will likely be the first country to balance with Japan. The racism of Korea will die down some as the next generation of affluent kids interact more in the region.

I can’t see the level of racism changing any time soon with Koreans. I went to grad school in the US and the Koreans never gave a flying fuck about interacting with non-Koreans. They even kept their distance from Korean-Americans. I went to an event for international students from colleges all over the US, and just about all them said the same thing about Koreans.

I hear you, but I meant that things will begin to thaw somewhat. I already see it here in Vancouver where wealthy Koreans are sending their kids for school. They are already seeing first hand that the world is not how they were told it is. The biggest groups of foreign students here are: Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Brazilian, Mexican, Russian. They are always out at pubs together, and from what I have seen Koreans are starting to openly date outside their circle.

I have always wondered why Canada, USA and Mexico get along so well, and yet Japan, Korea and China are always bitching about things. I just dont think their racist and xenophobia will last too much longer at this rate.

Post: #43

(09-21-2015 07:24 PM)Laner Wrote:  I hear you, but I meant that things will begin to thaw somewhat. I already see it here in Vancouver where wealthy Koreans are sending their kids for school. They are already seeing first hand that the world is not how they were told it is. The biggest groups of foreign students here are: Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Brazilian, Mexican, Russian. They are always out at pubs together, and from what I have seen Koreans are starting to openly date outside their circle.

Good to hear that…

I’ve banged a couple of women from China and made out with women from Japan, but women from Korea are usually very negative towards me. They look at me with disdain and I’ve never got that feeling from any other Asian FOBs. Maybe I’m just meeting the wrong ones…I used to get negative shit from Taiwanese women for years on end, but then I ended up banging a few of them.

(09-21-2015 07:24 PM)Laner Wrote:  I have always wondered why Canada, USA and Mexico get along so well, and yet Japan, Korea and China are always bitching about things. I just dont think their racist and xenophobia will last too much longer at this rate.

Japan did bad shit to China and Korea in WW2 and there’s people in all 3 countries old enough to remember that stuff. They also have a lot of national pride.

Any conflicts between US, Canada or Mexico were a long time ago.

Post: #44

(09-21-2015 02:54 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  Peace comes when there is a balance of power. America can't and shouldn't be everywhere. The best thing for Asia would be a balance of power, where all countries know that the other can bite. Right now, Japan has no deterrence against North Korea and China without America. It needs its own deterrence capability.

I agree. The pacifist article in the Japanese constitution is archaic, it was written at a time in which the US expected to be the world's sole nuclear superpower, an era that lasted about 5 years. Moreover, I believe the article prohibits aggressive war, self-defense is still permitted, and the geopolitical situation lends credence to that justification.

Each and every country has a right and responsibility to properly defend itself, and I think it's specious to suggest this ceases to apply because of actions taken many generations ago in a completely separate context.

By the way, Pakistan likes China because China humbled India in the early 1960's and continues to be the main counterweight to Indian military power in the region. I think it's far more out of anti-Indian spite (which is essentially Pakistan's raison d'etre anyway) than pro-Chinese sentiment.

Post: #45

(09-21-2015 09:06 PM)Saga Wrote:  I agree. The pacifist article in the Japanese constitution is archaic, it was written at a time in which the US expected to be the world's sole nuclear superpower, an era that lasted about 5 years. Moreover, I believe the article prohibits aggressive war, self-defense is still permitted, and the geopolitical situation lends credence to that justification.

Each and every country has a right and responsibility to properly defend itself, and I think it's specious to suggest this ceases to apply because of actions taken many generations ago in a completely separate context.

Archaic compared to what? If archaism was any argument for ignoring limits on government power, the 2nd amendment would've been gone long ago.

There is, however, an equally 'archaic' part of the constitution known as Article 96:

Quote:ARTICLE 96. Amendments to this Constitution shall be initiated by the Diet, through a concurring vote of two-thirds or more of all the members of each House and shall thereupon be submitted to the people for ratification, which shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of all votes cast thereon, at a special referendum or at such election as the Diet shall specify.
(2) Amendments when so ratified shall immediately be promulgated by the Emperor in the name of the people, as an integral part of this Constitution.

The reason Article 9 has remained intact since 1945 is because the country, which consists of all of the residents of Japan as opposed to just the ones who are the prime minister, demand it. Hence they've never been able to amend it.

If they can ignore any part of the constitution, they can ignore every part of the constitution.

Post: #46

(09-23-2015 04:46 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  Archaic compared to what? If archaism was any argument for ignoring limits on government power, the 2nd amendment would've been gone long ago.

Archaic compared to the state of affairs even before Abe took office. A strict reading of article 9 means no navy, no army, no air force and yet clearly Japan has for decades possessed all three in all but name. If the pacifist interpretation of the article is correct and any military capacity whatsoever is unconstitutional, then in effect the article has been circumvented since 1954.

However, if the pacifist interpretation is incorrect, then it's a moot point and newly increased military capacity isn't unconstitutional.

Post: #47

(09-21-2015 02:54 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  It would be a good thing if Japan rebuilds its military. Right now, the
Peace comes when there is a balance of power. America can't and shouldn't be everywhere. The best thing for Asia would be a balance of power, where all countries know that the other can bite. Right now, Japan has no deterrence against North Korea and China without America. It needs its own deterrence capability.

.

I see what you're saying but this balance of power theory has never bore fruit. Europe was beset by hundreds of years of examples which validate the power transition theory. You have a number of powers equal in might who were constantly jockeying and warring for position. It seems to be the inevitable outcome. Even during the cold war millions have died in proxy conflicts between the dominant powers. There is no peace with balance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_transition_theory

Post: #48

(09-21-2015 07:24 PM)Laner Wrote:  I have always wondered why Canada, USA and Mexico get along so well, and yet Japan, Korea and China are always bitching about things. I just dont think their racist and xenophobia will last too much longer at this rate.

Let's not get things confused when it comes to geopolitics..Canada and Mexico are very much client states of the U.S.

They provide different services for their status on the global stage.

Mexico is actually a huge threat to U.S. national security but the U.S. is willing to overlook and downplay a lot of it due to trade agreements worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

Canada is more or less a resource provider and client state.

Both of them answer to the political beck and call of the whitehouse in various ways even though they publicly dissent from time to time.

Post: #49

The only threat to Asia right now is China. North Korea is a wildcard but ultimately even they are dependent on China.

There is an outdated idea in the media that Japan is still potentially dangerous. Anyone who has spent 5 minutes in Japan knows this is not some ultra-nationalistic country looking to fight a war. It's been 70 years since WW2 and young Japanese males are about as pussified as they come.

As things stand today, the technologically superior Japanese could sink the Chinese navy in a couple of days, but things are rapidly changing. The Chinese are getting stronger and bolder. I think it's reasonable for Japan to have a stronger military and naval presence in the region as a balancing force to Chinese aggression.

With US influence crumbling worldwide there is going to be a power vacuum opening up in the coming years. China is preparing itself. Japan needs to be ready.

Post: #50

(09-23-2015 10:42 PM)Saga Wrote:  A strict reading of article 9 means no navy, no army, no air force and yet clearly Japan has for decades possessed all three in all but name. If the pacifist interpretation of the article is correct and any military capacity whatsoever is unconstitutional, then in effect the article has been circumvented since 1954.

It says:

Quote:Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
(2) To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

The claim has always been that the planes, boats, and vehicles are merely 'police forces', and not 'war potential'. This teetering on the edge of the article was legitimate only so long as they had no offensive capabilities, i.e. 'war potential', and they were only good for repelling actual invasions etc. If you read the article strictly around 'land/sea forces will never be maintained' for instance, you'd have to abolish all standard police and coast guards too.

The fact of that matter is that this is unworkable, since to truly defend yourself you need to have the ability to attack. The solution to this is to submit a referendum to the electorate with a revision to the Article, and to keep doing that until the electorate agrees with the new Article. Ignoring and countermanding a constitution is what a coup or a revolution is, and it should be as treated as such.