|
On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Show nested quote +Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage.
Occupation of Korea was perfectly legal and accepted by international community back then including countries like U.K., which was Japan's ally as of 1910. Taiwan was formally ceded by Shimonoseki Treaty after First Sino-Japanese war. Yeah, it sucks to be the victim side when power meant a lot and imperialism itself wasn't condemned at all, but just deal with it. The problem is that Japan did commit atrocities that were against Hague Convensions which Japan had signed prior to the war. For these acts, Japan should take full responsibilities. Crime against humanity did not exist during WWII, so this concept doesn't count except the cases stated in International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which Japan accepted the judgement of in Article 11 of San Francisco Treaty, though China & Korea were not part of the treaty and has no right to base their arguments on it. Killing of Chinese itself isn't the issue here since it is a war for christ's sake, but Japan deserves harsh criticism for atrocities against Hague Convensions like killing civilians, executing PoW etc. Japan did bad things =/= everything Japan did during that time was bad/illegal. Japan needs to draw a clear line what claims to admit and sincerely apologize, and what victim claims to fully reject based on law/treaty etc. Lack of willingness for the fomer actually hurts the credibility for the latter.
|
On October 21 2012 16:03 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Occupation of Korea was perfectly legal and accepted by international community back then including countries like U.K., which was Japan's ally as of 1910. Taiwan was formally ceded by Shimonoseki Treaty after First Sino-Japanese war. Yeah, it sucks to be the victim side when power meant a lot and imperialism itself wasn't condemned at all, but just deal with it. The problem is that Japan did commit atrocities that were against Hague Convensions which Japan had signed prior to the war. For these acts, Japan should take full responsibilities. Crime against humanity did not exist during WWII, so this concept doesn't count except the cases stated in International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which Japan accepted the judgement of in Article 11 of San Francisco Treaty, though China & Korea were not part of the treaty and has no right to base their arguments on it. Killing of Chinese itself isn't the issue here since it is a war for christ's sake, but Japan deserves harsh criticism for atrocities against Hague Convensions like killing civilians, executing PoW etc. Japan did bad things =/= everything Japan did during that time was bad/illegal. Japan needs to draw a clear line what claims to admit and sincerely apologize, and what victim claims to fully reject based on law/treaty etc. Lack of willingness for the fomer actually hurts the credibility for the latter.
Aggressive war itself was - and is - the problem, not just what happened during the war. Saying that 'it's a war, people die' is incorrect. Both sides are not equally blameworthy for a war just because they both fought, and in this case the blame falls just about entirely on the Japanese side because they were the aggressor. International law - including the outdated version used in the early 1900s - stipulated punishments for nations that engaged in aggression; this was used to prosecute Axis nations after the war.
That China and Korea did not attend the Triubnal is a problem, because the lack of their signatures => the judgment rendered did not reflect their respective polities. In general, China and Korea's failure to participate in the multiple treaties that Japan was subject to after the war is causus belli for the present situation - the argument over the islands being a prime example. It's a case of 'unfinished business.'
|
On October 21 2012 15:51 bioniK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Are you saying that Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop civil unrest in their country?
Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens?
And its really sad that a generation that was almost completely unaffected by the Japanese are expressing ill-will towards them based on what had happened 70 years ago.
The current Chinese distaste for Japan is based off the past record + present behavior, which includes: Yasukuni Shrine visits, humiliating treatment of comfort women claims in Japanese courts, land grabs of islands whose legal status is under dispute, and a lack of sincere actions by Japanese decisionmakers to show repentance and win brownie points from Japanese victim nations.
|
On October 21 2012 16:03 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Occupation of Korea was perfectly legal and accepted by international community back then including countries like U.K., which was Japan's ally as of 1910. Taiwan was formally ceded by Shimonoseki Treaty after First Sino-Japanese war. Yeah, it sucks to be the victim side when power meant a lot and imperialism itself wasn't condemned at all, but just deal with it. The problem is that Japan did commit atrocities that were against Hague Convensions which Japan had signed prior to the war. For these acts, Japan should take full responsibilities. Crime against humanity did not exist during WWII, so this concept doesn't count except the cases stated in International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which Japan accepted the judgement of in Article 11 of San Francisco Treaty, though China & Korea were not part of the treaty and has no right to base their arguments on it. Killing of Chinese itself isn't the issue here since it is a war for christ's sake, but Japan deserves harsh criticism for atrocities against Hague Convensions like killing civilians, executing PoW etc. Japan did bad things =/= everything Japan did during that time was bad/illegal. Japan needs to draw a clear line what claims to admit and sincerely apologize, and what victim claims to fully reject based on law/treaty etc. Lack of willingness for the fomer actually hurts the credibility for the latter.
I don't think anyone is asking Japan to acknowledge/apologize for what was technically illegal at the time.
|
United States43468 Posts
On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country.
To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to.
|
On October 21 2012 16:32 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:51 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Are you saying that Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop civil unrest in their country? Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens? Show nested quote +And its really sad that a generation that was almost completely unaffected by the Japanese are expressing ill-will towards them based on what had happened 70 years ago. The current Chinese distaste for Japan is based off the past record + present behavior, which includes: Yasukuni Shrine visits, humiliating treatment of comfort women claims in Japanese courts, land grabs of islands whose legal status is under dispute, and a lack of sincere actions by Japanese decisionmakers to show repentance and win brownie points from Japanese victim nations.
The civil unrest in China is costing it hundreds of millions of dollars is it not?
The Yasukuni Shrine visits, as I have mentioned before have much deeper religious/traditional implications than honoring Japanese war criminals. Even so, most politicans try to avoid visiting the shrine while they are serving in office.
If I'm not mistaken most comfort women claims in Japanese courts recently are from Korean comfort women. Japan wanted to compensate the South Korean victims individually but the government of SK refused instead they asked for a collective compensation to the government. Information regarding this was not made public in SK till like 5 years ago, while it was known to the Japanese public for quite some time, and the SK goverment spent majority of this money on developing their economy. I think a few comfort women actually took their claims to SK courts.
I'm under the impression that most of these people demanding "brownie points" from Japan while never be satisfied until Japan is burned to the ground, which is bad.
|
On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to.
Maybe I'm just being arrogant, but I don't think anyone in Asia believes for a second that Chinese goodwill can be bought with nice, cheap words.
EDIT: changed anyone to anyone in Asia.
|
On October 21 2012 15:58 bioniK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:55 Azarkon wrote:On October 21 2012 15:51 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Are you saying that Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop civil unrest in their country? And its really sad that a generation that was almost completely unaffected by the Japanese are expressing ill-will towards them based on what had happened 70 years ago. In the grand scheme of things, 70 years isn't a long time. It's going to take, at the minimum, 100-150 years for a 'national trauma' of this sort to stop mattering, and even then it won't stop mattering for everybody, just the main body of the population. Maybe, hopefully it stops mattering at one point.
Annnnnnd this is exactly the sentiment that has been the main source of vitriol in China. (I am not justifying any violence here so just stop). This "ohhhh when are you guys going to get over it *bored face*....." position in the face of genuine emotional grievances is completely void of any basic human empathy.
I would also argue that this pervasive apathetic attitude is a significant factor in why the cruelty exhibited by Imperial Japan is and continues to be completely unprecedented in modern history.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On October 21 2012 10:30 Abort Retry Fail wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 06:37 Telcontar wrote:
Of course we're going to side with China. It's amazing how arrogant Japan is still capable of being after all they've done. I believe in second chances, but how is Japan going to change if they obfuscate the truth from themselves and their own children? They've done all manner of unspeakable things during their occupation of Korea, both known and buried, and still no apology or even acceptance. I know not all Japanese are like that, but from what I gather it's a small minority. The rest either don' care or agree with the government's stance. This is a very bad generalization.
Oh is that so? Then please, enlighten me. What else is one to think when the Japanese government refuses to accept responsibility, and the people of japan do not take significant action to oppose their stance nor correct them? Oh sure, I've seen little groups of people light candles and stand around, and that's nice and all, but what else? Petitions? It's not like I particularly blame the general population though. What else can they do when they are taught lies and twisted truths from a young age? Perhaps it really is just the upper echelon of the government trying to sweep everything under the rug. However, that still doesn't change the fact that most Japanese either don't know, care, or care enough to do anything about it.
|
On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to.
KwarK, hi, I think you're a smart person in general and I appreciate the perspectives that you're giving, but I think you're a little biased on this issue because the past few pages have been posts about how Japan has done exactly what you just stated you would do in their case (try to win them over with "nice, cheap words") and it hasn't worked. I'm only singling you out in particular because you're on staff here and I hold you to the same level of standard that I hold myself.
I realize that I'm biased on this issue, but I'm doing my best to be rational and neutral in spite of it. My mother's side of the family is Chinese. I get it. I'd like to ask the OP to tone down the siding with the Chinese viewpoint that this is a natural reaction to Japan's actions. Japanese people living in China really have nothing to do with that.
Everyone else, can we step back a bit and stop firing insults? I know I started off badly because I was offended but let's keep this civil. I'm on the Japanese side here because I don't think the people being hurt by the attacks on them have anything to do with the stated rationale for the attacks. I don't think that a rationale like the one given should be sufficient justification to attack a nation or real, living people, because this happened to my great-grandparents on my father's side in WW2 during internment in Hawaii and it was fucked up. I don't like the way the Chinese government is advocating this, and I don't like how many Chinese people are acting because I personally think nationalism is stupid, and I hate seeing a nationality that I check on forms act stupidly.
I especially don't like the way that people are being insulted ad hominem for debating this. Keep it civil. People are being hurt, we don't need to insult each other over it.
[edit] Cleaned up a bit to be less hypocritical. [/edit]
|
United States43468 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:08 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to. KwarK, hi, I think you're a smart person in general and I appreciate the perspectives that you're giving, but I think you're a little biased on this issue because the past few pages have been posts about how Japan has done exactly what you just stated you would do in their case (try to win them over with "nice, cheap words") and it hasn't worked. I'm only singling you out in particular because you're on staff here and I hold you to the same level of standard that I hold myself. I realize that I'm biased on this issue, but I'm doing my best to be rational and neutral in spite of it. My mother's side of the family is Chinese. I get it. I'd like to ask the OP to tone down the siding with the Chinese viewpoint that this is a natural reaction to Japan's actions. Japanese people living in Japan really have nothing to do with that. Everyone else, can we step back a bit and stop firing insults? I know I started off badly because I was offended but let's keep this civil. I'm on the Japanese side here because I don't think the people being hurt by the attacks on them have anything to do with the stated rationale for the attacks. I don't think that a rationale like the one given should be sufficient justification to attack a nation or real, living people, because this happened to my great-grandparents on my father's side in WW2 during internment in Hawaii and it was fucked up. I don't like the way the Chinese government is advocating this, and I don't like how many Chinese people are acting because I personally think nationalism is stupid, and I hate seeing a nationality that I check on forms act stupidly. I especially don't like the way that people are being insulted ad hominem for debating this. Keep it civil. People are being hurt, we don't need to insult each other over it. [edit] Cleaned up a bit to be less hypocritical. [/edit]
The main complaints people have regarding the Japanese government not appreciating the legacy of the wounds their predecessors inflicted upon the people of East Asia (and a lot of European/Australian PoWs) are things that would be fixed with tact and relatively cheap actions. The textbook scandal was ridiculous, it was a textbook which wasn't even used in many schools and clearly had no real educational value, if they'd shut it down or even publicly condemned it while explaining that it was produced by a third party exercising free expression then that would have blown over. Same applies to the comfort women, the apology that Japan has made covers it, simply remind people about it often and whenever some third party in Japan denies it then condemn it while saying "this is the view of a third party and not the Japanese government, here, read our apology again".
Similarly not visiting the graves of war criminals is such an obvious no brainer it shouldn't need to be said but apparently does. Maybe my lack of sympathy for religious feelings comes into play here but just exhuming the war criminals and burying them elsewhere without honours would only piss off the small minority of hardcore nationalists in Japan while making an awful lot of Chinese people happier, sure you desecrate a few graves but the dead have yet to ever make a formal complaint about the desecration of graves and if it's just living people you're dealing with then there will be more happy about it than unhappy.
These are not expensive things but they would show the Chinese people that the Japanese government gets why they're pissed off.
|
On October 21 2012 18:21 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 18:08 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to. KwarK, hi, I think you're a smart person in general and I appreciate the perspectives that you're giving, but I think you're a little biased on this issue because the past few pages have been posts about how Japan has done exactly what you just stated you would do in their case (try to win them over with "nice, cheap words") and it hasn't worked. I'm only singling you out in particular because you're on staff here and I hold you to the same level of standard that I hold myself. I realize that I'm biased on this issue, but I'm doing my best to be rational and neutral in spite of it. My mother's side of the family is Chinese. I get it. I'd like to ask the OP to tone down the siding with the Chinese viewpoint that this is a natural reaction to Japan's actions. Japanese people living in Japan really have nothing to do with that. Everyone else, can we step back a bit and stop firing insults? I know I started off badly because I was offended but let's keep this civil. I'm on the Japanese side here because I don't think the people being hurt by the attacks on them have anything to do with the stated rationale for the attacks. I don't think that a rationale like the one given should be sufficient justification to attack a nation or real, living people, because this happened to my great-grandparents on my father's side in WW2 during internment in Hawaii and it was fucked up. I don't like the way the Chinese government is advocating this, and I don't like how many Chinese people are acting because I personally think nationalism is stupid, and I hate seeing a nationality that I check on forms act stupidly. I especially don't like the way that people are being insulted ad hominem for debating this. Keep it civil. People are being hurt, we don't need to insult each other over it. [edit] Cleaned up a bit to be less hypocritical. [/edit] The main complaints people have regarding the Japanese government not appreciating the legacy of the wounds their predecessors inflicted upon the people of East Asia (and a lot of European/Australian PoWs) are things that would be fixed with tact and relatively cheap actions. The textbook scandal was ridiculous, it was a textbook which wasn't even used in many schools and clearly had no real educational value, if they'd shut it down or even publicly condemned it while explaining that it was produced by a third party exercising free expression then that would have blown over. Same applies to the comfort women, the apology that Japan has made covers it, simply remind people about it often and whenever some third party in Japan denies it then condemn it while saying "this is the view of a third party and not the Japanese government, here, read our apology again". Similarly not visiting the graves of war criminals is such an obvious no brainer it shouldn't need to be said but apparently does. Maybe my lack of sympathy for religious feelings comes into play here but just exhuming the war criminals and burying them elsewhere without honours would only piss off the small minority of hardcore nationalists in Japan while making an awful lot of Chinese people happier, sure you desecrate a few graves but the dead have yet to ever make a formal complaint about the desecration of graves and if it's just living people you're dealing with then there will be more happy about it than unhappy. These are not expensive things but they would show the Chinese people that the Japanese government gets why they're pissed off.
Again, though, I think China's citizenry is maybe slightly overreacting by burning, looting, and assaulting people in retaliation. I'm sorry on behalf of my Japanese side towards China and I'm sorry on behalf of my Chinese side towards Japan. Really, if we're being pragmatic, people (especially in China and Japan) have no direct control over their politicians, but I think there's a stark difference in how the Japanese and Chinese citizens are acting.
|
United States43468 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:33 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 18:21 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 18:08 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to. KwarK, hi, I think you're a smart person in general and I appreciate the perspectives that you're giving, but I think you're a little biased on this issue because the past few pages have been posts about how Japan has done exactly what you just stated you would do in their case (try to win them over with "nice, cheap words") and it hasn't worked. I'm only singling you out in particular because you're on staff here and I hold you to the same level of standard that I hold myself. I realize that I'm biased on this issue, but I'm doing my best to be rational and neutral in spite of it. My mother's side of the family is Chinese. I get it. I'd like to ask the OP to tone down the siding with the Chinese viewpoint that this is a natural reaction to Japan's actions. Japanese people living in Japan really have nothing to do with that. Everyone else, can we step back a bit and stop firing insults? I know I started off badly because I was offended but let's keep this civil. I'm on the Japanese side here because I don't think the people being hurt by the attacks on them have anything to do with the stated rationale for the attacks. I don't think that a rationale like the one given should be sufficient justification to attack a nation or real, living people, because this happened to my great-grandparents on my father's side in WW2 during internment in Hawaii and it was fucked up. I don't like the way the Chinese government is advocating this, and I don't like how many Chinese people are acting because I personally think nationalism is stupid, and I hate seeing a nationality that I check on forms act stupidly. I especially don't like the way that people are being insulted ad hominem for debating this. Keep it civil. People are being hurt, we don't need to insult each other over it. [edit] Cleaned up a bit to be less hypocritical. [/edit] The main complaints people have regarding the Japanese government not appreciating the legacy of the wounds their predecessors inflicted upon the people of East Asia (and a lot of European/Australian PoWs) are things that would be fixed with tact and relatively cheap actions. The textbook scandal was ridiculous, it was a textbook which wasn't even used in many schools and clearly had no real educational value, if they'd shut it down or even publicly condemned it while explaining that it was produced by a third party exercising free expression then that would have blown over. Same applies to the comfort women, the apology that Japan has made covers it, simply remind people about it often and whenever some third party in Japan denies it then condemn it while saying "this is the view of a third party and not the Japanese government, here, read our apology again". Similarly not visiting the graves of war criminals is such an obvious no brainer it shouldn't need to be said but apparently does. Maybe my lack of sympathy for religious feelings comes into play here but just exhuming the war criminals and burying them elsewhere without honours would only piss off the small minority of hardcore nationalists in Japan while making an awful lot of Chinese people happier, sure you desecrate a few graves but the dead have yet to ever make a formal complaint about the desecration of graves and if it's just living people you're dealing with then there will be more happy about it than unhappy. These are not expensive things but they would show the Chinese people that the Japanese government gets why they're pissed off. Again, though, I think China's citizenry is maybe slightly overreacting by burning, looting, and assaulting people in retaliation. I'm sorry on behalf of my Japanese side towards China and I'm sorry on behalf of my Chinese side towards Japan. Really, if we're being pragmatic, people (especially in China and Japan) have no direct control over their politicians, but I think there's a stark difference in how the Japanese and Chinese citizens are acting.
I could not agree more regarding the burning, looting and assaulting. Violent protests against innocent civilians are absolutely wrong and are not justifiable. I don't believe anyone in this topic has ever suggested that they were, that's a point that nobody is arguing against.
|
On October 21 2012 18:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 18:33 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On October 21 2012 18:21 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 18:08 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to. KwarK, hi, I think you're a smart person in general and I appreciate the perspectives that you're giving, but I think you're a little biased on this issue because the past few pages have been posts about how Japan has done exactly what you just stated you would do in their case (try to win them over with "nice, cheap words") and it hasn't worked. I'm only singling you out in particular because you're on staff here and I hold you to the same level of standard that I hold myself. I realize that I'm biased on this issue, but I'm doing my best to be rational and neutral in spite of it. My mother's side of the family is Chinese. I get it. I'd like to ask the OP to tone down the siding with the Chinese viewpoint that this is a natural reaction to Japan's actions. Japanese people living in Japan really have nothing to do with that. Everyone else, can we step back a bit and stop firing insults? I know I started off badly because I was offended but let's keep this civil. I'm on the Japanese side here because I don't think the people being hurt by the attacks on them have anything to do with the stated rationale for the attacks. I don't think that a rationale like the one given should be sufficient justification to attack a nation or real, living people, because this happened to my great-grandparents on my father's side in WW2 during internment in Hawaii and it was fucked up. I don't like the way the Chinese government is advocating this, and I don't like how many Chinese people are acting because I personally think nationalism is stupid, and I hate seeing a nationality that I check on forms act stupidly. I especially don't like the way that people are being insulted ad hominem for debating this. Keep it civil. People are being hurt, we don't need to insult each other over it. [edit] Cleaned up a bit to be less hypocritical. [/edit] The main complaints people have regarding the Japanese government not appreciating the legacy of the wounds their predecessors inflicted upon the people of East Asia (and a lot of European/Australian PoWs) are things that would be fixed with tact and relatively cheap actions. The textbook scandal was ridiculous, it was a textbook which wasn't even used in many schools and clearly had no real educational value, if they'd shut it down or even publicly condemned it while explaining that it was produced by a third party exercising free expression then that would have blown over. Same applies to the comfort women, the apology that Japan has made covers it, simply remind people about it often and whenever some third party in Japan denies it then condemn it while saying "this is the view of a third party and not the Japanese government, here, read our apology again". Similarly not visiting the graves of war criminals is such an obvious no brainer it shouldn't need to be said but apparently does. Maybe my lack of sympathy for religious feelings comes into play here but just exhuming the war criminals and burying them elsewhere without honours would only piss off the small minority of hardcore nationalists in Japan while making an awful lot of Chinese people happier, sure you desecrate a few graves but the dead have yet to ever make a formal complaint about the desecration of graves and if it's just living people you're dealing with then there will be more happy about it than unhappy. These are not expensive things but they would show the Chinese people that the Japanese government gets why they're pissed off. Again, though, I think China's citizenry is maybe slightly overreacting by burning, looting, and assaulting people in retaliation. I'm sorry on behalf of my Japanese side towards China and I'm sorry on behalf of my Chinese side towards Japan. Really, if we're being pragmatic, people (especially in China and Japan) have no direct control over their politicians, but I think there's a stark difference in how the Japanese and Chinese citizens are acting. I could not agree more regarding the burning, looting and assaulting. Violent protests against innocent civilians are absolutely wrong and are not justifiable. I don't believe anyone in this topic has ever suggested that they were, that's a point that nobody is arguing against.
My misunderstanding. It really came off differently to me the way the OP framed your post. Also, OP is being quite obviously pro-burning/looting/assaulting:
+ Show Spoiler +On October 21 2012 16:32 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:51 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Are you saying that Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop civil unrest in their country? Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens? Show nested quote +And its really sad that a generation that was almost completely unaffected by the Japanese are expressing ill-will towards them based on what had happened 70 years ago. The current Chinese distaste for Japan is based off the past record + present behavior, which includes: Yasukuni Shrine visits, humiliating treatment of comfort women claims in Japanese courts, land grabs of islands whose legal status is under dispute, and a lack of sincere actions by Japanese decisionmakers to show repentance and win brownie points from Japanese victim nations.
|
On October 21 2012 18:45 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 18:42 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 18:33 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On October 21 2012 18:21 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 18:08 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On October 21 2012 16:43 KwarK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? EDIT: I have a hard time believing that this is some sort of reasonable resolution for Japan to earn forgiveness. I don't think anyone that thinks logically could actually expect this from a country. To be honest, probably yes, it is their job. If I were in charge of Japanese national security from foreign powers then I would actively lobby the government to buy some Chinese goodwill with nice, cheap words. It is the simplest and most effective way of securing themselves in the region without really doing anything. You'd have to be blinded by pride not to. KwarK, hi, I think you're a smart person in general and I appreciate the perspectives that you're giving, but I think you're a little biased on this issue because the past few pages have been posts about how Japan has done exactly what you just stated you would do in their case (try to win them over with "nice, cheap words") and it hasn't worked. I'm only singling you out in particular because you're on staff here and I hold you to the same level of standard that I hold myself. I realize that I'm biased on this issue, but I'm doing my best to be rational and neutral in spite of it. My mother's side of the family is Chinese. I get it. I'd like to ask the OP to tone down the siding with the Chinese viewpoint that this is a natural reaction to Japan's actions. Japanese people living in Japan really have nothing to do with that. Everyone else, can we step back a bit and stop firing insults? I know I started off badly because I was offended but let's keep this civil. I'm on the Japanese side here because I don't think the people being hurt by the attacks on them have anything to do with the stated rationale for the attacks. I don't think that a rationale like the one given should be sufficient justification to attack a nation or real, living people, because this happened to my great-grandparents on my father's side in WW2 during internment in Hawaii and it was fucked up. I don't like the way the Chinese government is advocating this, and I don't like how many Chinese people are acting because I personally think nationalism is stupid, and I hate seeing a nationality that I check on forms act stupidly. I especially don't like the way that people are being insulted ad hominem for debating this. Keep it civil. People are being hurt, we don't need to insult each other over it. [edit] Cleaned up a bit to be less hypocritical. [/edit] The main complaints people have regarding the Japanese government not appreciating the legacy of the wounds their predecessors inflicted upon the people of East Asia (and a lot of European/Australian PoWs) are things that would be fixed with tact and relatively cheap actions. The textbook scandal was ridiculous, it was a textbook which wasn't even used in many schools and clearly had no real educational value, if they'd shut it down or even publicly condemned it while explaining that it was produced by a third party exercising free expression then that would have blown over. Same applies to the comfort women, the apology that Japan has made covers it, simply remind people about it often and whenever some third party in Japan denies it then condemn it while saying "this is the view of a third party and not the Japanese government, here, read our apology again". Similarly not visiting the graves of war criminals is such an obvious no brainer it shouldn't need to be said but apparently does. Maybe my lack of sympathy for religious feelings comes into play here but just exhuming the war criminals and burying them elsewhere without honours would only piss off the small minority of hardcore nationalists in Japan while making an awful lot of Chinese people happier, sure you desecrate a few graves but the dead have yet to ever make a formal complaint about the desecration of graves and if it's just living people you're dealing with then there will be more happy about it than unhappy. These are not expensive things but they would show the Chinese people that the Japanese government gets why they're pissed off. Again, though, I think China's citizenry is maybe slightly overreacting by burning, looting, and assaulting people in retaliation. I'm sorry on behalf of my Japanese side towards China and I'm sorry on behalf of my Chinese side towards Japan. Really, if we're being pragmatic, people (especially in China and Japan) have no direct control over their politicians, but I think there's a stark difference in how the Japanese and Chinese citizens are acting. I could not agree more regarding the burning, looting and assaulting. Violent protests against innocent civilians are absolutely wrong and are not justifiable. I don't believe anyone in this topic has ever suggested that they were, that's a point that nobody is arguing against. My misunderstanding. It really came off differently to me the way the OP framed your post. Also, OP is being quite obviously pro-burning/looting/assaulting: + Show Spoiler +On October 21 2012 16:32 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:51 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s. All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Are you saying that Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop civil unrest in their country? Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens? Show nested quote +And its really sad that a generation that was almost completely unaffected by the Japanese are expressing ill-will towards them based on what had happened 70 years ago. The current Chinese distaste for Japan is based off the past record + present behavior, which includes: Yasukuni Shrine visits, humiliating treatment of comfort women claims in Japanese courts, land grabs of islands whose legal status is under dispute, and a lack of sincere actions by Japanese decisionmakers to show repentance and win brownie points from Japanese victim nations.
Oh get out of here. Nobody is pro riots.
|
Did you actually read what the OP posted in that quote I spoiler'd? If you did and still don't feel like that's the case, I'll highlight the parts that I feel are indicative of his supportive stance:
+ Show Spoiler +On October 21 2012 16:32 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2012 15:51 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 15:30 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 15:16 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:43 Shady Sands wrote:On October 21 2012 14:25 bioniK wrote:On October 21 2012 14:21 Orek wrote:
Given the chance, every single nation in the world wants non-allied neighbors/potential enemies to reduce its military presense while keeping your own military power. Nothing is new that U.S. wants China, Russia, N.Korea etc. to reduce its military presense while U.S. keeps by far the biggest military presense in the world. Nothing is new that China wants U.S., Japan, S.Korea etc. to reduce its military power while China grows its own. Nothing is new that Japan wants China, N.Korea, Russia etc. to reduce military influence in the Far East while Japan maintains alliance with the mighty U.S. As ridiculous as it sounds, what Shady Sands says isn't new, and similar claim exists from Japan to China as well, both of which aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. "I stay strong, you stay weak." was/is/will be the name of the game until human society develops further in the next centuries. "I stay weak, and I trust you." unfortunately doesn't work today. I figured people already knew this which was why I was confused as to why the OP had such a strong stance in the matter. Its only common sense when nations of conflicting ideologies would want to preserve and protect their interests right? So how reasonable is to to ask one nation to give up their ability to do so? Because that nation has used its military irresponsibly? The question is: how can Japan win forgiveness/win the hearts of China? I laid out 3 actions which will (to most Chinese) permanently remove Japan as a threat/historical enemy. If Japan can't do it, it's not China's fault. How exactly has Japan used its military irresponsibly? World War 2? The Nanjing Massacre? Unit 731? The Three Alls Policy? Occupying Manchukuo for 10 years? Korea for 50 years? Taiwan for 50 years? The Bataan Death March? Comfort Women? Is it really their job to win over the hearts of the Chinese people at the cost of the ability to protect themselves against a belligerent nation? Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s.All I'm saying is that when Japan complains to Chinese authorities about protests and the general ill-will Chinese people feel towards the Japanese government and companies, perhaps they might want to realize that it's not the Chinese government's job to make the people feel neutral about Japan either. If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage. Are you saying that Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop civil unrest in their country? Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens?Show nested quote +And its really sad that a generation that was almost completely unaffected by the Japanese are expressing ill-will towards them based on what had happened 70 years ago. The current Chinese distaste for Japan is based off the past record + present behavior, which includes: Yasukuni Shrine visits, humiliating treatment of comfort women claims in Japanese courts, land grabs of islands whose legal status is under dispute, and a lack of sincere actions by Japanese decisionmakers to show repentance and win brownie points from Japanese victim nations.
Their job? No, of course it's not their job. And China is by no means belligerent towards Japan--no nation has displayed unprovoked belligerence towards Japan since Kublai Khan in the 1200s.
If Japan wants the ill-will to go away because they feel their current interests are hurt by the continued protests and informal boycotts, the ball is in their court. The Chinese authorities have no obligation to stop the outrage.
Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens?
|
Yes and i've come the the conclusion that your anti-china bias is so far off the charts that it almost looks like you've gone out of your way to deliberately misinterpret every single post about the origins of bitterness towards Japan as "You wanna bash japs and flip Hondas!"
|
On October 21 2012 18:57 ShadeR wrote:
Yes and i've come the the conclusion that your anti-china bias is so far off the charts that it almost looks like you've gone out of your way to deliberately misinterpret every single post about the origins of bitterness towards Japan as "You wanna bash japs and flip Hondas!"
I'M CHINESE
|
On October 21 2012 15:12 bioniK wrote:
I see you didn't read my wall of text a few pages back, which I don't blame you for.
I also think its worth mentioning that this resolution only asks Japan to acknowledge and apologize for the coercion of comfort women during the 1930s to the end of the war. Also the representative that presented this resolution, Mike Honda has stated "the purpose of this resolution is not to bash or humiliate Japan." U.S government isn't condeming Japan here.
I don't know where you quoted that Japanese schools use textbooks to downplay the comfort women tragedy, but it has been said before that a vast majority of school boards in Japan rejected the textbooks that downplay Japanese war crimes, keyword in that quote "some" textbooks. I also think its worth mentioning that I didn't learn about comfort women in HS.
That quote is in the text of the bill. Here is text that the US House of Representatives came up with in their resolution:
Whereas some new textbooks used in Japanese schools seek to downplay the `comfort women' tragedy and other Japanese war crimes during World War II;
Whereas Japanese public and private officials have recently expressed a desire to dilute or rescind the 1993 statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the `comfort women', which expressed the Government's sincere apologies and remorse for their ordeal;
The corrected link is:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110j6lE2w::
The House of Representatives made it clear that there is a movement in the Japanese government to "rescind" the statement issued by Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the `comfort women' in 1993.
Look, the US government has made it clear there are issues in Japan regarding whitewashing their atrocities in WW2. The US is Japan's biggest ally and friend and if your friend tells you this, you bet there is some truth to it.
|
United States43468 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:51 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +Nope. Why should Chinese authorities stop civil unrest not directed at China or its own government or citizens?
Well that's ridiculously easy to argue against. It's called the social contract. People pay taxes and follow laws and the government levies taxes and protects them within the law. The reason the government should stop civil unrest within their country is because they have a legal responsibility to do so which they willfully created when they put the laws in place to protect the social contract.
They should do it because they're obliged to do it. If Shady Sands wants to get into "why should the government feel obliged to give non citizen residents the protection of the law" then that'd need a slightly longer answer but it'd still be a question with a stupidly obvious answer. At this point all you need to do is call the guy an idiot, although I'd frame it without that word because otherwise I'll have to step in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
