Pro-China, Anti-Japan Protests - Page 66

On September 19 2012 01:41 synapse wrote:

It's not really the land that they want, it's the waters around the island that are valuable for their natural resources haha.

On September 19 2012 01:40 Felnarion wrote:
I think the bible has an interesting stance on these things. Normally, I don't ascribe to the Bible's teachings...but here?

Dig trenches to cut the islands in half, and give each side half of each island.

On September 19 2012 01:35 Azarkon wrote:


This is a typical Japanese perspective that does not at all help matters. Saying that every issue other governments have with Japan is a political play, when it's obvious that a lot of the rage and anger is grassroots, and has legitimate and understandable links with the past, is the equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and singing la-la-la.

On September 19 2012 01:49 ChThoniC wrote:


What do you mean that it "does not at all help matters"?

For example, with the Liancourt Rocks, why does Korea refuse to go the the ICJ over the ownership and get it settled? The official Korean position is "because it's obviously ours", which is not true. There is obviously a dispute, and if anything signs point to them being Japanese.

A more likely reason is that Korea isn't going to the ICJ because this recent campaign is only political.

With the Senkaku Islands and China, it seems pretty clear that China agreed that they belonged to Japan in 1895 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Shimonoseki), and shortly after that, a Japanese bonito plant was set up on the island (with no dispute from China).

This recent anti-Japan sentiment also comes shortly after a lot of civil unrest in China. Is it a coincidence? Or does it make more sense that it's a political ploy?
EDIT: Look at this article. The headline says it all: "China's Vice President Xi Jinping returns to public eye amid anti-Japan unrest"
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/chinas-vice-president-xi-jinping-returns-to-public-eye-amid-anti-japan-unrest/story-e6frg6so-1226475066343

On September 19 2012 01:52 Azarkon wrote:


In 1895, China was losing every war vs. Japan and had no ability to protest Japanese annexations. Taiwan was annexed in the same year, in case you forgot.

In the 1970s, when the Senkaku / Diaoyu islands were returned to Japan by the US, both the ROC and the PRC DID protest.

A week ago, the Japanese government decided to take the issue further by nationalizing the islands. This sparked the protests, which turned into riots.

On the ground level, hatred for the Japanese is tangible and potent. Every Chinese I've met in China have expressed this.

It's obvious that this isn't just a government ploy.

On September 19 2012 02:02 ChThoniC wrote:


So from 1895 until 1970, there were no protests by China about these islands that belonged under the control of Japan, and then the US. Then in 1970 there was some protest, which lead to absolutely nothing, until 42 years later when the Japanese government bought the islands from a Japanese citizen.

Governments buy property from citizens fairly often, but it never incites burning factories and smashing the cars of citizens, and looting Rolex and Dior.

The vice "president" of China disappeared mysteriously for 2 weeks among civil unrest, and now suddenly appears again smiling that the citizens of China are rioting against Japan. Just coincidence?

On September 19 2012 01:47 Nuclease wrote:
In reaction to Kwark, I might say this:

Anti-Japanese sentiment, while it might have its "justifications," is paradoxical and unreasonable. Why? There are many reasons. Firstly, the Chinese have been buying and trading Japanese goods for decades. If the anti-Japanese sentiment was so reasonable, why haven't they been feeling it up until now? It seems to me that this is just the Chinese government doing a very good job with riling up its people (as always). When the government is making announcements over loud speakers at universities (the Chinese government controls all but a few universities), and they are making open statements of protest on American support of Japan on the issue, it becomes obvious that this is just a power grab.

America recently installed an advanced missile-defense radar system in Japan, which has the range to detect incoming missiles from North Korea. In this move, they offended China and China ramped up governmental encouragement of protests. It's clear that this is the Chinese government, not its people.

The people are using unguided frustration and anger to vent their rage. This is made clear by the destruction of Japanese goods (which they benefit from and have for decades) and the destruction of Chinese governmental vehicles (even if they are Japanese-made, they belong to the government they are made to seem like they love so much).

Finally, one has to see that no matter what the involvement in WW2 is by Japan, this hate is no longer justified. During the time of WW2? That's one thing. Now? It's another. To say, Kwark, that we can justify this hatred because the Japanese are not recognizing what they have done to the Chinese is ridiculous. According to Mike Rogers, a Congressman from Michigan, the "Japanese prime ministers have, at least four times to date, clearly and publicly and officially apologized for World War II atrocities, war crimes and transgressions. Since the prime minister of Japan is its highest-ranking executive of state, to say that Japan hasn't apologized to its Asian neighbors is false. Even China, Korea, and Russia, as well as the United States, recognize that Japan has indeed apologized for her past actions." Just because Japanese officials recently visited a shrine does NOT mean that Japan as a whole can be held accountable for their actions. Why? Because they man who really represents Japan as a whole asked them NOT TO GO. According to the very article you cite in your response, Kwark, "Prime minister Yoshihiko Noda had asked members of his cabinet to stay away from the shrine." Moreover, that shrine doesn't just honor 14 "war criminals," it also honors the rest of Japan's war-dead, if you had read your article, Kwark. That visit was a general sign of defiance, not a tribute to Tojo. Moreover, even if it was a tribute to Tojo, who is to say that it would be totally unjustified? The term "war criminal" is one that we should all take a long and hard look at. We are told that killing people is a crime from the time we are born. Then, we launch into war, and suddenly there are conditions under which killing is okay. To defend a country, to win a war, etc. We have launched people into a world of crime the second we put them into a war, and to accuse them of committing crimes under these circumstances is unjustified. Why? Not because the things they do are not horrible and wrong. But because the war they are in is the first crime that causes all the others. The Japanese have done horrible things. But they hold themselves accountable for it, as I have already showed, and war is a horrible thing in itself. Moreover, we must not forget why Tojo is a war criminal: because the Japanese at large killed, according to the sources in this wikipedia article, around 6,000,000 people in Asia. However, this was not all under Tojo's reign as Prime Minister. Many of those killings took place far before Tojo. If the killing of citizens makes him a war criminal, then should we not visit Truman's grave? FDR's grave? The Presidents who built and dropped the atomic bomb are war criminals, too, since the standard for war criminals in this case is the killing of civilians. Make any argument you want for the necessity to drop the bomb, that's a non-issue (especially since it's so hard to justify any argument on any side). I'm sure that Tojo was making the same arguments for his actions. The point is that innocent civilians were killed in that bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The criminals are on the losing side. Fortunately for Truman and FDR, we won, so they don't have to be the criminals.

What's more on the war crimes side, is that the Chinese government is guilty of war crimes and ethnic cleansing. Recently, too. According to this article, over 1,000 Uighurs were killed for speaking out against assimilation and annexing of Uighurs and their territory. This is well-known, so there's no need for me to go on. Let us not forget Taiwan or Tibet, either. The point of all of this is: if we are going to try and justify the amount of hate in China right now by pointing out old war crimes, we better look at a few things: the assumptions we make by using the term "war-crime," the standards by which we measure war-crimes and what that makes our generals and presidents, and the current war-crimes being committed by the Chinese government.

The Chinese people are puppets on a string to the media of their government. This is not justified.

Sources: this thread, http://www.lewrockwell.com/rogers/rogers206.html, Kwark's ABC article from the OP, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes, http://www.theatlanticright.com/2009/07/09/uighurs-fight-for-survival-china-guilty-of-ethnic-cleansing/

On September 19 2012 02:02 ChThoniC wrote:


So from 1895 until 1970, there were no protests by China about these islands that belonged under the control of Japan, and then the US. Then in 1970 there was some protest, which lead to absolutely nothing, until 42 years later when the Japanese government bought the islands from a Japanese citizen.

Governments buy property from citizens fairly often, but it never incites burning factories and smashing the cars of citizens, and looting Rolex and Dior.

The vice "president" of China disappeared mysteriously for 2 weeks among civil unrest, and now suddenly appears again smiling that the citizens of China are rioting against Japan. Just coincidence?

On September 19 2012 02:07 synapse wrote:

China wasn't really under any circumstance to contest the ownership of a small island through their civil war and WW2. Once everything settled down and the US returned the islands to Japan, China originally protested but it was Deng Xiaoping that kind of told everyone that this island wasn't really important and we could negotiate on it later. The territorial dispute has been going on for a long time, and the Japanese government suddenly buying it is easily seen as an insult.

On September 19 2012 02:34 ChThoniC wrote:


China signed documents saying that the land belonged to Japan, and then didn't say anything about it for 75 years, through two wars that lasted less than 30 years combined.

It's absolutely nuts that this is leading to street riots, burning down factories, destroying malls, raiding stores that have no affiliation with Japan whatsoever (Rolex and Dior ??), and attacking people in public based on their nationality.

If this is a real issue, why not take it to the ICJ? The reaction is totally ridiculous and makes it impossible to support what the Chinese people are doing, even if there's a valid dispute.

On September 19 2012 02:34 ChThoniC wrote:


China signed documents saying that the land belonged to Japan, and then didn't say anything about it for 75 years, through two wars that lasted less than 30 years combined.

It's absolutely nuts that this is leading to street riots, burning down factories, destroying malls, raiding stores that have no affiliation with Japan whatsoever (Rolex and Dior ??), and attacking people in public based on their nationality.

If this is a real issue, why not take it to the ICJ? The reaction is totally ridiculous and makes it impossible to support what the Chinese people are doing, even if there's a valid dispute.