What's new

Is it time for the US to pull out of the Korean peninsula?

Should the US pull out of the Korean Peninsula?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 23.5%
  • No

    Votes: 9 52.9%
  • don't know?

    Votes: 4 23.5%

  • Total voters
    17
As for S. Koreans wanting the US to pull out, there probably are such people. I've just never happened to meet a S. Korean with that view.

I think the majority of Koreans understandably have some resentment about foreign occupying troops, but the great majority of them don't want a US pullout because that would result in invasion and war.

S. Korea has free elections. If a majority of them ever vote to have the US leave, then I and most Americans will want our government to leave.
 
Funny because Irani fashist system said same about Syria " The Syrian people want the Assad " ... You know 90% of Syrians are againts the Assad but governments like Irani and N.Korean are same, Both should be wiped out as soon as possible.
Look at South Korea, It's how the United Korea should be not like North Korea, So don't speak in behalf the Koreans.

Find some south Korean ppl on the internet and ask them yourself. South korea has many institutions aiming for unified. The problem between N and S korea is not whether to unite or not. The problem is which society system should be used after unified, just like east and west German.
I can say this because i myself is a northeast asian, just like you r familiar with muslims.
And I found you seem to stand in some position and to always aim at North Korea or Iraq. I just want to say, in east Asia, ppl consider middle east ppl are terrorists by seeing too much American media. When US and England TV spread the news of "how many innocent jews or Europeans are killed by Muslims terrorists", they never point it out clearly these terrorists are Syrian or Saudi Arabian.
In sum, I think you have watch too much American TV.
 
Find some south Korean ppl on the internet and ask them yourself. South korea has many institutions aiming for unified. The problem between N and S korea is not whether to unite or not. The problem is which society system should be used after unified, just like east and west German.
I think it's like the situation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Saudi people need the US protection from Iran but in the same time they know for sure that the US military bases are a big threat to them and all muslim nations, The thing is, It's like you paying a bad guy to protect you from a " Very bad guy".

I just want to say, in east Asia, ppl consider middle east ppl are terrorists by seeing too much American media. When US and England TV spread the news of "how many innocent jews or Europeans are killed by Muslims terrorists", they never point it out clearly these terrorists are Syrian or Saudi Arabian.
i'm not sure what your point is ! what do you mean ?

In sum, I think you have watch too much American TV.
Why ?
I watch American movies & TV serieses since i was 10 years old.
 
1st, if America, Russia and China leave N and S Koreans alone. They will attact each other quickly. Considering N.K has more army and weapons, I think there is a big chance for NK to attact first.
2nd, there's no doubt that both of N and S korea normal people want to have a united Korea. The problem is listening to whom?
3rd, it also can be sure that most of the Koreans want US to pull out. Look at what's the reaction of normal SKoreans after some US soldier raping a local girl, you will know that. SKoreans are also scary of being invaded after US pulling out. Both ideas exist together. But I can tell, if there's a public vote, most ppl absolutly will ask US to pull out.
This because in history, China has sent army to help Korea 4 times, never leave army in their territory. But in 1800s, Japan used the excuse of helping Korea, sending army to their country and never leaved until WWII ended. Now American's behavior may recall some feeling of being invaded. At least NK's leader is telling all of the Koreans this stuff.
4th, same thing is happening in Japan. There are many Japanese, you can ask them if their most compatriots want US to stay or not.
 
i'm not sure what your point is ! what do you mean ?
Why ?
I watch American movies & TV serieses since i was 10 years old.

I mean donot always believe what the media telling you.
I guess you believe NK's leader is evil and SK is victim, right?
But Saudi Arabia also has a king, the normal people cannot vote for themselves either. Is Saudi Arabia an evil country and full of terrorists? No, I donot think so. And your opponents from Iraq, at least their normal ppl can vote for their prefered leader.
Let me make it clear. Suddenly one day Americans tell the world that Saudi Arabia is a totally evil country and your government is dictature. What can you say for yourselves? No, you just cannot. Because you donot even have a law like other part's world.
You may think this is absurd. But you may know that American gave supplies to Taliban when they fought against Russian.
So I call this brainwash stuff. I said all this is just based on you thinking NK is an evil country. If I have misunderstood you, then you can just skip over this.
 
Your posts are completely biases, but I think I noticed that before... Hmm.
1st, if America, Russia and China leave N and S Koreans alone. They will attact each other quickly. Considering N.K has more army and weapons, I think there is a big chance for NK to attact first.
Of course if there was a war, N. Korea would attack first! They've spent decades making military threats. South Korea would never (in its current state) want to attack, because they are not an aggressive nation. They like their lives. So, no, they won't attack each other quickly. Maybe North Korea would, thereby committing suicide, destroying the balance the world has gotten to.
2nd, there's no doubt that both of N and S korea normal people want to have a united Korea. The problem is listening to whom?
My understanding of it is that of course they want a united country, but South Korea is hesitant about paying for all of it. North Korea has terrible infrastructure, the people are mentally/emotionally underdeveloped (overall) because of the lack of education and freedom of thought, and are generally malnourished. I forget by how much, but the height of North Koreans has been shrinking every generation because they can't eat a healthy diet. So, as much as South Korea wants to be united, they would be paying for it for decades. It isn't comparable to East and West Germany, since the USSR didn't starve East Germany on every level.
3rd, it also can be sure that most of the Koreans want US to pull out. Look at what's the reaction of normal SKoreans after some US soldier raping a local girl, you will know that. SKoreans are also scary of being invaded after US pulling out. Both ideas exist together. But I can tell, if there's a public vote, most ppl absolutly will ask US to pull out.
I don't think this is true. I say that as a non-Korean, and you as a non-Korean. People are able to have complex thoughts. As appalling as the crimes of some soldiers are, there is also the fear of missile strikes from their neighbors who want to unite. So, they can want both. I know from my personal time living in Okinawa, people there wanted US forces out of populated areas, but not from the island or Japan. They wanted the alliance, just to reduce the friction between the forces and the populace. I would expect most sensible South Koreans feel the same way. But neither of us are in the position to speak for everyone there.
This because in history, China has sent army to help Korea 4 times, never leave army in their territory. But in 1800s, Japan used the excuse of helping Korea, sending army to their country and never leaved until WWII ended. Now American's behavior may recall some feeling of being invaded. At least NK's leader is telling all of the Koreans this stuff.
History is not a great basis for these things. Maybe the last 50 years, but not going back to the 1800s. The leadership in North Korea lies to its people on a daily basis about the behavior of other countries (ie. they all want to destroy us!). That's why the Internet is illegal there, and why its people are not allowed to have free conversation with foreign people. So, when you say, at least the NK leader is telling all this stuff, I don't know what your point is.
4th, same thing is happening in Japan. There are many Japanese, you can ask them if their most compatriots want US to stay or not.
Yup, I know. I live in Japan, and lived in the area with the largest grouping of US forces. People didn't like them there, but they disliked North Korea far far more (based on the things North Korea publicly says, not because of what American media says). And they really disliked the ever-increasing Chinese military, the government-approved anti-Japan protests/riots, the Senkaku disputes etc etc. China is a real worry. America had the chance to take over Japan in WWII, and they chose not to. Japan trusts the US military. They know that they simply are in Japan for defensive purposes, and not to make Japan a new colony. Have you been to Japan to talk to the locals about what they think about US forces? <for the record, I am not American, so nobody is under any pressure to lie to me about liking them>
 
As for S. Koreans wanting the US to pull out, there probably are such people. I've just never happened to meet a S. Korean with that view.

While I am always a bit suspicious of information that overwhelmingly supports the status quo, I did do a search for polls on the matter, and I could not find any at all. But all general information I found would seem to support the idea that South Koreans overwhelmingly want the U.S. military presence. And to me, that is what counts second. What would count first is if the American people want out. But I did find polls that suggest that Americans still want to be there and South Koreans seem to still want them. So without any further info, I have no problem with the current situation.

I think the majority of Koreans understandably have some resentment about foreign occupying troops, but the great majority of them don't want a US pullout because that would result in invasion and war.

What little I know of Koreans does suggest there must be some resentment in the back of their minds. My impression is that they are very proud and more than a little xenophobic.

But I cannot agree that a pullout would mean automatic war. I do not deny the possibility, but, there are still a lot of good reasons why the Norks would not do it. The only question is if they would be so crazy as to ignore those reasons, and thing about crazy people is they are so unpredictable. I have not decided how crazy the current Dear Leader Kim is.


S. Korea has free elections. If a majority of them ever vote to have the US leave, then I and most Americans will want our government to leave

I am in awe that you said this. Are you saying there is a ballot on the question of the U.S. presence?? Never heard of it.
 
, any attempted invasion would immediately engage US troops -- the main deterrent to invasion.

I disagree that the U.S. presence is the main deterrent. I would say the mere threat of U.S. involvment is the real deterrent, and that will continue even if the U.S. leaves. But I think the current leadership of North Korea realizes there is good chance they could lose everything if they attacked, like their power and rich lifestyle, with or without U.S. involvment, and this is a deterrent maybe even larger.

Its the same reason Saddam Hussein never would have attacked Kuwait if Bush Sr. had just said no. But Bush stayed silent (probably on purpose) and Saddam saw no risk. But we trashed Saddam without any bases in Kuwait. Of course, the terrain helped, but I think its an example that few despots would ignore.

And there is no use acting like S.K. is a weak, sissy nation desperate for assistance. Its not. S.K. has quite an economy, industrial base and military.

Some of the young people here, with so little experience, seem so firm on their opinions. Well, let me tell you my firm opinion: the US will never abandon S. Korea.


Abandon? Who said abandon?? We don't need troops and bases there to support S.K. We can still send them money and hardware. And if war does break out we can send warplanes quick as you please. War ships would arrive soon enough, and troops could follow. So no, I don't like to see a pull out described as abandonment.


I don't care about political or economic convenience. We are morally bound to defend S. Korea from the North. We made them an implicit, if not express, deal. We told them, "Don't follow the North's example. Don't develop your own nukes, and you'll be under the US umbrella of protection."

That was over 60 years ago. S.K. can stand on her own two feet now. There is no obligation to do anything for S.K. for all eternity.



We've made that bargain, and the S. Koreans have upheld their part. And it's the same implicit bargain that we made with Japan. If we don't keep our deal with S. Korea, then why should Japan, or any other nation, ever trust the US?

Far better reasons already exist not to trust the U.S.!!! But again, that was over half a century ago. Nobody is going to add a pullout now to America's reputation after all we have done for S.K. ! No, we are not now joined at the hip.

And if the US isn't trusted on these bargains, nuclear weapons will spread like fire around the world.

I don't even know where that came from, but I am thinking left field.
 
Of course if there was a war, N. Korea would attack first!

I think its quite likely that South Korea could launch a pre-emptive strike against North Korean nuclear facilities, thus sparking a full scale war.

I also think its quite possible a pre-emptive strike could be launched by S.K. on other grounds as well.

Just as likely I think its fair to say North Korea could also launch a pre-emptive strike for similar reasons, but, the world will just call it an attack, and make sure North Korea loses the semantics war up front, which is bunch of political horse $#!T that just clouds everyone's judgement.

And I am sure that both America and South Korea are quite capable of making excuses and total lies and false flags if someone decides they want a war.

They've spent decades making military threats.

My point exactly. Decades! Sounds to me like all bark and no bite. So while I do consider the Norks to be more of threat, I don't think its THAT much more.
 
It is probably time that US forces moved into Korea on a larger scale. I do sympathize with what the topic creator has said about isolating North Korea however. For North Korea to have avoided that isolation, they would have had to submit to the then demands on North Korea to curb their various actions and intent on the world stage. This is what the US does! With all of its allies and power throughout the globe, they are able to bully a bully to back down, but in doing so, they must force submission. The reality is that when they do it, the only real possible outcome is confrontation. The US must accept that they have a responsibility to meet that confrontation, because they already accepted responsibility for their isolation. This is only going to end one way, unless North Korea miraculously submits to allied nations wishes for them to belong to the world economy and politic. I fear that resentment runs too deep, and there is nought much else an outcome than war as a result.

I am not however saying that the US is responsible for an ensuing war, but it is naive to think that the US is not aware of it being a likely outcome.
 
History has taught (most of us) time and again what happens when there is a power vacuum.

You mean like how Belgium got invaded when it did not have a government for three years?

History DOES NOT teach us what happens when there is a power vacuum. History teaches us about war and works backwards from there, making everything look like a cause of war.

Also, to say the US pulling out of S.K would create a power vacuum assumes the South Koreans are total wimps who can't fend for themselves and that is not correct.
 
Ok so I see some people actually think that there should be MORE troops in North Korea.

I wonder - and go with me on this one.

who is the largest military power in Aisa at the moment = USA
Who is expected to take over the USA as largest military power in Aisia = indo-CHINA

could this be part of some US desire to put troops on the Chinese border, or better yet to draw china into a regional skirmish, damaging the economic growth that will have it leaving the US behind in terms of power, influence and wealth?

also regarding North Korea in general - how sure can we be that it is the way that the MAINSTREAM MEDIA tell us it is?

north-korean-vacation-photos-53.jpg

north-korean-vacation-photos-47.jpg

north-korean-vacation-photos-9.jpg

The problem with uniting North and South Korea is that they have an incompatible economic and sociological system.

In south Korea if you want a house, then you need to get a mortgage, you need to put your self into debt, and then buy a house.
Or you can give a proportion of your wage, to your landlord in rent.

In the north you are given a house by the government,

the south has a very consumer driven culture - not so much in the north eh.

In many ways you could actually say that life in the north is better than life in the south, and for all those naysayers - see how long the quality of life in the USA stays medium (can't say high really can I) - if the entire world and his cousin slapped a trade embargo on the US. Then caused your government to spend vast sums of money on the military.

Also it's worth noting - that the north has ordered it's military not to fire the first shot.

If it starts, it will be started by the south/USA

now that Iraq is done, and Afghanistan is coming to a close,

the military industrial complex needs another war - otherwise they don't make profit - and what does capitalism tell us is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING?

PROFIT.

Roosevelt warned this would happen.
 
"Japan trusts the US military. They know that they simply are in Japan for defensive purposes, and not to make Japan a new colony. Have you been to Japan to talk to the locals about what they think about US forces? <for the record, I am not American, so nobody is under any pressure to lie to me about liking them."

I'm pretty sure I get the truth from both Koreans and Japanese on this issue. I wear on my sleeve the fact that I don't want my country to keep being world policeman. (Heck, we don't even get paid to do it!) Our military is the single biggest discretionary spending item in our national budget. I doubt that's true of Japan or S. Korea.

If any country in the world wants our troops to leave, this US voter and taxpayer is eager to oblige them.

Zorro, I'm stunned that you can't see the nuclear proliferation danger. If the US pulls out of S. Korea or Japan, we are one step removed from defending them because an attack on those countries does not automatically put our own military people and assets at risk. Neighboring hostile powers (China and N. Korea) already have nuclear weapons. So S. Korea and Japan would feel compelled to make up for the lesser US defense by getting their own nuclear weapons.

It's crazy to say that the US wants troops on a border with China! The risk of conflict due to misunderstanding would be considerable. We'd have no reason to do that unless China were threatening to invade S. Korea.
 
I'm pretty sure I get the truth from both Koreans and Japanese on this issue. I wear on my sleeve the fact that I don't want my country to keep being world policeman. (Heck, we don't even get paid to do it!) Our military is the single biggest discretionary spending item in our national budget. I doubt that's true of Japan or S. Korea.
To be fair, Japan pays the US far more than most other countries to host them. They have a very lopsided set up.

And as much as America doesn't get paid to do it, the military is America's biggest welfare program, inventing an industry where there wouldn't be one otherwise. If America really did slash its military budget, thousands and thousands of largely undereducated people would flood into the American economy. Not a comment on Americans in Korea per se, but when considering that America isn't paid for it, that needs to be kept in mind. America needs its massive military and its expenditure at this point.

Japan is the fifth biggest military spender right now (if I remember correctly), don't know about S.Korea. Of course, military spending shouldn't always be considered per capita. The cost of technology and the need for manpower changes at different scales... though I think America way overspends.
 
The issue of nuclear prolifiration is not really that much of an issue - as long as the states are secure and are able to secure their weapons -
(bearing in mind that both the americans and Russians have lost half a dozen nukes each.) - nuclear weapons are literally nuclear options.

last resort.

the isreali defence minister made a pretty scary - yet bang on the money comment.

when asked if he was worried about the Iranians getting a nuclear bomb and using it on israel he replied.

"of course we are not worried, the Iranian people are a sensible people and on the whole so is their government. We know that even if or when the Iranians develop these capabilities they will not use them [nukes] to attack israel, because they have no desire to see their country turned into a glass desert."

I really want to point out there is a big big difference between having a few nukes and the ability to strap them on to a missile and the multi warhead machines of sheer iradication that the true nuclear powers have.

A Russian ICBM (or american) does not contain a nuke. it blasts up to the stratosphere - the payload then activates - dropping on average 15 separate warheads each with their own targets (that can be many thousands of miles apart) with a yield that would make Hiroshima look like a firework.

oh yea - and they have THOUSANDS of these things. not to mention atmospheric emp nukes, neutron bombs that wipe out all life but leave building standing etc.

the closest thing the US has to what most perceive to be a nuclear missile is the nuclear tipped Tomahawk of which (if memory serves correctly) 22 are currently stationed in Japan - the US actually planned to remove these, as a gesture to china, but the Japanese gov. made the strongest of requests to keep them.

In europe we have the NATO strike missions. Germany, Holland, Belgium and many others (including until recently Turkey) all have Nuclear bombs - on use em as you see fit loan from the americans.

German planes, German pilots, flying from German bases, carrying "american" bombs. (a remnant from the cold war)

a couple of nukes and some rocket technology / airforce does not make for a true nuclear power - it does however give those states the ability to guarantee a mass causality retaliation - and thus acts as a guarantee against invasion.

when you can wipe out your enemy and all her allies - with a 100% kill rate in 90 minutes - THEN your in the club.

strategic security (thats what we call it) is an interesting topic, very few truly understand it. Even less understand the large scale infrastructure required to support it.

to give an example - Britain has just earmarked 20bn pounds to keep it's club membership. That money is just for the warheads and missiles, not even including the undetectable subs that carry them.

North Korea mite have nukes, but it is no nuclear power.

Japan putting up patriot (LOOOOOOOOL) missile batteries in tokyo is nothing more than a propaganda exersize.
(mostly because they don't work)

also to stay on topic.

+1 nahadef
cos he's rite
 
Your posts are completely biases, but I think I noticed that before... Hmm.

>

Interesting, Because I just wanted to say the same thing after I saw your replies about China and North Korea.
You consider NK as evil first, then you try to prove this. When you talked about Japan millitary, you were always saying it's Chinese's deeds, then Japanese's reaction.
You may believe CCP hope US pulling out from Japan. And Japan like their staying. When you say this part, I can see you are absolutly not a Japanese, or a Japanese with little knowledge of Japanese history and political knowledge.
1st, There are 2 kinds of voices about US's millitary base inside CCP. Most of CCP consider it's good for the whole world that US's army staying in Japan. You should be aware of that US building base around Senkaku, was because WWII. And a main reason was there was an independent country with the name of Ryukyu. So I myself also think US should stay there, which may disappoint you.
2nd, Chinese never invaded Japan for even 1 time. But Japan has invaded China or Korea nations for 7 times at least. So when you said its Chinese's fault to make Japan increasing there cost of weapons, I think your logic is very interesting.
3rd, You talked about nuclear weapons. You may know there are only 5 countries allowed to own nuclear weapons. (I think no country should have it.) But here my point is you may know Japan's nuclear leakage 2 yrs ago. It is just because Japanese want to make nuclear weapons quickly, so they built too many nuclear power station. They just fool themselves.
4th, I can say you still cannot figure out asian wisdom and logic, at least you are not good enough to be a politician in Japan. Chinese never invaded Japan. Japanese know this. And on Senkaku issue, US refused helping Japanese, even they have a base near that islands. Senkaku islands are not so important. Japanese just want to use this islands to make their economy revival again. Chinese know this surely. American can not figure this out first, but I think they have understood later on. So that's why you see the news that Chinese patrol around the islands 3 days a week, while Japanese patrol around the islands for another 4 days, and American decided to stand out of this. This is just political games. And this is absolutly a long story. Too long to tap.
Finally, Chinese government knows the importance of relationship between C and Japan, never saysbad about Japan. Another thing may disappoint you. I have to say you are brainwashed first, then your posts are biases.
 
You may believe CCP hope US pulling out from Japan.
Never said anything about that. You made that up.
And Japan like their staying. When you say this part, I can see you are absolutly not a Japanese, or a Japanese with little knowledge of Japanese history and political knowledge.
I actually talk to Japanese people. You don't. I live in Japan, you don't. I lived in Ryukyu for a number of years, you didn't. But you can claim to know more about them and their history. Of course, you'd be making things up.
1st, There are 2 kinds of voices about US's millitary base inside CCP. Most of CCP consider it's good for the whole world that US's army staying in Japan. You should be aware of that US building base around Senkaku, was because WWII. And a main reason was there was an independent country with the name of Ryukyu. So I myself also think US should stay there, which may disappoint you.
Ryukyu was claimed by Japan hundreds of years ago. I lived in Ryukyu. And I don't really care what your opinion on them staying or going is, you are making things up.
2nd, Chinese never invaded Japan for even 1 time. But Japan has invaded China or Korea nations for 7 times at least. So when you said its Chinese's fault to make Japan increasing there cost of weapons, I think your logic is very interesting.
You like to say this, but the Yuan Dynasty was a Chinese dynasty. Irrelevant though. Japanese today are not militaristic. They like shopping and resort hotels. Maybe once Chinese people have enough money overall, they won't be so obsessed with a sliver of history and a nationalistic fervor. Anyway, if you want to base all of China's military strategy on the Japan of 80 years ago, well, that's myopic. Get over it. Move on.
3rd, You talked about nuclear weapons. You may know there are only 5 countries allowed to own nuclear weapons. (I think no country should have it.) But here my point is you may know Japan's nuclear leakage 2 yrs ago. It is just because Japanese want to make nuclear weapons quickly, so they built too many nuclear power station. They just fool themselves.
When they start making weapons, you'll have a point. Until then, you are making things up.
4th, I can say you still cannot figure out asian wisdom and logic, at least you are not good enough to be a politician in Japan. Chinese never invaded Japan. Japanese know this. And on Senkaku issue, US refused helping Japanese, even they have a base near that islands. Senkaku islands are not so important. Japanese just want to use this islands to make their economy revival again. Chinese know this surely. American can not figure this out first, but I think they have understood later on. So that's why you see the news that Chinese patrol around the islands 3 days a week, while Japanese patrol around the islands for another 4 days, and American decided to stand out of this. This is just political games. And this is absolutly a long story. Too long to tap.
America really doesn't want to start fights with China. Most countries don't. That's why Taiwan isn't in the U.N., and why America is silent on Senkaku.
Finally, Chinese government knows the importance of relationship between C and Japan, never saysbad about Japan. Another thing may disappoint you. I have to say you are brainwashed first, then your posts are biases.
No, I don't believe that. The government doesn't have to directly say things to have them said (American politics does the same thing). The CCP controls a lot of what is and isn't said in the popular culture (try talking about free Taiwan or Tibet). Anti-Japanese talk is allowed, to what ever extent. You can call it brainwashed, but everybody saw the riots last year. Protest is not allowed in China, so why was anti-Japanese protest allowed? The CCP.
You make way too much stuff up. You have some facts straight, like Japan invaded China before, but your conclusions are divorced from reality. It's easy to see you haven't lived in Japan.
 
Ryukyu was claimed by Japan hundreds of years ago. I lived in Ryukyu. And I don't really care what your opinion on them staying or going is, you are making things up.
.
Ryukyu Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When Ryukyu government was formally annexed by Japan in 1879, Ryukyu's king family members kneed down in front of the house of Chinese prime minister for 3 days, requiring JUSTIFY and help from Chinese government.
You really know nothing about asian history and situation now. And you just have a bias view about me, CCP as you mentioned.
America really doesn't want to start fights with China.
Totally biased when you say this. It seems like you say Chinese want to fight with American. Chinese and American keeps a good relationship for the most of past 70 yrs. Two countries are opponents now, maybe, but never enemy. And it is Japanese prime to provoke a war between China and America for the moment. That's why their prime flew to WDC and ask Obama in face if they can help Japanese on Senkaku issue. Obama refused this directly is because they donot want to be played by this, not because they are afraid of Chinese or sth like this. So on North Korea issue, this is a different thing, US sends help and army to Korea directly.
And it's a little childish when you say I make things up and you live in Japan when you have nothing to prove.
 
Never said anything about that. You made that up.

You like to say this, but the Yuan Dynasty was a Chinese dynasty. Irrelevant though. Japanese today are not militaristic. They like shopping and resort hotels. Maybe once Chinese people have enough money overall, they won't be so obsessed with a sliver of history and a nationalistic fervor. Anyway, if you want to base all of China's military strategy on the Japan of 80 years ago, well, that's myopic. Get over it. Move on.
So how can you get the conclution about Chinese today are militraistic, while Japanese are not? Japan's prime minister said to the whole world recently in America: JAP IS BACK.
You may not understand this as some so called foreigner living in Okinawa.
For 1500 yrs long in Japanese history, the only honor thing they can be back is back to their NAZY ERA.
Their nazy deeds hurted not only Chinese, but also US and others. That's also a reason why they donot get support from US on Senkaku issue. President Roosevelt once asked Taiwan leader Chiang Kai-shek if Taiwan want the whole Ryukyu area back to China when WWII ends. So you should know Japan is the one taking Chinese's lands, and they still try to consider Chinese as enemy.(Senkaku is islands in south of Ryukyu and near to Taiwan.)While Chinese only want Senkaku back, not the whole part of Ryukyu. Is it naive to still blame Chinese?
Again, there are also riots aiming to Chinese in Japan.
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to say that more than 5 countries have nuclear weapons.

In the asian region you have - China, Russia, India, Pakistan, DPRK and sudo-Japan

China and Russia are full nuclear powers.
India and Pakistan have static capabilities
DPRK has a few units
Japan is considered a sudo nuclear power, because they have the technology to build one. Including many reactors that can be switched over to fast breeder reactors with the press of a button - Japan could have several nukes ready in 3-12 months.
 
Back
Top Bottom