Japan Is No Threat, Just A Strong Power

[qwertyu]

Oh, incidentally, the Japanese 60 year old chemical weapons are STILL killing unsuspecting rural Chinese today, some 2000 of them since the war ended, as reported. Just peanuts, I suppose.

Greetings to the others, Void, Bossel, lexico, etc. I'm off, really important stuff beckons, you know, like looking up "favourite Commie phrases" such as "global hegemony", dusting my Mao's Little Red Book and oiling the thought-control machine. Have fun!

 

[Bramicus]

Kindly point out how [citing] Japan's war records = hate-mongering

I think anyone who starts at the top of this thread and reads all of your posts will see that you are very negative about Japan, and what's more, although you started by talking about the things (you are critical about) that Japan is supposedly doing today, in order to try to show how bad they are now (nationalistic, militaristic, whatever) you also continually bring up the bad things that the militaristic World War II government of Japan (which ceased to exist at the end of that war) did over 60 years ago! The evidence is right above us; I'll leave it to the reader to decide whether that's so or not.

Kindly point out [where] in any of my posts I have proposed to "declare war" on the Axis Powers because of "new evidence" of 1944 "atrocities".

Of course you didn't. Come on, you know English well enough to see -- and if you are honest you'll admit that it's obvious -- that I'm making an analogy to show how ridiculous it would be to base our opinions of countries as they are today, on what they did during World War II.

Accuracy please, it's "80 to130". "Harmless"? It's relative isn't it? I dunno, how many have the Americans and Russians got?

To be absolutely accurate: bazillions.

Ops, that should be "80-130" not "80 to 130", before I get dragged through the mud for this "misrepresentation".

Don't worry, I'm not the one who drags people through the mud for mistakenly putting in the wrong word before correcting it.

 

[lexico]

in order to try to show how bad they are now (nationalistic, militaristic, whatever)...also continually bring up the bad things that the militaristic World War II government of Japan ... did over 60 years ago!

I believe it was Chancellor Kohl who declared that Nazi Germany's responsibility for the crimes against humanity and the Jewish people in particular is without expiration. 60 years or 600; does the fact ever go away ? Esp. when minimalist-denialist ideas getting more popular (exceeding 50% now in the 47 school districts ?), the past, its interpretation, and current gov'tal behavior are all asking for heightened scrutinization.

It's amazing to observe revisionist ideas being put forth by the Japanese-US alliance and those who promote revisionism in all its varied forms out of self-service. Understanding there is great monies and business interests involved, historical accuracy should benefit, not damage peaceful coexistence. But of course alarmist voices from the alliance are sure to find an audience in the petroleum tanker route, and there will be great profit-sharing along the black path of crude oil. But we don't need all this repulsive propaganda to understand that; so let's not insult each other.

 

[Bramicus]

I believe it was Chancellor Kohl who declared that Nazi Germany's responsibility for the crimes against humanity and the Jewish people in particular is without expiration. 60 years or 600; does the fact ever go away?

I quite agree with you that Nazi Germany's responsibility will never go away, just as the guilt of the Japanese government of 1945 and before will also never go away. But that doesn't mean that the German and Japanese people who are alive now (but were not alive, and/or didn't have any power back then), and their present governments which were not even in existence back then, should continue to be held responsible -- they should not be.

However, although you didn't say this just now, I know that you believe, as I do, that the fact that these things happened should never be pushed under the rug. We must always remember that they happened, why they happened, and how they happened. But the reason we should remember these things is not so that we can use it to promote dislike or animosity against the peoples of those countries today. The reason we should never forget them is so that we might learn the lessons of history and make sure that things like that never happen again. (I don't really understand the rest of what you wrote in that paragraph, about minimalist-denial, etc., but if you mean that there are people who are denying it happened, I agree with you they should not.)

It's amazing to observe revisionist ideas being put forth by the Japanese-US alliance and those who promote revisionism in all its varied forms ﾂ… we don't need all this repulsive propaganda to understand that; so let's not insult each other.

I'm certainly no friend of revisionism. But the "alarmist voices" from America/Japan you speak of... I thought this thread was about whether Japan is now a threat? In other words, I'm addressing the alarmist voices from the other side.

 

[Bramicus]

Z: The fish in the water are happy.
H: How do you know ? You're not fish.
Z: How do you know I don't ? You're not me.
H: True I am not you, and I cannot know.
Likewise, I know you're not, therefore I know you don't.
Z: You asked me how I knew implying you already knew I knew.

Hey, that sounds a lot like the kind of pointless bickering over word-parsing that was going on earlier in this thread, doesn't it?

 

[lexico]

Hey, that sounds a lot like the kind of pointless bickering over word-parsing that was going on earlier in this thread, doesn't it?

It sure does, Bramicus. And that conversation happened around 2400 years ago, plus no one got killed over whether the fish was happy or whether who knew what or didn't know.

It appears that we on this thread, although in general agreement as to the specific historical events of Imperial Japan's involvement in the region, still hold widely varying views on historical responsibility. According to Blaise Pascal identity of an idividual relies on the continuity of memory; legal responsibility of the individual begins with legal age and ends with death or insanity.

Extending the Pascalian model of individual identity to the modern state, I believe a change of government does not constitute death or condemnation to a mental asylum. Even after change of gevernment, Japan still carries on its identity regardless of name or ideology. The birth of modern Japan in 1952 was not the birth of a new country but a continuation of Japan in which the national identity was preserved. Hence war time responsibility (sensou sekinin ﾂ戰ﾃ?ﾂ･ﾂ静凪?戮) should be carried over by the current gov't.

To this must be added post-war responsibility (sengo sekinin ﾂ戰ﾅ津｣ﾂ静凪?戮) which refers to any further damages caused by the laxity of modern Japan in taking care of Imperial Japan's damages to other countries and their people. One notable example would be the on-going Chinese civilian casualties from IJ's WWII chemical warheads still left unremoved. The detoxification plants are still under costruction, and the processed toxic wastes are planned to be dumped into the Tuman(Tumen) River flowing into the Sea of Chosen (N.K) Eastern Sea (S.Korea) Sea of Japan (Japan.)

That Japan has so late in its responsibility in this particular case tells how reluctant Japan has been in clearing up its not-so-honorable past. Those who criticize Japan and lash out at the moral/legal laxity thereof are actually helping Japan to come clean with its past ...not for the sake of endless criticism.

 

[Bramicus]

Extending the Pascalian model of individual identity to the modern state, I believe a change of government does not constitute death or condemnation to a mental asylum. Even after change of gevernment, Japan still carries on its identity regardless of name or ideology. The birth of modern Japan in 1952 was not the birth of a new country but a continuation of Japan in which the national identity was preserved. Hence war time responsibility ﾂ… should be carried over by the current gov't.

To this must be added post-war responsibility ﾂ….

I think it depends on whether we're talking criminal responsibility (which in this case means guilt, blame, and punishment), or civil liability (which in this case means a responsibility to repair damage done). When it comes to the responsibility of succeeding generations, there are two basic original approaches: the Code of Hammurabi, and Mosaic law

Hammurabi's Code: If a poorly built house causes the death of a son of the owner of the house, then the son of the builder is put to death. (Sect. 230)

Mosaic Law: "Fathers should not be put to death on account of children, and children should not be put to death on account of fathers." (Deut. 24:16)

In these matters, I go with the spirit of the Mosaic law. In civil matters, which analogously in this situation means undoing the damage of past actions by earlier governments of a country by paying to remove unexploded bombs, poison gas factory waste, etc., succeeding governments should bear a responsibility toward making good, just as the son of a man who had a debt should pay that debt out of the proceeds of his father's estate.

However, in criminal matters, which analogously in this situation means whether the citizens of one country should cast blame and/or dislike and/or impugn the motives or the morals of the citizens of another country, or seek to punish them, for the crimes of their ancestors, that should not carry forward to succeeding generations or succeeding governments. Extending the Pascalian model as you describe above makes sense when it comes to accepting a responsibility for making good the injuries of the past, but it should not be applied when it has to do with casting blame or guilt, or seeking punishment for the crimes of preceding governments, because in democratic forms of government the government is really only a representative of the living people of the country. To carry blame or guilt forward like that would be to damn the children for the sins of the fathers, which would conflict with the concept you mentioned wherein the legal responsibility of the individual ends with death or insanity, as well as conflicting with the spirit of Mosaic law.

Of course, that is not to say that people should not be held accountable for the things they themselves actually do -- they should be -- but that is another matter.

 

[Void]

originally posted by Bramicus
Once Iran completes its goal of developing nuclear weapons, those fanatics will have the ability to obtain a nuclear weapon.
(...)
As far as I can see, the only ones trying to conquer other countries for
"global hegemony" (a favorite Communist Party phrase) today are Islamist fundamentalists.

originally posted by qwertyu
Americans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Germans, are all EQUALLY capable of the atrocities of torture, of using terrible weapons of horror and mass destruction, of war crimes and mass slaughter.

Forgive me, Bramicus, but aren`t you being, in a way, prejudged about islamic countries and Iran in particular. If to look at Qwertyu`s idea at a little different angle. I read recently that there exit such organization as "Anti-Imperialist International Brigade, NIPPON SEKIGUN; NIHON SEKIGUN", which is also can be considered fanatical, and even more they had a goal of performing "world revolutional war". Many countries (not only islamic) have such organizations. And then it is more likely that European countries, Japan, US, China and Russia are of bigger threat, because they have technologies and nuclear weapons right at hand. Once a while we had a lot of blabbing around the case of "AUM Senrikyo" (sp?), though it was not case of mass destruction it showed what can be done in civilised country. Maybe, it would be much better to pay attention to what is going on at our homes as well?

As for "global hegemony" of Islamist fundamentalists, there, certainly, can be found bunch of countries that will easily point to another hegemony taking place: "hegemony of the west/ anglo-saxonian hegenomy/or US hegemony". And those countries are non-islamic, islamic and fundamentalists. But, yet, can one with the same easiness say that they are all wrong?

originally posted by Bramicus
I quite agree with you that Nazi Germany's responsibility will never go away,
just as the guilt of the Japanese government of 1945 and before will also never go away. But that doesn't mean that the German and Japanese people who are alive now (but were not alive, and/or didn't have any power back then), and their present governments which were not even in existence back then, should continue to be held responsible -- they should not be.
...
The reason we should never forget them is so that we might learn the lessons of history and make sure that things like that never happen again.

I once read in some book: "There is no escape, we pay for the violence of our ancestors". Younger generation are not responsible for the sins theit fathers commited, but as you said we are responsible for keeping the records of "what" and "how" happend. As time goes by the only source we can learn the lessons of the history - are the schoolbooks of all sorts. But if the history depicted there was carefully revized and wiped out what will we learn from them? We live in a world of not single individuals, but in a world of societies and states. The government sets the course of the state and also designs its educational system.
Yeah, government is only a representative of the living people of the country... in democratic forms... but has anyone seen true democracy?
When gov-t acts undemocratic-like does it also represents all the masses of the people and does it listen to them?... but, i guess, this is off-topic

 

[Bramicus]

Forgive me, Bramicus, but aren`t you being, in a way, prejudged about islamic countries and Iran in particular.

That statement makes me believe that you are confusing the words Islamist and Islamic. The difference between those two words is essentially the same as the difference between the words Crusader and Christian. Like the Crusaders of old, today's Islamist fundamentalists are bent on spreading their theology through whatever means necessary, including violence, and imposing sharia, Islamic law, first across the entire Middle East (as the ancient Crusaders tried to with Christianity), and then throughout the entire world. So when I say Islamist fundamentalists I'm not talking about Muslims in general, or Islamic fundamentalists in general for that matter, any more than I would be talking about all of today's Christians if I said Crusaders. There are plenty of enlightened Islamic organizations that oppose not Islamic, but Islamist fundamentalism.

As for Iran, I think the people of Iran are great, but the current government has been de facto at war with America for the past quarter-century, and has supported Islamist terrorist organizations.

Younger generation are not responsible for the sins theit fathers commited, but as you said we are responsible for keeping the records of "what" and "how" happend. As time goes by the only source we can learn the lessons of the history - are the schoolbooks of all sorts. But if the history depicted there was carefully revized and wiped out what will we learn from them?

I think that's pretty much what I was saying: we cannot afford to forget history, and we must teach what happened and teach the lessons of history, but we must not blame human beings who did not themselves commit war crimes, just because their fathers did.

 

[Void]

i know, that i am sort of repeating your (and many others`) statment. That`s not exactly what i am emphasizing. But about this

but we must not blame human beings who did not themselves commit war crimes, just because their fathers did.

Did anyone here blamed 'the sons' for the 'sins of the fathers'?
Most of the times it is referenced to "Japan", which is "state" and which is as state (represented by government) bears certain responsibility, and not only before its own state. The govermnent, in one way, is an abstract concept, but in another it is represented by people. And these people in their turn are committing crime - changing the history to fit their own goals and ideas.

This is JRef forum, that`s why there are many talks about Japan. With due efforts i could find quite a number of forums where people blame Russia, claiming that it does exactly the same thing with history... so do many other countries... Well, we can deal with the "government" and "state" as ideal (not in the meaning of perfecton, btw) concepts, but then we also have to deal with another problem: people which live in state very often believe what
their gov-t is saying, because they believe that this gov-t truly represents their interests. But this is most of the times far from being true. History is very tricky, bend it a little and you might see the rifle firing for the second time (WWI and WWII are live examples)

-----------------------

That statement makes me believe that you are confusing the words Islamist and Islamic. The difference between those two words is essentially the same as the difference between the words Crusader and Christian.

OK, let it be so. Though, i thought that -ist meant just a 'person', and after staring at 3 pages of the dictionary
Definition of Islamist | Dictionary.com
Definition of Islamism | Dictionary.com
Definition of Islam | Dictionary.com
i still think that the negativity into the meaning of the word brought by modern affairs, but not by the heart of Islam

"Whatever means neccessary", huh... Overt violence is indeed scary and unjustified. Christianity already lived through this stage, but it certaily didn`t abolish the idea of spreading its ideology. It is like a latent form of desease still moving around. Just wander what happens when two viruses collide, especially, when one of them are weaker but is almost grown into the body`s immune system

 

[ranko]

For Bramicus , you also confuse the country flag and your nationality outlined in the profile.

You hang the country flag : Canada and Nationality : USA

Fun.

 

[Void]

For Ranko, like he couldn`t be residing currently in Canada because of job or for some other reasons? ne? If i`ll move to China should i change nationality for: Chinese?
Fun.

if you look closely at other members` profiles you`ll see that flag shows the country of residence. You are free to put any nationality you want, or not to put any. Enjoy the forum

 

[Bramicus]

Void is right, Ranko. The forum always automatically puts the flag of the country of residence, which is where I am staying currently as it says in my profile. I will be moving very soon because my work here is ending, to another country for a short-term task, and then the flag will change from Canada's to some other flag. But my nationality remains USA, as it shows.

 

[Bramicus]

i thought that -ist meant just a 'person', and after staring at 3 pages of the dictionary
Definition of Islamist | Dictionary.com
Definition of Islamism | Dictionary.com
Definition of Islam | Dictionary.com
i still think that the negativity into the meaning of the word brought by modern affairs, but not by the heart of Islam

I will post here each main definition from the dictionary links you gave, and you (and others) can see that it is as I said.

Islamic: Adjective of Islam: A monotheistic religion characterized by the acceptance of the doctrine of submission to God and to Muhammad as the chief and last prophet of God.

Islamist: Adjective of Islamism: An Islamic revivalist movement, often characterized by moral conservatism, literalism, and the attempt to implement Islamic values in all spheres of life. (Emphasis added.)

Islamist fundamentalism -- also known as Islamofascism -- attempts to implement what they consider to be Islamic values, not only in all spheres of life, but in all areas of the world. Aside from the fact that it is a different religion they are trying to impose on the entire world, they are exactly like the militant Crusaders were.

 

[Bramicus]

Void, where in the Russian Federation do you live? One of my grandparents was born in Russia, one in the Ukraine, one in Poland, and one in Lithuania. They all met and married in America.

 

[Void]

Void, where in the Russian Federation do you live? One of my grandparents was born in Russia, one in the Ukraine, one in Poland, and one in Lithuania. They all met and married in America.

right in the middle - Western Siberia

 

[Bramicus]

right in the middle - Western Siberia

Wow - east of the Urals? I don't know anyone who's ever been to that area. What's it like? Are there any webpages with photos?

 

[bossel]

Islamist fundamentalism -- also known as Islamofascism -- attempts to implement what they consider to be Islamic values, not only in all spheres of life, but in all areas of the world. Aside from the fact that it is a different religion they are trying to impose on the entire world, they are exactly like the militant Crusaders were.

AFAIK, the term islamofascism is mainly used by a certain Christian-conservative faction of society. It's more make-belief than anything else. Interestingly used by the very same people who want to impose their Christian values on the world. Should we call that christofascism?

That Japan has so late in its responsibility in this particular case tells how reluctant Japan has been in clearing up its not-so-honorable past. Those who criticize Japan and lash out at the moral/legal laxity thereof are actually helping Japan to come clean with its past ...not for the sake of endless criticism.

Well said, although in a number of cases the criticism is a bit exaggerated.

 

[Bramicus]

AFAIK, the term islamofascism is mainly used by a certain Christian-conservative faction of society. It's more make-belief than anything else.

I'm so glad to find out that the atrocities carried out on 9/11 were just a figment of my imagination.

Interestingly used by the very same people who want to impose their Christian values on the world. Should we call that christofascism?

If a Crusader Christian fundamentalist group starts committing terrorist acts that murder hundreds and thousands of people, in an attempt to impose a theocratic government on the entire world in which society would be regulated under Christian theocratic law and non-Christians would be tolerated only as a subjugated people who are treated as second-class citizens and must pay a special tax to show that they acknowledge their subjugation, then yes, we should certainly call that Christofascism!

 

[Void]

Wow - east of the Urals? I don't know anyone who's ever been to that area. What's it like? Are there any webpages with photos?

https://jref.com/showthread.php?p=228897&posted=1#post228897
number 16

 

[Maciamo]

I'm so glad to find out that the atrocities carried out on 9/11 were just a figment of my imagination.

If a Crusader Christian fundamentalist group starts committing terrorist acts that murder hundreds and thousands of people, in an attempt to impose a theocratic government on the entire world in which society would be regulated under Christian theocratic law and non-Christians would be tolerated only as a subjugated people who are treated as second-class citizens and must pay a special tax to show that they acknowledge their subjugation, then yes, we should certainly call that Christofascism!

Bramicus, fascism does not equal terrorism. Fascist Italy was not a terrorist state. Terrorists are almost never fascists, although both may be political or religious extremists. More info on fascim on Wikipedia

 

[Void]

I don`t see anything threatening in the sentence you`ve underlined, Bramicus.
It was like this since the birth of Islam (at least in my books), but then there
were some changes (as usuall with humans, inevitable question who shall inherit the power ) and after first secession three branches emerged. Each of them later gave birth to various sects (pretty much like in Christianity, heh)
There are two main branches now, according to wiki (sorry, hadn`t much time
to dig over other english sourses), Sunni and Shi`a. Among both of them there are traditionalists and modernists. Religion is a subject to change as time passes and world & knowledge evolve.

Religion is not a threat by itself. The problem is that people use it to cover
their own not so good intentions. For the west it`s more safe to point at the
religion and say: "look, people, fundamental islam is dangerous! soho!" it`s much more safe than to let people look carefully and find the roots of the problem. They are too embarassing for the west. Almost the same for muslim countries of the Middle East with only difference: they have to exaggerate the significance of these roots to fuel up despair and foster hatred among those who are not educated enough to ask their own and proper questions, and some of them are smart and cynical enough to make big money on their fellows` hatred
That`s the vicious circle of double standards widely accepted in politics of both worlds - western and arabian - you can get use of terrorism in both ways: as a tool or as a baddie to scare children and withdraw attention from yourself

If a Crusader Christian fundamentalist group starts committing terrorist acts that murder hundreds and thousands of people, in an attempt to impose a theocratic government on the entire world in which society would be regulated under Christian theocratic law and non-Christians would be tolerated only as a subjugated people who are treated as second-class citizens and must pay a special tax to show that they acknowledge their
subjugation, then yes, we should certainly call that Christofascism!

Funny situation. Conflict between Russia nad Latvia, for example. I do admit they have all the right to feel anger fro being deprived of independence after WWII. But you know what is interesting? The status of 'non-citizen' for Russian people living there, this status legally deprive them of many human rights. This is a christian country and this is what the EU tries not to notice * smirk *
Another thing, about religion. We have few of them, major - orthodox christianity, islam, buddism, got some catholics and others not that numerous. When USSR came to end and boundaries were open a bunch of protestant confessions rushed here and in former Soviet republics (some of them are islamic, btw). What made them think that they are better than what we`ve got? If you can`t rule by the means of power (Crusades) anymore then do it in a stealth way, huh?
From my friend`s memories. What interest had Catholic church in Kazachstan? They send a priest there (in a capital), in a while this state wasn`t considered that significant (or smth else) and he was moved into Armenia.
There was a thread somewhere about missionairies in Japan.
All this staff makes me snort with sarcasm when they babble about islamists threat. When the body is healthy it can withstand the virus, but when it is rotten and spoiled the rest of population - what does it expect?

 

[Bramicus]

Bramicus, fascism does not equal terrorism.

Of course you're right, they're two different things. But it's perfectly possible for a group of terrorists to be trying to impose an essentially fascist society, whether based on secular or religious totalitarianism. In that case they're both terrorists and fascists.

 

[Bramicus]

Pictures of Western Siberia

Thanks for the pictures! The forests, birds, and flowers look beautiful -- and the food looks yummy. And such giant mushrooms!!!

Too bad about the gnats though.

 

[bossel]

I'm so glad to find out that the atrocities carried out on 9/11 were just a figment of my imagination.

You're sure you read what I wrote? Interesting interpretation, but sadly only remotely related to the question of islamofascism. The attacks of 9/11 were not an attempt to achieve Islamic world domination. They were directed specifically against what many Islamists recognise as the attempt of the (christofascist?) US to achieve world domination, esp. against the presence of the US in the Middle East. The US (& its allies) are seen as modern crusaders.

There was some kind of order (Al Qaida calls it a fatwa, though it isn't really) given in 1998 which explains it (my own translation from German):
"The order (fatwa?) to kill the Americans & their allies is an individual responsibility of every Muslim who is able to do so, in every country in which it is possible. [The aim is] to liberate the Al-Aqsa-Mosque [in Jerusalem] & the sacred places [in Mekka] & to force their armies to leave every Muslim territory, beaten & incapable to [furthermore] threaten Muslims."

If a Crusader Christian fundamentalist group starts committing terrorist acts that murder hundreds and thousands of people

Pretty much sounds as if you talk of the US government.