What's new

Welcome to Japan Reference (JREF) - the community for all Things Japanese.

Join Today! It is fast, simple, and FREE!

Koizumi wants an army?

PaulTB

Manga Psychic
Joined
22 Jan 2004
Messages
2,187
Reaction score
57
Eisuke said:
The United States wants Japan to be a Britain of the Far East which means helping and supporting the USA militarily when needed.
I think the favoured word is "Poodle".
 
Joined
18 Jan 2005
Messages
10,196
Reaction score
655
I recommend South Korea to Britain of the Far East.
Rather than reinforcement of an army of Japan, the Japanese government thinks that I want you to reinforce the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Since the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is incompetent.
(gai munoushou)
However, the Self-Defense Forces should develop the interception system of a continent ballistic missile early.
 

Aaron Tan

A gamer in Auckland
Joined
25 Apr 2005
Messages
24
Reaction score
1
any different~any different~any different~any different~any different~any different~any different~
 

Eisuke

先輩
Joined
28 Nov 2003
Messages
274
Reaction score
6
PaulTB said:
I think the favoured word is "Poodle".

Here is information about that:

From their perspective, Britain is the United States' closest ally in Europe and Japan is its closest ally in Asia. But unlike Britain, Japan still cannot fully be involved in US military operations. Article 9 of the Japanese constitution prohibits the use of force as a means of settling international disputes, and the SDF is authorized to fight only if Japan itself is invaded, and then only on Japanese territory or in the surrounding sea and air. For this reason, Japanese troops were deployed to Samawah, a southern Iraqi city, which the Japanese government claims as non-combat zone, strictly on a "humanitarian" mission. The 2003 Special Measures Law stipulates that the SDF can only be sent to areas where hostilities are not under way. To send troops into a combat zone would violate this law.

Article 9 of the constitution, the "war-renouncing" provision, states:
1) Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of aggression of the state will not be recognized.
US officials appear to welcome a change in this state of military affairs in Japan and then seek a heightened level of the US-Japan alliance in the future - to parallel the US-British alliance. Washington has urged Tokyo to amend Article 9 and to authorize the right to collective self-defense. (Japan's current official stance is that it has this right, but cannot invoke it under the current constitution.) US military planners clearly want Tokyo to expand the SDF's activities to support US-led operations in Asia and elsewhere in the future. They may want to capitalize on the close personal ties between Bush and Koizumi to achieve their political and military ends.


This idea of transforming Japan into "Britain of the Far East" is nothing new. Richard Armitage, the former US deputy secretary of state, who has extensive knowledge of Japan, once expressed this idea in a special report for the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University (in Washington, DC): This report has since been commonly known as the Armitage Report, referring to Japan as the "Britain of the Far East". Many senior officials have adopted that concept and used the expression. Michael Green, the current National Security Council senior director for Asian affairs, was a member of the Armitage group. On October 11, 2000, the study group led by Armitage, then president of Armitage Associates, said, "We see the special relationship between the United States and Great Britain as a model for the [US-Japan] alliance."

The rest of the article can be found here: atimes.com
 

Kama

Okama XD
Joined
10 Mar 2004
Messages
398
Reaction score
6
Hiroshi66 said:
Wow, Poland? I love Poland. Have studied it for a long time. What about Austria? They've invaded your territory just as much as the Russians and the Germans have.

In any case.. I don't think not allowing countries to bear arms will prevent a war from happening. If a country is bent on war, THEY ARE BENT ON WAR. If Germany wants to invade France, they will do so and fight a guerilla war. Or they will smuggle weapons in. If a country has a goal, it will achieve it no matter what. Its the fact that they don't want to commit war.

I wans't here for a long time. :D Of course, Austria also invaded our country. But it was deeper in the history, Polish people generally remember only about IIWW so that means Germany and Russia.
 

qwertyu

Underdogs Unite!
Joined
5 May 2005
Messages
120
Reaction score
14
No. I doubt that there are certain German schoolteachers and instructors which either glorify or outright deny the dark Nazi past. Most don't, but I am sure there have been cases over the years. Has everybody attacked Germany and wanted them to not have their own army? This time, Japan shouldn't be different from anybody else. Even if there are certain instructors and writers denying the past, does that mean that Japan can't have a future?

You really need to update your knowledge about how Germany and Japan GREATLY differ in the way they address their WWII past. In Germany, it is a CRIME to deny/whitewash the Holocaust or Nazi atrocities. In Japan, the top politicians like Ishihara and lots of rightwing groups supported by big businesses do that with impunity. Most Japanese highschool textbooks don't even go into much detail about WWII, whereas every German child was taught in great length about the Holocaust. No German politician would ever worship Hitler and other top Nazis. The Germans will give them hell.

Japan has not done even a fraction of what Germany did to atone for WWII wrongs and to build up a relationship of trust with its neighbours.
 

qwertyu

Underdogs Unite!
Joined
5 May 2005
Messages
120
Reaction score
14
Erm...did Britain also invade its neighbours 60 years ago on a racist agenda and insist to this day that they did it in self-defense and to liberate and modernise inferior Continentals?

Come on, drop the whole pretense about the new arms build-up. Koizumi didn't even bother to pretend. The only answer is of course China. The US and Japan think that they need to counter China, but Japan, while happy to play sidekick, should also think about how this might ring alarm bells among its former victims in Asia. They might just get their act together and counter Japan.
 

Eisuke

先輩
Joined
28 Nov 2003
Messages
274
Reaction score
6
Quote from a article:

I've said it before and I'll say it again - it's been 68 years since the Japanese began their brutal quest of conquering Asia and regardless of what they print or don't print in their textbooks, Japan is not the same country that it was back then and they have every right to operate and maintain a credible military force that serves to secure and protect their interests just as every other sovereign country does.

If it weren't for bullying neighbors like China and North Korea that keep pushing the envelope, perhaps Japan wouldn't feel such a strong need to remilitarize.

WATCHINGCHINA.COM - Make an offer on this domain on Bido
 

lexico

Sempai
Joined
22 Dec 2004
Messages
2,343
Reaction score
153
No Japan Ruled Itself Out of the Game

Let me draw an example of an extreme sex offender. It's an example to help some of you to jump to any conclusion.

A compulsive sex offender was given the option of castration, and he accepted over perhaps 20 years in prison. For the price he paid by having his male member dismembered, his period of incarceration was drastically reduced, having removed his main means of offense.

This is in close parallel to Japan. I am not convinced that Japan has reformed itself. The mere fact that there are such active pro-militarist members for Japan on this peace-loving forum is one strong piece of evidence. Another would be the revival of the Yasukuni shrine in 1978 and the election of the militarist party into power in 1992. That is sure proof that the militarist elements in Japanese society have taken up the majority of the population in the voting age bracket since the late 1970's to the present to say the least.

Therefore if anyone asks me, I say the 'castration of Japan' is still effective and should stay that way for all forseeable future.

It was on this term that Japan glided over a large scale excecution of the aggressive elements within it, that Japan was reinvited into the international community. You have the national guards; even that is too much freedom for a nation incapable of preventing the rise of a violent power, curbing the extent of violence during the aggression, and the reemergence of yet another militant power seeking entity scheming to re-arm for a renewed militarist, expansionist, aggressive Japan in the furture.
 
Last edited:

qwertyu

Underdogs Unite!
Joined
5 May 2005
Messages
120
Reaction score
14
First, why don't you post your own opinions instead of quoting from others?

and regardless of what they print or don't print in their textbooks, Japan is not the same country that it was back then

It is not the same country because it doesn't have the same military capability but a large and powerful segment of Japanese society and Japan's top politicians have maintained the SAME IDEOLOGY - that the JA were "liberating" and modernizing backward Asians, that what Japan did was in self-defense and nothing worse than the Western Imperialists, that it is entitled to the islands it seized from Korea and China and China is treated as a threat and enemy. Plus, Japan never committed any atrocities and the victims are all liars.

With an attitude like that, what would it be like for Japan to have the same military offensive strength to invade others?

and they have every right to operate and maintain a credible military force that serves to secure and protect their interests just as every other sovereign country does.

Japan can rearm, but then so should its former victims. There'll be an arms race, unfortunately. And if they are smart, the Asian continental countries should also consider a defense pact much like Nato. This helps to keep eachother in check. I don't think the US will like it, but then the Asians should look out for themselves.

If it weren't for bullying neighbors like China and North Korea that keep pushing the envelope, perhaps Japan wouldn't feel such a strong need to remilitarize.

How did Korea and China "bully" Japan? Is asking Japan to stop worshipping its war criminals who killed millions bullying? Is it too much to ask Japan to respect shared history?

This comes across as cold-blooded.

It is the other way round, Japan bullied China and Korea 60 yrs ago, and continues to do it by lying about history and aggressively claiming their territory.
 

lexico

Sempai
Joined
22 Dec 2004
Messages
2,343
Reaction score
153
Please comment, Eisuke.

qwertyu said:
First, why don't you post your own opinions instead of quoting from others ?
Hello. If I may butt in, did he really quote anything ?
I think Eisuke wants to say something meaningful, but either
1) doesn't want the responsibility arising from making any specific remark
2) can have an easy retort by baiting somebody to read into his vague reference as seems fitting his context. But if someone makes a specific comment on it he technically reserves the right to say, "did I say that ?"
3) doesn't have much detail to offer save his desire to portray the image of a passionate conservative.
Eisuke said:
and regardless of what they print or don't print in their textbooks, Japan is not the same country that it was back then
Eisuke, please comment on the following points if you want to avoid criticisms of 1), 2) or 3).
qwertyu said:
It is not the same country because it doesn't have the same military capability but a large and powerful segment of Japanese society and Japan's top politicians have maintained the SAME IDEOLOGY
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
that the JA were "liberating" and modernizing backward Asians
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
that what Japan did was in self-defense
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
that what Japan did was nothing worse than the Western Imperialists
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
that it is entitled to the islands it seized from Korea and China
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
that China is a threat and enemy.
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
Japan never committed any atrocities
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
the victims are all liars.
Prove it please, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
With an attitude like that, what would it be like for Japan to have the same military offensive strength to invade others?
Please comment, Eisuke.
Eisuke said:
they (the Japanese) have every right to operate and maintain a credible military force that serves to secure and protect their interests just as every other sovereign country does.
Prove that they are credible, meaning trustworthy. Their directive still comes from the Emperor, correct ? Has your emperor made a declaration of timeless peace and non-agression ? What are the legal and administrative safeguards that will absolutely prevent any future aggression outside Japanese territory whether in the offensive or in defence of Japan or any other ?
qwertyu said:
(if) Japan can rearm, but then so should its former victims. There'll be an arms race, unfortunately.
In the absence of certainty of Japanese non-agression, would you be responsible for such an arms race due to the re-arming of Japan ? Please comment.
qwertyu said:
the Asian continental countries (island countires, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, countires in North America ad South America) should also consider a defense pact much like Nato. This helps to keep eachother in check. I don't think the US will like it, but then the Asians should look out for themselves.
Would you care to comment, Eisuke ?
Eisuke said:
If it weren't for bullying neighbors like China and North Korea that keep pushing the envelope, perhaps Japan wouldn't feel such a strong need to remilitarize.
qwerty said:
How did Korea and China "bully" Japan ?
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwerty said:
Is asking Japan to stop worshipping its war criminals who killed millions bullying ?
Please comment, Eisuke.
qwertyu said:
Is it too much to ask Japan to respect shared history?
This comes across as cold-blooded.
It is the other way round, Japan bullied China and Korea 60 yrs ago, and continues to do it by lying about history and aggressively claiming their territory.
I do agree. Care to comment, Eisuke ?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom