Zeke Posted April 16, 2005 Report Posted April 16, 2005 I found this checking my e-mail. Appearantly Japan wants a seat on the UN security council... sounds odd, but I don't live in China either. - Z
Greased_Lightning Posted April 16, 2005 Report Posted April 16, 2005 lol China complaining about Japan's agressive history? While it's true, that's a good case of the pot calling the kettle black. As if China has been such a nice country Anyone else think it's funny that they mentioned that the rioters flipped a Nissan? That took a whole two ppl probably. Seems like China is taking any excuse to get pissed lately...hmmm...double check the nukes guys, cuz Joe Chinaman's gettin' all 1950s again!
»Ducky Posted April 17, 2005 Report Posted April 17, 2005 Why does Japan wanting a seat on the security council sound odd?
Aileron Posted April 18, 2005 Report Posted April 18, 2005 Japan's aggressive history? The chinease are just mad because when the Mongols tried to invade Japan, they had a little sailing accident. One has to wonder which is stronger - the divine wind protecting Japan or the divine wind protecting Britain - or do they both come from the same place? The "aggresive history" arguement, is, was, and always will be a crock of crap...every nation on Earth was "aggressive" at one time or another...and old nations like China have a lot of said history to work with. I've heard about the riots...I don't quite know if Japan is going for one of the regular seats or is trying to change the UN cons!@#$%^&*ution to get a permanent seat. If Japan is going for a regular seat...that's certainly no cause for rioting, especially from the Chinease, who have a permanent seat. I'm !@#$%^&*uming Japan is after a permanent seat then...correct me if I'm wrong here. I mean, what does China care if Japan gets a seat on the security council? Its not like there's a chance China is going to lose their seat...odds are its gonna be France, and at the moment it looks like Russia and maybe even the UK are less influencial than China...and I think that all three of them are in the "!@#$%^&* no, keep them on the council" catagory. The real question is whether France's seat should be given to Germany or Japan. On one hand Japan is slightly more influencial, on the other, Germany is politically similar to France, mitigating the change. Really though, if we are going to change the UN cons!@#$%^&*ution we might as well add another permanent seat. Maybe China is just afraid of generally changing the UN's cons!@#$%^&*ution...but most likely its just a bunch of anti-social college students looking for an excuse to topple a Nissan.
Phyran Posted April 20, 2005 Report Posted April 20, 2005 i thought it was Korea that had a sailing accident with their fleet before they can invade Japan
Aileron Posted April 20, 2005 Report Posted April 20, 2005 Well, they started sailing from Korea...the Mongols were in charge of virtually all of Asia at the time.
Phyran Posted April 20, 2005 Report Posted April 20, 2005 wait I remember a time when Ancient Korea was invaded by Japan, Korea repelled the invasion and launch their own offensive by General.. (forgot his name)
Paine Posted April 20, 2005 Report Posted April 20, 2005 I remember a time when Ancient Korea was invaded by Japan...<{POST_SNAPBACK}> how OLD are you?
Phyran Posted April 20, 2005 Report Posted April 20, 2005 I remember a time when Ancient Korea was invaded by Japan...<{POST_SNAPBACK}> how OLD are you?<{POST_SNAPBACK}> uhh err... yea... *hides time machine* anyway perhaps I did not use the correct grammer, I meant umm...I read a history textbook and played Dawn of the modern empire so you know...yea....
MonteZuma Posted April 26, 2005 Report Posted April 26, 2005 The scale of the attrocities committed by the Japanese in China before and during WW2 were mind-boggling. Nothing that communist China has ever done since the Chinese civil war is remotely comparable. One of the worst incidences was the Nanjing massacre (200,000 civilians killed, ,000 raped), but there are many, many more. 8.5 million Chinese civilians were killed by Japanese aggressors. Setting aside the rapes and murders, an untold amount of Chinese heritage was destroyed by the Japanese. Despite this, the Japanese have effectively written this episode out of their text books. The reaction in China is similar to the reaction that the jewish community would have if the Germans decided to call the death of the jews at the hands of the nazis an 'unfortunate incident' and wrote it out of their history. The Chinese obviously are far from perfect in respect to their human rights record, but they have every right to be royally pissed off.
MonteZuma Posted April 26, 2005 Report Posted April 26, 2005 Joe Chinaman's gettin' all 1950s again!<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Hardly. Perhaps the Japanese are gettin all 1930s again? BTW...in relation to other posts...I don't think the protests had much (if anything) to do with the UN and UN membership at all.
Zeke Posted April 26, 2005 Author Report Posted April 26, 2005 Hard to judge when you only have one source... - Z
MonteZuma Posted April 26, 2005 Report Posted April 26, 2005 Thanks to the Internet there are plenty of alternative news sources and viewpoints. I know that Chinese English language TV (CCTV-9) was saying nothing about UN membership when the protests were happening. But they were saying lots about Japanese denial of the Nanjing massacre.
Greased_Lightning Posted April 29, 2005 Report Posted April 29, 2005 I agree Japan has to own up to their country's past crimes, but that doesn't warrant violence against people who had nothing to do with it. My crack of the 'Joe Chinaman 1950s' was inaccurate as I was referring to the latter-1940s revolution and all the unrest and eventual US-China conflict. Off topic I suppose so sorry. One would hope that the two countries will soon get along better due to their proximity, but given the long, unfriendly history, probably ain't gonna be anytime soon. I find more trouble with China's at!@#$%^&*ude toward any declaration of independence by Taiwan. Why do they care so much if Taiwan wants free nation status? Anyone who has an insight into their thinking please post.
MonteZuma Posted April 29, 2005 Report Posted April 29, 2005 I agree Japan has to own up to their country's past crimes, but that doesn't warrant violence against people who had nothing to do with it.Agreed. When it boils down, the Chinese government should denounce any kind of violence against Japanese individuals or corporations. One would hope that the two countries will soon get along better due to their proximity, but given the long, unfriendly history, probably ain't gonna be anytime soon.Agreed. But you never know. China is changing so fast that anything could happen. I find more trouble with China's at!@#$%^&*ude toward any declaration of independence by Taiwan. Why do they care so much if Taiwan wants free nation status? Anyone who has an insight into their thinking please post.I'm divided on this. On the one hand, I feel that the Taiwanese should have the right to self determination, but on the other, I understand mainland China's claim to the island. There is no right or wrong in this matter. "One country, three systems" seems like a fair compromise to me.
Aileron Posted April 29, 2005 Report Posted April 29, 2005 Nanjing is an excuse and nothing more...the modern Japanese government is no more responsable for it than the current German government is for the holocaust, and no one proteseted Germany's recent seat on the council. They are different people 70 years later who just happen to govern the same spec of land. If it was the same government, maybe, but its a completely different government. You can't hold the democratic government of Japan responsable for the past actions of the previous imperialist government of Japan, especially not after 70 years...the only thing the two governments have in common is that they both rule an island named "Japan". Its anti-social college students who want to topple a Nissan, nothing more. The Chinese government can't be honestly behind them. The last time, they ran over one of these anti-social college students with a tank. Maybe they are using this opportunity to gauge world opinion, seeing who will side with China and who with side with Japan, or maybe they are siding with the anti-social college students to make up for the last time. They are being sneaky here, though in a very smart and intelligent way. Siding with their people, even if their people are wrong, is a pretty good role government should play...so, even though the rioters were wrong, the Chinese government isn't going to suffer any internal political problems from supporting them. Thus, all I can say about the Chinese backing of the students is that they are being smart and clever.
MonteZuma Posted April 30, 2005 Report Posted April 30, 2005 Nanjing is an excuse and nothing more...the modern Japanese government is no more responsable for it than the current German government is for the holocaust, and no one proteseted Germany's recent seat on the council.Nanjing is a scar than runs very deep. That is like saying the jews just use the holocaust as an excuse to oppose anti-semitism. The protests had little if anything to do with the UN. You are confusing 2 different issues. There is a very big difference between Germany and Japan. Germany has worked very hard to come to terms with nazism and the German role in WW2. Japan has not. You can't hold the democratic government of Japan responsable for the past actions of the previous imperialist government of Japan, especially not after 70 years...the only thing the two governments have in common is that they both rule an island named "Japan".This is getting repetative, but if today's German government downplayed the holocaust and referred to it as an unsubstantiated incident then I'd have a bone to pick with them too. It is very important that German kids know what their grandparents allowed to happen. It is also important that Japanese kids get the same insights. Its anti-social college students who want to topple a Nissan, nothing more.You know nothing about the Chinese people. The Chinese government can't be honestly behind them. The last time, they ran over one of these anti-social college students with a tank. Maybe they are using this opportunity to gauge world opinion, seeing who will side with China and who with side with Japan, or maybe they are siding with the anti-social college students to make up for the last time.Erm. I don't think so. They are being sneaky here, though in a very smart and intelligent way. Siding with their people, even if their people are wrong, is a pretty good role government should play...so, even though the rioters were wrong, the Chinese government isn't going to suffer any internal political problems from supporting them.Imo the Chinese government made a mistake backing the students. At the national level, they have encouraged student protests and violence. In the long run, that can threaten communist rule, just as the Tiananmen protests were considered a threat. At the international level, they have supported a violent act against innocent foreigners. The last thing the Chinese need is to deter foreign investment and tourism by promoting that kind of impression in the west. But when it all boils down, the protests were very small. I was in Nanjing when this blew up, and in Shanghai shortly after, and didn't notice a thing. The electronics shops were still full of Japanese brand products, most of which are made in China. I don't think the protests are part of a grand plan at all. The Japanese and Chinese coexist peacefully, but with some obvious differences of opinion.
»i88gerbils Posted April 30, 2005 Report Posted April 30, 2005 As someone who has studied Japan for quite sometime I'll make a few comments on this situation to clear things up. Heck, I even translated a newspaper article on this from Yomiuri when I was applying for the CIA media analyst position (didn't get it). This has been going on for years. It isn't recent news. I'll try to draw out a picture on both sides for Japan and China (and other Asian nations). Basically, there is no correct answer as to what should happen. First a little background. Japan is a major contributor to the United Nations. If you were not aware of it the UN bases its contributions off of the % of a nation's GDP. The United States pays the most, followed by Japan, and then Germany. However, unlike the G8(9), the UN is not governed by the nations that pay admittance, but by those selectively chosen for the World situation in the 1950s. In that situation the US, UK, Soviet Union, and France as winners of World War 2 were granted permanent seats on the council. China, or Cheng Kai Shek's [sp] Nationalist China, was also granted a permanent seat for representation in Asia. Of course, the PROC took over this spot decades later. Japan and Germany, as "aggressors" in World War 2, were not allowed permanent seats. Nowadays, Japan, a country cons!@#$%^&*utionally against War, participates financially in the UN. However, as of 1996 (or so), Japan passed controversial law to allow its Self Defense forces (SDF) to participate in UN Peacekeeping Operations (PKO). At first, they were just backup and supply units. Now they participate fully in PKOs. Additionally, China questions Japan's "peace" role because of its military spending. Japan spends the second largest amount on its "military" behind the US. Of course this is still only 2% of GDP. You also must think about what they pay for: American Aegis Cruisers, fighter jets, etc ... State-of-the-art equipment. On the other hand, Japan has recently backed Taiwan in any military conquest of the island. This is due to piss of mainland Chinese who think of Taiwan as part of China. Now we'll throw into the mix the Japanese Empire and the textbook controversy. Although the textbooks use the same kanji for the Nanking massacre and other events, they don't attribute the same meaning. The International community has always stated that Japan needs to correct these issues in their educational programs. What was the "Rape of Nanking" you say? Japanese troops slaughtering the Chinese people in that city for about a week leaving hundreds of thousands of woman and children dead. Japan has indicated that since they normalized relations with China and South Korea that they did not need to apologize. Obviously there is something wrong with that. I'm glad that Prime Minister Koizumi took the first step. However, let's throw in something else. Due to the Liberal Democratic Party's nature, much like the Republican party in the US, Koizumi has to gather support from the far Right and moderates in Japan. Apologizing is fine, but will he stop visiting the Japanese war shrine that honors Generals that have committed atrocities? Probably not. And I agree that further visits are fine. Why you ask? Japan is roughly animistic in religion. Praying to the gods and your ancestors is not just a tradition, but a way of life. Almost beyond a Cultural Norm. Telling Japan not to honor everybody is like telling people in the US that they cannot go to Churches because of that particular Church's Religious Beliefs (with the exception of Rastafarianism). Also, why we never took out the Emperor after World War 2. Finally, Japan and China are not just linked politically and culturally, but economically as well. Most scholars will say that while the Chinese and Japanese are shaking fists and waving guns at each other that under the table they are shaking hands. What would happen to China's economy if Japanese businesses pulled out? It would wreak havoc for both Japan and China. Unlike radical changes, Japan moves slow. In the 20th century, due to the intricate logistics of the Japanese bureaucracy, business, and legislature, Japan has moved like mol!@#$%^&*es through Reform. However, it is my understanding that Japan has slowly improved, and that the Chinese protestors have overreacted. Remember, to discuss this issue you have to know all the pieces to the puzzle. Here are some questions to think about: + Should Japan (and Germany) get a seat on the security council because their money is really helping to fund the U.N.? Remember, the American Revolution was fought over taxation. + Should Japan pay reparations to China, or has, like the Japanese courts decided years ago, the normalization of relations prevented reparations? + Should China expose its own human rights violations (none by them), or continue to hide over Turk suppression? Are the Chinese being a little bit hypocritical? ----btw, about that comment about Korea invading Japan. Japan has tried to do the opposite several times as well. History is your friend. N.B.: Meh, too rantish... I wrote this fairly quickly, but it works. Style--.
Aileron Posted April 30, 2005 Report Posted April 30, 2005 I think Japan obviously should get a UN security council seat...I can see no valid reason why someone would not want them to have one. As for the Japanese textbooks...rioting is certainly not a solution to that problem. As for the Chinese, they generally have a history of violating human rights that dates back all the way to Shang dynasty, but I wouldn't hold that against the current government. The people who committed the atrocities and the people who rule the current government are different people at different times whose only commonality is that they rule a certain speck of land.
MonteZuma Posted May 2, 2005 Report Posted May 2, 2005 As someone who has studied Japan for quite sometime I'll make a few comments...Nice post! Replies to your questions... + I have not formed an opinion either way as to whether or not Japan should have a seat on the Security Council, but membership should not be based on financial contribution alone. The citizens of the world should decide. + Yes, they should pay. + China, like every country, should be held accountable for human rights violations. They should come clean to the world and the Chinese people. But no matter what abuses the Chinese have perpetrated, they do not negate Japanese attrocities. Two wrongs (or Wongs) don't make a right.
Recommended Posts