What's new

Japan Defence Forum

Do we have any ethnic Japanese posting on here?

Nope, you may leave the thread :-)

Yes Japan is changing but you can just brush away your pass and pretend nothing had happened.:disagree:

Historical recognition is not the same as being held accountable for history. As far as accountability is concerned, it's a done deal. There is no reason to get on a revenge path. Incidentally, I recall that Mao once thanked Japan for its war on China because the war gravely damaged the Nationalists Chinese. If it wasn't for the war, then Mao and the Chinese communists couldn't have defeated Chiang Kai-chek and the Nationalists Chinese.

@Suika, what a bizarro, the Japanese govt laid down its claim on Diaoyu Islands (Japan calls it Senkaku Islands) based on the "old history", that is the Shimonoseki Treaty (1895), a consequential treaty resulted from the First Sino-Japanese War!

And you know, every time the Japanese govt asserts its claim by quoting the Shimonoseki Treaty (1895), it acts as if the Japan is rubbing salt into the [Chinese] wound.

And did you know that in 1912, when the Qing dynasty fell, Tibet declared its sovereignty? And when China was going through the warlord period when multiple Chinese warlords were competing against each other for control of all of China, Tibet did not participate and continued being a sovereign nation? And did you know that when the Chinese had the war of resistance against the Japanese, the Tibetans did not fight together with the Chinese against the Japanese instead? And that when US airplanes flew over the Himalaya mountains to resupply Chinese forces, they also flew over Tibet? Tibet was only part of the Qing because the Qing was imperialistic and conquered Tibet. And it was not until after the Chinese Civil ended in 1949 that Chinese communists marched into Tibet to established brutal authority. If one wants to advocate for the changing of national boundaries on the basis of historical losses and have Senkaku be changed into Chinese territory, then Tibet should be giving back its sovereignty. Afterall, they do not speak Chinese, they speak Tibetan. They don't even use Chinese characters, it's an entirely different language.
 
.
From what I know we have no Japanese posters at this point in time. There's two reasons for that, number one they are simply not interested in geo political affairs. Secondly their use of the English language, as a primary form of communication on the internet is minimal.
Just some recent Japanese politicians are too annoying Chinese.
 
.
Okinotorishima? It is hypocritical of Japan. Even though it is clearly a reef and not an island, Japan is still claiming an EEZ around. But what kind of building has Japan done with Okinotorishima? How much building? Did Japan actually start massive resource extraction from it and its EEZ on an industrial level? No... Did Japan build a massive airbase on it? No... It's like, if one major country is going to completely disregard international laws like UNCLOS and build massive fake islands and military installations and air bases, even within the EEZs of an other country, then the game changes and Japan ought to do the same. BUt we'll see if China comes to it's sense first. If they don't, then it's hard to disagree with giving Japan the green light to go ahead and start developing the Okinotorishima area, with resource sharing with Taiwan of course.

China has no legitimate right over the SCS on a non-"might makes right" basis. Here is a presentation about the history of China's claim over the SCS.

China was not the first to military SCS, we did that all thanks to US for keeping blind eyes of other countries such Vietnam and other to militarized the occupied reefs and islands. Sure Japan can do want ever on it territory if you guys think that will give you a strategic advantage. SCS islands was first annexed by Japan from China then under French's hand then later under Chinese KMT with US's blessing, when KMT lost the civil war, US had encouraged other south east Asia nations to robe its from China. ..get your fact right.

And did you know that in 1912, when the Qing dynasty fell, Tibet declared its sovereignty? And when China was going through the warlord period when multiple Chinese warlords were competing against each other for control of all of China, Tibet did not participate and continued being a sovereign nation? And did you know that when the Chinese had the war of resistance against the Japanese, the Tibetans did not fight together with the Chinese against the Japanese instead? And that when US airplanes flew over the Himalaya mountains to resupply Chinese forces, they also flew over Tibet? Tibet was only part of the Qing because the Qing was imperialistic and conquered Tibet. And it was not until after the Chinese Civil ended in 1949 that Chinese communists marched into Tibet to established brutal authority. If one wants to advocate for the changing of national boundaries on the basis of historical losses and have Senkaku be changed into Chinese territory, then Tibet should be giving back its sovereignty. Afterall, they do not speak Chinese, they speak Tibetan. They don't even use Chinese characters, it's an entirely different language.

So base on your logic Japan should not pursue their claim on Kuril Islands since it's become historical even...is that what you're trying to say?
 
.
China was not the first to military SCS, we did that all thanks to US for keeping blind eyes of other countries such Vietnam and other to militarized the occupied reefs and islands. Sure Japan can do want ever on it territory if you guys think that will give you a strategic advantage. SCS islands was first annexed by Japan from China then under French's hand then later under Chinese KMT with US's blessing, when KMT lost the civil war, US had encouraged other south east Asia nations to robe its from China. ..get your fact right.



So base on your logic Japan should not pursue their claim on Kuril Islands since it's become historical even...is that what you're trying to say?
Early Diaoyu island will not wait until now.
 
.
China was not the first to military SCS, we did that all thanks to US for keeping blind eyes of other countries such Vietnam and other to militarized the occupied reefs and islands. Sure Japan can do want ever on it territory if you guys think that will give you a strategic advantage. SCS islands was first annexed by Japan from China then under French's hand then later under Chinese KMT with US's blessing, when KMT lost the civil war, US had encouraged other south east Asia nations to robe its from China. ..get your fact right.

As a response to imperial Japan and imperialistic ambitions of France, I do not criticize China for creating the 9 dash line. That was before WW2 and in those days, many countries were doing empire building. So the 9 dash line claim was necessary for China to combat France and Imperial Japan. But those days are over.

What China should be doing in the South China Sea today is making fair with all countries in the region. But that also means all other countries should make fair as well. They should compromise and share the South China Sea resources and reefs and treat the water ways as international waters. The 9 dash line claim is an old legacy from the age of imperialism. Be civilized and share it. And as the biggest and most powerful country by far in the South China Sea disputes, China should be taking a leadership role in hammering out compromises. Instead, China is acting like an imperialistic country of the old age before WW2.

So base on your logic Japan should not pursue their claim on Kuril Islands since it's become historical even...is that what you're trying to say?

It's on going dispute because the Soviet Union attacked after Japan had already surrendered. And because of that, technically speaking, Japan and Russia still have not finalized a peace treaty, so it is actually not a done deal.
 
.
There is no real JP here. Just a fake one :D

better let it has fun on its own... lost my appetite the moment I found out it's fake...

what a waste of time :(:hitwall:
 
.
Nope, you may leave the thread :-)

Not wise asking moderators to leave, I do detect a hint of compulsion in your words. Anyway, I'm interested to know why you back Japan. Is it a case of devil's advocate?
 
Last edited:
.
It's on going dispute because the Soviet Union attacked after Japan had already surrendered. And because of that, technically speaking, Japan and Russia still have not finalized a peace treaty, so it is actually not a done deal.

Tell me what different for Japan did when China was weak and what Soviet did to Japan when Japan was weak and surrender...both are just opportunists and chose the right moment, so your justification doesn't make any sense and beside it was more than half century, it become an historical issue, Japan should also give up these island too.
 
.
Not wise asking moderators to leave, I do detect a hint to compulsion in your words. Anyway, I'm interested to know why you back Japan. Is it a case of devil's advocate?

I'm sorry. I responded because too quickly because I've been answer lots of oppositions posts and I did not realize you were a moderator. If I noticed at that time, I would not have replied like that.

I back Japan because I think what China is doing is wrong. There are only two countries that can keep China in check. They are the US and Japan. Also, Japan has been pacified. But now they have to regain strength to help the US and other neighboring countries keep China's ambitions in check.

Now, if China was different, I would not feel this way. But is a country that puts people like Liu Xiaobo in jail. So I think China is not a good country to have become even bigger.

Here is Liu Xiaobo

We see what China is trying to do in Hong Kong, by trying to impose elections that have only CCP-approved candidates. Because of that, we now see a raise in a Hong Konger identity.

So it is not that I am against China because I am against Chinese people. It is because I am against the CCP. They control the population too much and they are trying to expand their sphere of influence, which is bad. So Japan is needed to raise up and challenge that, together with the US.
 
.
I'm sorry. I responded because too quickly because I've been answer lots of oppositions posts and I did not realize you were a moderator. If I noticed at that time, I would not have replied like that.

I back Japan because I think what China is doing is wrong. There are only two countries that can keep China in check. They are the US and Japan. Also, Japan has been pacified. But now they have to regain strength to help the US and other neighboring countries keep China's ambitions in check.

Now, if China was different, I would not feel this way. But is a country that puts people like Liu Xiaobo in jail. So I think China is not a good country to have become even bigger.

Here is Liu Xiaobo

We see what China is trying to do in Hong Kong, by trying to impose elections that have only CCP-approved candidates. Because of that, we now see a raise in a Hong Konger identity.

So it is not that I am against China because I am against Chinese people. It is because I am against the CCP. They control the population too much and they are trying to expand their sphere of influence, which is bad. So Japan is needed to raise up and challenge that, together with the US.

Thank you for your detailed post. It gives me a better understanding behind your posts.
 
.
Tell me what different for Japan did when China was weak and what Soviet did to Japan when Japan was weak and surrender...both are just opportunists and chose the right moment, so your justification doesn't make any sense and beside it was more than half century, it become an historical issue, Japan should also give up these island to.

Look, before China become weak during the 1800s, Japan was a feudal country. But then the European powers came. The British carried out the Opium wars against China. The Russians took outer Manchuria and Vladivostok from China. The Spanish were in the Philippines. The Russians were coming down from the north and near Hokkaido. And of course there were the American black ships that sailed into Tokyo bay and delivered the threat of gun boat policy. Japan had a choice to make. Either end up like China, and other parts of Asia, India, Africa, or change itself, modernize and join the fight for survival. Japan competed in the age of empires like the other major powers, for the sake of survival. That was the kind of world it was. If you were weak, you were dead. Because of that, I think China should not take the first Sino-Japanese war so personally. But after WW1, I think Japan went the morally wrong way when it invaded Manchuria in 1931. That was greedy imperialism. Before WW1, it was about survival. But in 1931 and afterwards, it was more about the Japanese militarism that disobeyed the government and later, the military take over of the government.

Look, was China weak during the 1950s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1960s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1970s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1980s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1990s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the early 2000s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.

So now China has become strong. Why are they making an excuse out of the period of humiliation to be a bully in the SCS? No one invaded China after WW2. It is ok to become stronger, but be strong while staying at your borders. Everyone gets very nervous and worried when a big country tries to expand their sphere of influence.

Thank you for your detailed post. It gives me a better understanding behind your posts.

You're welcome. Sorry about that earlier post.
 
.
Okinotorishima? It is hypocritical of Japan. Even though it is clearly a reef and not an island, Japan is still claiming an EEZ around. But what kind of building has Japan done with Okinotorishima? How much building? Did Japan actually start massive resource extraction from it and its EEZ on an industrial level? No... Did Japan build a massive airbase on it? No... It's like, if one major country is going to completely disregard international laws like UNCLOS and build massive fake islands and military installations and air bases, even within the EEZs of an other country, then the game changes and Japan ought to do the same. BUt we'll see if China comes to it's sense first. If they don't, then it's hard to disagree with giving Japan the green light to go ahead and start developing the Okinotorishima area, with resource sharing with Taiwan of course.

China has no legitimate right over the SCS on a non-"might makes right" basis. Here is a presentation about the history of China's claim over the SCS.
My home is in the northeast of China, Japan, said Manchuria more than 70 years ago Japanese military bacterial bombs retained. In order for the Chinese government to not let the Japanese government take it, but do the destruction locally.
 
.
My home is in the northeast of China, Japan, said Manchuria more than 70 years ago Japanese military bacterial bombs retained. In order for the Chinese government to not let the Japanese government take it, but do the destruction locally.

Yes, Imperial Japan used chemical and biological weapons against China. The two countries are currently working together to clean up the remnants.

---start---
BEIJING – China’s military said Tuesday that more than 2,500 abandoned Japanese wartime chemical weapons collected from northern China, including Beijing and the port city of Tianjin, have been destroyed in a four-year disposal process.

Japan and China have been working together on the biggest chemical weapon cleanup effort in history, a decades-long, diplomatically sensitive project that is seen in China as a reminder of the wartime atrocities it suffered during Japan’s 1937 invasion and subsequent occupation.

Under the terms of a 1997 treaty, Tokyo is responsible for cleaning up hundreds of thousands of chemical weapons left behind by its occupation troops at the end of World War II. China says thousands of Chinese have been killed or hurt since the end of the war in 1945 by accidents related to the buried weapons.

China’s Defense Ministry said Tuesday that the weapons’ disposal at a facility in the city of Shijiazhuang in Hebei province, neighboring Beijing, had finished in a “safe, orderly and smooth manner.” The weapons are generally burned in specially designed furnaces.

The remaining pieces of Japanese chemical weapons are difficult to find and destroy because they were scattered widely, the ministry said. It urged Japan to “increase manpower and resources” to finish the job.

China has repeatedly urged Japan to speed up the project, which was initially scheduled to be completed in 2007 but had hit delays.

China estimates that Japanese troops left behind more than 2 million chemical weapons, mostly in the northeastern region of Manchuria. The cleanup of the biggest cache — a site with nearly 700,000 chemical bombs at Haerbaling in Jilin province — is scheduled to be finished in 2022.

The Japanese government said in 2015 that it finished destroying another cache at a facility in the central Chinese city of Wuhan.
---end---
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...nese-chemical-weapons-destroyed/#.WNaCN2997cs
 
.
Look, before China become weak during the 1800s, Japan was a feudal country. But then the European powers came. The British carried out the Opium wars against China. The Russians took outer Manchuria and Vladivostok from China. The Spanish were in the Philippines. The Russians were coming down from the north and near Hokkaido. And of course there were the American black ships that sailed into Tokyo bay and delivered the threat of gun boat policy. Japan had a choice to make. Either end up like China, and other parts of Asia, India, Africa, or change itself, modernize and join the fight for survival. Japan competed in the age of empires like the other major powers, for the sake of survival. That was the kind of world it was. If you were weak, you were dead. Because of that, I think China should not take the first Sino-Japanese war so personally. But after WW1, I think Japan went the morally wrong way when it invaded Manchuria in 1931. That was greedy imperialism. Before WW1, it was about survival. But in 1931 and afterwards, it was more about the Japanese militarism that disobeyed the government and later, the military take over of the government.

Look, was China weak during the 1950s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1960s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1970s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1980s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1990s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the early 2000s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.

So now China has become strong. Why are they making an excuse out of the period of humiliation to be a bully in the SCS? No one invaded China after WW2. It is ok to become stronger, but be strong while staying at your borders. Everyone gets very nervous and worried when a big country tries to expand their sphere of influence.



You're welcome. Sorry about that earlier post.
Look, before China become weak during the 1800s, Japan was a feudal country. But then the European powers came. The British carried out the Opium wars against China.
The Russians took outer Manchuria and Vladivostok from China. The Spanish were in the Philippines. The Russians















were coming down from the north and near Hokkaido. And of course there were the American black ships that sailed into Tokyo bay and delivered the threat of gun boat policy. Japan had a choice to make. Either end up like China, and other parts of Asia, India, Africa, or change itself, modernize and join the fight for survival. Japan competed in the age of empires like the other major powers, for the sake of survival. That was the kind of world it was. If you were weak, you were dead. Because of that, I think China should not take the first Sino-Japanese war so personally. But after WW1, I think Japan went the morally wrong way when it invaded Manchuria in 1931. That was greedy imperialism. Before WW1, it was about survival. But in 1931 and afterwards, it was more about the Japanese militarism that disobeyed the government and later, the military take over of the government.

Look, was China weak during the 1950s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1960s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1970s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1980s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1990s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the early 2000s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.

So now China has become strong. Why are they making an excuse out of the period of humiliation to be a bully in the SCS? No one invaded China after WW2. It is ok to become stronger, but be strong while staying at your borders. Everyone gets very nervous and worried when a big country tries to expand their sphere of influence.



You're welcome. Sorry about that earlier post.
The foolish Japanese soldiers branded the hatred of Sino-Japanese relations so strong.

China has never been so bitter against Japan for thousands of years. Japanese cultural inheritance of China even tokyo is copied by the name of the song dynasty. The year before last, when Live in peace had weapons, it expanded like a neighbouring country. This is Japan in the eyes of the Chinese.

pls keep your "rightful owner of these islands" to yourself. nobody is interested of hearing it. China has NEVER controlled and administered the sea and islands in the south sea in history.
Who is managing, then? America?
 
.
Look, before China become weak during the 1800s, Japan was a feudal country. But then the European powers came. The British carried out the Opium wars against China. The Russians took outer Manchuria and Vladivostok from China. The Spanish were in the Philippines. The Russians were coming down from the north and near Hokkaido. And of course there were the American black ships that sailed into Tokyo bay and delivered the threat of gun boat policy. Japan had a choice to make. Either end up like China, and other parts of Asia, India, Africa, or change itself, modernize and join the fight for survival. Japan competed in the age of empires like the other major powers, for the sake of survival. That was the kind of world it was. If you were weak, you were dead. Because of that, I think China should not take the first Sino-Japanese war so personally. But after WW1, I think Japan went the morally wrong way when it invaded Manchuria in 1931. That was greedy imperialism. Before WW1, it was about survival. But in 1931 and afterwards, it was more about the Japanese militarism that disobeyed the government and later, the military take over of the government.

Look, was China weak during the 1950s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1960s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1970s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1980s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the 1990s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.
Was China weak during the early 2000s? Yes. Did anyone invade China? No.

So now China has become strong. Why are they making an excuse out of the period of humiliation to be a bully in the SCS? No one invaded China after WW2. It is ok to become stronger, but be strong while staying at your borders. Everyone gets very nervous and worried when a big country tries to expand their sphere of influence.
You're welcome. Sorry about that earlier post.

Well I merely replied to your statement about historical claim that what is the pass should leave it behind, so why Japan couldn't give up Kuril Islands as well, Japan can't not just memorized some part of their history and try to brush away some other, consistently you tell us to forget Shimonoseki Treaty then you should accept also what Soviet has done to Japan.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom