" "Pacifists" No More?" Scuffles as Japan security bill approved by committee

[Aepsilons]

well. the koreans clearly dont think so. thats just the reality. actions speak louder than words. the pattern is, you get a new thing, they will soon get a better one. check the pattern of the past 20 years then we can talk.

Doesn't everyone do that? For example:

scenario 1:
-USA develops F22 program
-Russia and China develop their own 4th generation fighter

scenario 2:
-British Royal Navy builds a battleship
-German Navy builds a battleship, too
-French Navy builds a battleship, too

scenario 3:
-Japan develops Shinkansen
-Germany develops their own Shinkansen
-China develops its own Shinkansen "HSR"

scenario 4:
-Tadashi gets a girlfriend
-Tadashi's best friend, Masaharu, gets jealous and also gets a girlfriend to compete with Tadashi
-Tadashi and Masaharu go on a double date with their respective girlfriends
-Everyone is happy

scenario 5:
-Ling Ling gets a lollypop
-Yu Fang , Ling Ling's best friend, also wants the same delicious-looking lollypop
-Yu Fang goes home and asks her mommy to buy a lollypop from Uncle Wong's Store
-The next day Yu Fang shows off her new lollypop; Ling Ling smiles.

dont forget the dokdo/shima issue.

That's a tit for tat issue, and quite frankly everyone has the same around the world. I don't think this is a unique case for either Japan-South Korea, South Korea-China, or Japan-China.

That's just my view.

 

[jhungary]

This is gibberish. Funny how you're trying to lecture someone who actually speaks English properly. NO ONE says x held a favourable view TO anything. It's OF. Not even going to bother with the terrible syntax.

lol thats right, if you never even heard about emphasis, you dont know whats it syntax looks like, lol at your proper english, maybe you should check your own grammar before commend on other...

But then, who I am talking to? I aint some grammar nazi.

Go to ur nearest book store, get a elementary lv English textbook, study up, then maybe, just maybe, we can talk, before then, I bid u adieu

You are being abbetted to an endless and pointless discourse. My professional advice, my friend, just drop it. The other side clearly doesn't care to learn your view nor does the other side have any inclination of conceptual analysis in regards to the American-Philippine paradigm.


Regards.

lol that was my only entertainment i enjoy online, otherwise I am gonna need to pay for Cable....

you know, my entertainment budget is quite small, I need all free entertainment I can get my hand on

 

[grand]

Doesn't everyone do that? For example:

scenario 1:
-USA develops F22 program
-Russia and China develop their own 4th generation fighter

scenario 2:
-British Royal Navy builds a battleship
-German Navy builds a battleship, too
-French Navy builds a battleship, too

scenario 3:
-Japan develops Shinkansen
-Germany develops their own Shinkansen
-China develops its own Shinkansen "HSR"

scenario 4:
-Tadashi gets a girlfriend
-Tadashi's best friend, Masaharu, gets jealous and also gets a girlfriend to compete with Tadashi
-Tadashi and Masaharu go on a double date with their respective girlfriends
-Everyone is happy

scenario 5:
-Ling Ling gets a lollypop
-Yu Fang , Ling Ling's best friend, also wants the same delicious-looking lollypop
-Yu Fang goes home and asks her mommy to buy a lollypop from Uncle Wong's Store
-The next day Yu Fang shows off her new lollypop; Ling Ling smiles.






That's a tit for tat issue, and quite frankly everyone has the same around the world. I don't think this is a unique case for either Japan-South Korea, South Korea-China, or Japan-China.

That's just my view.

scenario 1 shows china and russia view the u.s. as a military threat.

scenario 2, isnt so obvious now and is not at all clear of a pattern like korea-japan. there is no comparison.

3 and 4 really dont apply to military.

i mean the patern is very very easy to see. s korea is very uncomfortable with japan having an edge over it.

 

[Aepsilons]

lol that was my only entertainment i enjoy online, otherwise I am gonna need to pay for Cable....

you know, my entertainment budget is quite small, I need all free entertainment I can get my hand on

ahahaha, i hear you, brothah.

 

[XiaoYaoZi]

Nope, they don't have the nuclear subs, nor they have a true aircraft carrier with the fixed-wing aircrafts.

And their Aegis DDGs are purely belonged to the US technology.

The undisputed best navy in Asia belongs to the country who is now building two aircraft carriers at the same time, and also building many more Type 052D/055 and Type 093G.

No need to reply to KMT fan SB, no need to arouse Japanese's wet dream that they have the No.1 navy in Asia.
Not only our navy to war as you post.
We now have over 850 third generation fighters, meanwhile the number adds 30-50 every year, that is enough to take care of all the JP air forces, anti-sub planes, warships.
In addition our Second Artillery...
Most important role of the modern war to victory is the capability and scale of industry, that means the potential of war. In the begin of WWII IJN almost was the largest navy in the world, but in the end it was hit to shit by the largest industry entity that time, US. China is the largest industry entity nowadays in the world, about 3-4 times as large as Japanese industry. Meanwhile our industry is roaring every day, Japanese industry has shrunk to its level of the late 1980s. In addition, we needn't care about the supply of crude oil in wartime, our own oil fields in our territory can independently sustain the war of any scales tens of years.(China is the oil-poor country in peace time and the oil-rich country in the wartime. JP? )

Yet diaoyudao is still in the hand of japan，isn't it ironic？

For anyone, if they even have no enough strength to protect their own territory. The territories they stolen from others are purely their endless unnecessary heavy burden. To Japan, Vietnam and Philippine.

 

[prima99]

You do know that the sovereign at the time was Queen Wilhelmina, right?

hahaha yes you're right. thanks for the correction

Are you implying the Soviet Union hijacked our victory?

the A Bombs were really the last attempt to damage Japan. if murica were more than able to take them head on, then the A Bombs were the very last thing to drop. really, there is no reason for them to surrender just because they take two A Bombs in irrelevant cities. in fact, the A Bombs were supposed to make them grow even more aggresive towards murica. think how there is no Peace treaty among Japan and Russia today. even today the Russians are eager to demolish them when they can.

 

[21 Dec 2012]

the A Bombs were really the last attempt to damage Japan. if murica were more than able to take them head on, then the A Bombs were the very last thing to drop. really, there is no reason for them to surrender just because they take two A Bombs in irrelevant cities. in fact, the A Bombs were supposed to make them grow even more aggresive towards murica. think how there is no Peace treaty among Japan and Russia today. even today the Russians are eager to demolish them when they can.

Right. Two of your cities just turned to ash by an enemy that is stronger than ever and capable and willing to do the same to the rest of your country..................makes you even more aggressive and not surrender.

 

[prima99]

Right. Two of your cities just turned to ash by an enemy that is stronger than ever and capable and willing to do the same to the rest of your country..................makes you even more aggressive and not surrender.

you're incredibly stupid if you are to surrender your vast colonies in East Asia and South East Asia just because your home gets two irrellevant bombs, even more stupid when you're leaving Australia when you gain upper hands in those territory. think about it, kay?

 

[21 Dec 2012]

you're incredibly stupid if you are to surrender your vast colonies in East Asia and South East Asia just because your home gets two irrellevant bombs, even more stupid when you're leaving Australia when you gain upper hands in those territory. think about it, kay?

US had only 2 nukes? Are you this stupid?

 

[prima99]

US had only 2 nukes? Are you this stupid?

nobody says murica has only two nukes? you're blind or stupid?

so what if murica has thousand nukes? does it even contribute to japanese surrender? nope. your point?

 

[21 Dec 2012]

nobody says murica has only two nukes? you're blind or stupid?

so what if murica has thousand nukes? does it even contribute to japanese surrender? nope. your point?

You are stupider than a brick.

nobody says murica has only two nukes?

Then what's the incessant harping about 'two irrellevant bombs'. Do you think the US wouldn't use the rest of them on Tokyo, Kyoto, Kawasaki, etc. You would still continue to fight when you know that your enemy can turn all your cities and you to vapour unopposed?

 

[prima99]

You are stupider than a brick.


Then what's the incessant harping about 'two irrellevant bombs'. Do you think the US wouldn't use the rest of them on Tokyo, Kyoto, Kawasaki, etc.

*facepalm* did you own a brain? or you're unable to use your brain at all?

you didn't think how the Bombs ended up in Nagasaki and Hiroshima instead of Tokyo or Kyoto did you? when you give threats to make a country surrender, you don't bomb civillian cities. you bomb their military installations. this is the reason why irrelevant bombs are irrelevant. get it?

Two Irrelevant Bombs are nothing than an USSR weight dropped to your country. they are so close they just need to jump from Kuril to tokyo and BAM! new USSR colony in Asia. the best the murica can do is to throw a threat of A Bombs since they can't take them head on.

You would still continue to fight when you know that your enemy can turn all your cities and you to vapour unopposed?

oh right, say that to murica if they want another Pearl Harbor incident worth the whole East Asia, South Asia, and Australia combined up their asses.

 

[21 Dec 2012]

*facepalm* did you own a brain? or you're unable to use your brain at all?

you didn't think how the Bombs ended up in Nagasaki and Hiroshima instead of Tokyo or Kyoto did you? when you give threats to make a country surrender, you don't bomb civillian cities. you bomb their military installations. this is the reason why irrelevant bombs are irrelevant. get it?

Two Irrelevant Bombs are nothing than an USSR weight dropped to your country. they are so close they just need to jump from Kuril to tokyo and BAM! new USSR colony in Asia. the best the murica can do is to throw a threat of A Bombs since they can't take them head on.



oh right, say that to murica if they want another Pearl Harbor incident worth the whole East Asia, South Asia, and Australia combined up their asses.

oh right, say that to murica if they want another Pearl Harbor incident worth the whole East Asia, South Asia, and Australia combined up their asses.

You are stupid and delusional
Calling a nuclear bomb 'irrelevant' has to be the dumbest thing said here. And there have been plenty dumb things spoken right on this very thread.

you didn't think how the Bombs ended up in Nagasaki and Hiroshima instead of Tokyo or Kyoto did you?

Do you?

The Selection of the Target | The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki | Historical Documents | atomicarchive.com

The work on the actual selection of targets for the atomic bomb was begun in the spring of 1945. This was done in close cooperation with the Commanding General, Army Air Forces, and his Headquarters. A number of experts in various fields assisted in the study. These included mathematicians, theoretical physicists, experts on the blast effects of bombs, weather consultants, and various other specialists. Some of the important considerations were:

1. The range of the aircraft which would carry the bomb.
2. The desirability of visual bombing in order to insure the most effective use of the bomb.
3. Probable weather conditions in the target areas.
4. Importance of having one primary and two secondary targets for each mission, so that if weather conditions prohibited bombing the target there would be at least two alternates.
5. Selection of targets to produce the greatest military effect on the Japanese people and thereby most effectively shorten the war.
6. The morale effect upon the enemy.

The purpose of the bombing wasn't to achieve some military objectives, which fyi it did

Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops. To quote a Japanese report, "Probably more than a thousand times since the beginning of the war did the Hiroshima citizens see off with cries of 'Banzai' the troops leaving from the harbor."

but psychological. Not only were two cities being bombed by nukes, the two cities were bombed by nukes for the first time in human history. The impact of having a burning, smoking crater left in place of miles of concrete and wood within seconds would shock lesser beings but primanus99 thinks it is all but irrelevant.

 

[prima99]

You are stupid and delusional
Calling a nuclear bomb 'irrelevant' has to be the dumbest thing said here. And there have been plenty dumb things spoken right on this very thread.

Do you?

The Selection of the Target | The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki | Historical Documents | atomicarchive.com

The purpose of the bombing wasn't to achieve some military objectives, which fyi it did



but psychological. Not only were two cities being bombed by nukes, the two cities were bombed by nukes for the first time in human history. The impact of having a burning, smoking crater left in place of miles of concrete and wood within seconds would shock lesser beings but primanus99 thinks it is all but irrelevant.

pfffttt hahaha... what a retard

The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender? | The Asia-Pacific Journal

Two historians, Asada Sadao and Richard Frank, have recently confronted this issue head-on, arguing that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima had a more decisive effect on Japan’s decision to surrender than did Soviet entry into the war.[4] This essay challenges that view. It argues that (1) the atomic bombing of Nagasaki did not have much effect on Japan’s decision; (2) of the two factors—the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Soviet entry into the war—the Soviet invasion had a more important effect on Japan’s decision to surrender; (3) nevertheless, neither the atomic bombs nor Soviet entry into the war served as “a knock-out punch” that had a direct, decisive, and immediate effect on Japan’s decision to surrender; (4) the most important, immediate cause behind Japan’s decision to surrender were the emperor’s “sacred decision” to do so, engineered by a small group of the Japanese ruling elite; and (5) that in the calculations of this group, Soviet entry into the war provided a more powerful motivation than the atomic bombs to seek the termination of the war by accepting the terms specified in the Potsdam Proclamation. Further, by posing counterfactual hypotheses, I argue that Soviet entry into the war against Japan alone, without the atomic bombs, might have led to Japan’s surrender before November 1, but that the atomic bombs alone, without Soviet entry into the war, would not have accomplished this.

this comes from Japanese source itself, not some made-up murican source. i did say some posts before that the A Bombs deals some "Damage" to Japan. but since we're talking about what makes the japanese surrender, then the A Bombs were pretty irrellevant. i could've post other links but this should be enough to educate you

 

[21 Dec 2012]

pfffttt hahaha... what a retard

The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender? | The Asia-Pacific Journal



this comes from Japanese source itself, not some made-up murican source. i did say some posts before that the A Bombs deals some "Damage" to Japan. but since we're talking about what makes the japanese surrender, then the A Bombs were pretty irrellevant. i could've post other links but this should be enough to educate you

Do you understand that you are quoting a blog and not a 'Japanese source', retard.
Let me give you a more official 'non-American', 'non-made-up' source. Tell me if you can find the mention of Soviet invasion

Speech by Emperor Hirohito accepting the Terms of Surrender, 14 August 1945

What Mr. Tsuyoshi Hasegawa argues in his well-researched hypothesis is that Japan was counting on Soviet mediation to let it come out of war with at least a couple of its colonies intact along with its Imperial system but that dream was broken with Soviet attack in Manchuria and hence Japan surrendered.
While this would certainly have an impact, the Japanese people were very well prepared to fight till the last man. The Japanese high command had brainwashed the people into believing stuff about invading American forces who btw had also drawn on plans for invading Japan. Without nukes, it would be just another front. The IJA was still relatively intact and retreating to the home land for the final defence.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
This is not to say anything about you who foolishly continue to argue that nuclear bombs were 'irrelevant' to the surrender, when the person who himself authorized the surrender disagrees.

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, it would not only result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.